OPINION | TARA HOLM
If my seatmate on an airplane asks me what I do for a living, I tell the truth: I’m a mathematician. This generally triggers one of two responses. Either I’m told that I must be brilliant. . . or I hear about the person’s inability to balance a checkbook. The truth is, I’m not brilliant, just persistent, and I hate balancing my checkbook. Both responses, however, point to a fundamental misunderstanding about what mathematics is supposed to do and its current — and unfortunate — trajectory in American education.
Calculators have long since overthrown the need to perform addition, subtraction, multiplication, or division by hand. We still teach this basic arithmetic, though, because we want students to grasp the contours of numbers and look for patterns, to have a sense of what the right answer might be. But what happens next in most schools is the road-to-math-Hades: the single-file death march that leads towards calculus.
We are pretty much the only country on the planet that teaches math this way, where students are forced to memorize formulas and procedures. And so kids miss the more organic experience of playing with mathematical puzzles, experimenting and searching for patterns, finding delight in their own discoveries. Most students learn to detest — or at best, endure — math, and this is why our students are falling behind their international peers.
When students memorize the Pythagorean theorem or the quadratic formula and apply it with slightly different numbers, they actually get worse at the bigger picture. Our brains are slow to recognize information when it is out of context. This is why real-world math problems are so much harder — and more fascinating — than the contrived textbook exercises.
What I’ve found instead is that a student who has developed the ability to turn a real-world scenario into a mathematical problem, who is alert to false reasoning, and who can manipulate numbers and equations is likely far better prepared for college math than a student who has experienced a year of rote calculus.
What can we do as parents? At my house, we sometimes talk through simple logic puzzles over dinner. There are lots of good examples on the Internet, even pirate puzzles to please my son. Sudoku, despite claims to the contrary, is all about logical problem solving.
Or how about family board games night once a week? I’m not talking Candyland-style games, all luck and no skill. Some favorites in my household include logic puzzles like Rush Hour and board games like TransAmerica, Clue, and Carcassonne. Of course, there’s also always checkers and chess. These games teach kids to think logically several steps ahead, all while having fun. And they are far more effective than the SAT prep booklets which litter the homes of high school juniors each year.
I’m not down on mathematical training. I’m just down on the persistent memorization approach, which works your intellectual muscles about as effectively as lifting loaves of Wonder Bread helps build your biceps. We are failing our children if all we teach them are dry formulas. The benefits just don’t add up.
Fifty years ago, a homeownership program in Boston backfired. The lessons are still being learned.Continue reading »
In less than two generations, the United States transformed itself from a largely racist society to a largely non-racist one.Continue reading »
It is a stain on America’s reputation that it elected a president who professes to see more honor in our enemies than in the leaders of the US Congress.Continue reading »
Baker’s housing bill is better than nothing. But the Legislature will have to do better next session.Continue reading »
Why did seven Nobel laureates associate with a firm that markets an unproven dietary supplement?Continue reading »
Her uncle didn’t own New York. But she felt like he did.Continue reading »
Congressional Republicans are having their Captain Renault moment with Rep. Steve King.Continue reading »
Nearly half of all physicians experience burnout in some form, and the number will continue to grow.Continue reading »
In this week’s Arguable newsletter, Jeff Jacoby writes about Elizabeth Warren’s likability, a religiously diverse congress, and libraries.Continue reading »