Quote:
Originally Posted by Lil' Lavery
Because both of those skills apply to your ability to function as a member of society and citizen. Algebra, when viewed as a discrete skill, does not seem to be something that a typical citizen must master.
|
I don't mean to be antagonistic, but how discrete is discrete? Analyzing the three caskets in
The Merchant of Venice? Writing a 5-paragraph character sketch? Do I really need to know the Treaty of Utrecht to understand the importance of its modern ramifications? ...By the way, I don't think I was taught the latter any more than the applications of a character sketch. Is "teaching" algebra, the long, confusing, repetitive jumble of letters that has no impact on my future really that different from teaching, say,
Wuthering Heights (the long, confusing, repetitive jumble of letters that has no impact on my future*)? [EDIT: What Arthur said.]
This article seems to set up a false dilemma. Algebra's not the problem, the algebra curriculum is. Basic algebraic concepts are critical to quantitative literacy in society, as the article itself explains. Karthik nailed it, but I wanted to point out an additional line that struck me as...bizarre.
I fully concur that high-tech knowledge is needed to sustain an advanced industrial economy. But we’re deluding ourselves if we believe the solution is largely academic.
What does "academic" mean? Webster's first** definition is relating to a school/higher education. Under that definition--why not? Especially when the preceding example is about a community college. Shouldn't academics be giving us the knowledge we need to sustain our society?
*I actually didn't mind this book.
**Webster's seventh is "having no practical or useful significance". Seems like a good example of the root problem.