HSC maths and science on the decline

[enwiabe]

If you're making a claim, it's only reasonable for someone else to ask how you made that link.

My irritation w/ Russ is more the stupid nature of how he went about it. Instead of 1) looking for evidence himself, or 2) straight up asking for some sort of evidence, he goes on a long-winded rant about how my logic is flawed etc. as if I don't have evidence to back it up and I'm just pulling it out of my ass.

From someone who knows me (and I would have thought respected me enough to not think that of me, and not try to publically embarrass me by accusing me of it), I found it pretty irritating and decided to show him what a passive-aggressive twat he was being.

[ninwa]

Somewhat relevant: http://www.premier.vic.gov.au/media-centre/media-releases/8173-supporting-teachers-and-school-leaders-to-raise-victoria-s-education-system-to-meet-the-world-s-best.html

(I haven't read it as I'm at work so idk how effective it actually is)

[slothpomba]

Somewhat relevant: http://www.premier.vic.gov.au/media-centre/media-releases/8173-supporting-teachers-and-school-leaders-to-raise-victoria-s-education-system-to-meet-the-world-s-best.html

(I haven't read it as I'm at work so idk how effective it actually is)

I think someone linked pay tables in that other thread about burn out, there actually was a significant jump (3-5 K if i remember correctly) in the last year of the pay increase.

http://www.education.vic.gov.au/hrweb/Documents/Salary-Teacher.pdf

[ninwa]

Blog post from Stuyvesant High School maths teacher about "The Death of math" in the US

[chasej]

I'm going to recall a personal story which I think could be one of the reasons.

Every maths teacher I've ever had has often been asked the inevitable question of "why do we learn this? 95% of us are never going to need this information?". Most maths teacher somehow try to justify the subject by saying something along the lines of "oh I used it in my last profession of x" and "no it's important to know this for y". Really at the same time these teachers know most students would never need to the practical knowledge they are learning in real life outside of school. Teachers fail to convey to their students that math isn't just about practical application but rather about finding ways to critically evaluate and solve information as well as improve general problem solving skills etc.

The notion that many teachers try to put forward of maths helping in practice is in the minds of students making them think they do not need to pursue the subject simply as they won't have any practical use. Students fail to realise the ways in which math can help them to advance and gain skills in many other areas.

It's not the quality of maths that is the problem, but rather the attitude of some teachers and students which is.

Again, I have no facts or stats to back this up and I'm can't be bothered finding them but this is my opinion that has been formed after dealing with numerous high school math teachers over the last 5 or so years. In fact I suffer from the belief that math is not needed due to having little practical use myself, thus I will not be continuing with any formal study of mathematics next year in yr 12 (and likely never again), lack of interest in maths has I believe been caused by years of dealing with teachers who simply fail to convey the importance of the area in educational development.

[Mao]

Teachers fail to convey to their students that math isn't just about practical application but rather about finding ways to critically evaluate and solve information as well as improve general problem solving skills etc.

Mathematics is certainly about problem solving. You see a problem, you gather data, you propose a reasonable mathematical model, you carefully evaluate the model. Scientific logic relies on mathematics.

VCE Mathematics is not so much about problem solving, but rather, finding a formula that fits. It is an exercise in pattern recognition. Teachers and students alike fall into the habit of finding applications for mathematics, rather than using mathematics to solve interesting real-world problems.

The solution? Make science and mathematics more integrated. Right now, soft sciences (e.g. biology, psychology) have little to no mathematics at all, the physical sciences (e.g. chemistry, physics) only has very simple mathematics, and doesn't dare touch calculus with a metal pole. At least, introduce advanced streams of physical sciences to be taken concurrently with advanced mathematics, like in IB, that will give higher level mathematics relevance without teachers having to pull exampls out of their asses.

[BigAl]

They need to integrate (mind the pun) calculus into physics more and vice versa

I remember how mind blown I felt when nliu1995 explained to me that the true mathematical relationship between and how F=ma and kinetic energy = 0.5mv^2 were deduced.

In spesh you learn a = d(0.5v^2)/dx and F=ma... Physics you learn Ek = 0.5mv^2 and F=ma... Sub a into what you learn in  into what you learn in physics and you feel absolutely blown away! (Arguably my favourite connection I've learnt this year... But it won't really help me on either exams.)

Why don't VCAA put two and two together?

I remember my teacher writing the kinetic energy formula out in the first week of y12..he said he doesnt know how this equation was derived...so i went home and spent some time on the problem...then from the definition of work and change of variables...the ke formula wasnt that hard to derive at all..there is also this problem in physics known as the two body problem..basically if you assume one of the bodies at foci and other one orbitting it in an elliptical orbit, you can derive the equation of ellipse in terms of newton's law of gravitation...and it's not really that hard and a spesh kid could really understand it..its kinda cool

[slothpomba]

The solution? Make science and mathematics more integrated. Right now, soft sciences (e.g. biology, psychology) have little to no mathematics at all, the physical sciences (e.g. chemistry, physics) only has very simple mathematics, and doesn't dare touch calculus with a metal pole. At least, introduce advanced streams of physical sciences to be taken concurrently with advanced mathematics, like in IB, that will give higher level mathematics relevance without teachers having to pull examples out of their asses.

Hey! Biology isn't a soft science! Thats usually the social sciences, even then the distinction is kind of meaningless.

Even in university level biology or psychology the math is pretty simplistic and is usually putting things into equations or stats. So, they're a bit out of luck there. I'm a bit skeptical of introducing so much math into chemistry. It's meant to be a "taster" to learn concepts of chemistry, i wouldn't introduce a heavy component about the history and philosophy of science in it because i think its needed (which it is). I still think math belongs in the subject its named after and i don't think the VCE curriculum should be fragmented or have similar versions of subjects because that leads to its own issues with teaching, books, exams, etc (i.e. CAS & non-CAS). 

[pi]

Blog post from Stuyvesant High School maths teacher about "The Death of math" in the US

I agree with this guy (not saying Nina is a guy).

I also would like to see more emphasis and encouragement regarding competition maths (and science). Trying to get people find more people with raw natural talent rather than those with the persistence to smash out textbook and trial exam questions. I guess at the moment it's really on a school-to-school basis with schools like Scotch grooming their students via running special Olympiad classes, to schools like MHS who subsidise the costs and encourage participation without prep, to schools who don't even know about them or tell their students about it.

I know it's not for everyone, but it ties in well with the "deep learning" the teacher was talking about.

[Will T]

I agree with this guy (not saying Nina is a guy).

I also would like to see more emphasis and encouragement regarding competition maths (and science). Trying to get people find more people with raw natural talent rather than those with the persistence to smash out textbook and trial exam questions. I guess at the moment it's really on a school-to-school basis with schools like Scotch grooming their students via running special Olympiad classes, to schools like MHS who subsidise the costs and encourage participation without prep, to schools who don't even know about them or tell their students about it.

I know it's not for everyone, but it ties in well with the "deep learning" the teacher was talking about.

Agree. Encouraging people to think deeply about stuff > Churning past papers like they don't mean nothing for 40+

[slothpomba]

Agree. Encouraging people to think deeply about stuff > Churning past papers like they don't mean nothing for 40+

I wish units had more specialisations, Physics style. I've never taken physics so i dont know if it was actually a good idea for that course but i think it looks ok (in theory) to explore something deep and possibly contemporary. You could easily find applicable areas for all of the sciences as well.

[Mao]

I wish units had more specialisations, Physics style. I've never taken physics so i dont know if it was actually a good idea for that course but i think it looks ok (in theory) to explore something deep and possibly contemporary. You could easily find applicable areas for all of the sciences as well.

The "specialisation" in physics is a nice idea, but does not work. Most VCE Physics teachers are not comfortable enough with Special Relativity to teach it to the same quality as the other modules, and limited access to the Synchrotron means few schools are able to study that module. Everyone did Structures.

Same goes for chemistry. Because of the wealth of resources available for sulfuric acid (it's been in the course since forever), few teachers ventured outside because: 1) more practice materials and 2) difficult to research a new chemical for their class plan, which requires reading up about industrial processes and plant designs, where the information available is generally indigestible for someone who has never done Chem Eng before.

Also, entire classes were restricted to doing the same module, so teachers, not wanting to completely burn the struggling kids alive, always chose the easiest option.

But yes, there is definitely room for individual specialisations for deeper learning. It does not work as a specialisation module, and it does not achieve the intended effect as a SAC (students are not rewarded enough for putting in the extra mile). Not sure how to design a system that accomodates this...