Over-emphasis on mathematics?

[Vermilliona]

I know this is a really common question, but is VCE-level maths really essential, and does it, as so many say, close off the majority of doors in tertiary institutions?

It's obvious that maths is an essential skill, and that it develops analytical thinking and has numerous cognitive benefits, so it's logical that it should be compulsory through primary school and some of high school. But when you get to VCE level (even in Further), the prime time for reaping the brain-development benefits is largely over, and subjects other than maths can be just as beneficial in this regard.

People who drop maths entirely (from what I've seen, at least) often face heaps of stigma and judgement for it, both from other students and career counsellors - it's the holy grail, the thing that gets you all da uni courses, that you'll be doomed without. And yet, isn't it, at most, a shortcut to the degree, because many unis offer bridging courses or switches from, say, arts to commerce? And how much of Methods maths is really used in the courses that require it (such as medicine)*? I don't really have a fully-formed opinion on this, just would like to hear people's thoughts.

*(I know maths is seen as the staple of the ability to think analytically, which is required in medicine, but can't this ability be demonstrated through subjects other than maths, of which many require analytical thinking (humanities etc.?)

(Just in case, I'm not trying to be all petulant and bag maths in VCE because I'm not a maths genius, just genuinely trying to understand whether it should be seen as all-important, like it currently is)

[pi]

I don't think Monash requires any level of Maths for their MBBS (just chemistry and an English), could be wrong though

[hobbitle]

Technically neither does the postgrad MD at Melbourne Uni; though many students will have come from an undergrad containing at least one or two subjects that get you to Specialist level or higher. 

Essentially you're right.  The honest truth is that unless you want to be an Engineer, Physicist, Mathematician, Statistician, IT expert, or any of those other obvious things, most people don't require anything more than Further Maths in their lives or careers.  However, at least taking VCE Methods/Spec DOES leave a lot of doors open for you in the future.  People change their minds and their careers, often as frequently as every 8-10 years.  I was completely indifferent towards Maths in high school, didn't use it one bit for 10 years, and now I use it every day.

[Vermilliona]

Thanks for the replies!

I wonder if even Further is that applicable... The business module in the 3/4 is pretty much the only thing that you'd truly have to deal with 'out there', but do you really remember it all by the time you get around to doing your tax return or running a business, or would you rather just hire a financial expert? It depends on what your profession is of course, but is the maths you use Year 12 standard, or just things that you learn by Year 10? (I suspect the majority of people only really use basic arithmetic..)

[hobbitle]

I don't know the Further curriculum but I thought that perhaps it'd be fairly standard sore of basic algebra and arithmetic.  Is it more than that?

Basically there are a crazy amount of people out there who did go through high school but still don't know how to work out the area of a rectangle.  It might sound stupid, because even that might be more maths knowledge than the average person needs, but geez.... sometimes maths is just integrated into life, you know?  Even in a non-technical discipline (before Eng) I would occasionally use the principles of algebra to work some basic stuff out (I build stuff as a hobby etc) - it seems weird to me that if someone would be presented with 10x=40 they wouldn't be able to work out what x is.........

Like you I guess I don't really have a formulated argument for it... interesting nonetheless.

[Vermilliona]

Further's a bit more than basic algebra, I think most students are finished with that by the end of Year 10. It's networks and matrices and all kinds of (largely inapplicable to normal life) stuff, judging by what I've seen so far.

I agree that it's worrying that many people don't have that basic knowledge, but perhaps this is the fault of weak teaching in the early years when these things are really consolidated... I don't know if the two extra years of maths in VCE would help, part of the reason people don't know these things is because they simply forget (by Year 10 level you're doing a lot more complex stuff that rectangles). Don't really know how to solve that problem, although I guess on the very basic, short-sighted level it's not a big deal, since they can just google it 

I just find it strange that there's all this stigma around not taking a VCE maths, I think there's a lot of misinformation and scaremongering (primarily from education traditionalists..)

[JellyDonut]

bridging courses do exist if you wanna jump between degrees but there is a limit to what you can realistically learn and retain in a 12 week course. i mean do what you gotta do, the math in a general commerce degree never got that hard for me anyway, but y'know

[Planck's constant]

TrueTears tells me that life is not worth living without Maths
I believe him !

[rife168]

I agree with TT.

"The purpose of life is to prove and to conjecture."
 - Paul Erdős

[Guest]

Over-emphasis on mathematics? More like a severe underemphasis on what is fundamentally nature.
Mathematics in the Victorian curriculum simply isn't taught correctly to capture students interest. We are often taught about how to complete questions and even tackle challenging questions, but over the years the emphasis on building the intuition for mathematical proofs has been lost. We may understand how to solve a problem or problems of a certain type in a chapter. There is hardly an effort made by the teacher, or the textbook, to link key principles taught in the chapter. For example, if only such an effort had been made to link the gradient with rates of change well enough in Year 9, we wouldn't be so afraid of Calculus in Year 10. Burkard Polster and Marty Ross mention that "the few concepts taught are continuously drip-fed over 11 years" in the article "New maths curriculum a feeble tool calculated to the bore". I also believe that students should be taught the "history" of mathematics as a human endeavor (to an extent). How are we to make "leaps" and "bounds" in the future if we don't know the past of what we study? Learning how methods were formed will inspire students to apply and build a range of methods of their own via trial and error, to not only reach a correct answer, but learn from their mistakes too. The article also states that "it (mathematics) may (rarely) be a "how", but is never a "what".
And yet we question the over emphasis on mathematics.

Source:
http://www.theage.com.au/federal-politics/society-and-culture/new-maths-curriculum-a-feeble-tool-calculated-to-bore-20100303-pivw.html
http://www.theage.com.au/national/education/summing-up-a-failure-20090220-8d42.html
http://www.qedcat.com/year9_review.pdf
http://www.qedcat.com/Death_of_Reason_14-05-07.pdf


I'm also confused why people who can be undoubtedly be classified as "brilliant" choose career paths that might negate their skills and under-emphasize their true capacity. As pi said "I don't think Monash requires any level of Maths for their MBBS (just chemistry and an English)". I admire Thushan, pi and Shenz0r (all doing med) for their talent all round. Although, I'm curious to know what made them decide to pursue their career paths. What happens to all the maths you had learnt guys?  *sob*


Moderator action: Merged double-post

[thushan]

I'm also confused why people who can be undoubtedly be classified as "brilliant" choose career paths that might negate their skills and under-emphasize their true capacity. As pi said "I don't think Monash requires any level of Maths for their MBBS (just chemistry and an English)". I admire Thushan, pi and Shenz0r (all doing med) for their talent all round. Although, I'm curious to know what made them decide to pursue their career paths. What happens to all the maths you had learnt guys?  *sob*

Haha, in short, I was pushed into med. It's a love hate relationship right now.

I would have loved to have done something like Econometrics. But Med isnt bad.

[abeybaby]

Over-emphasis on mathematics? More like a severe underemphasis on what is fundamentally nature.
Mathematics in the Victorian curriculum simply isn't taught correctly to capture students interest. We are often taught about how to complete questions and even tackle challenging questions, but over the years the emphasis on building the intuition for mathematical proofs has been lost.

This is why, when you get an amazing maths teacher, everybody loves him/her

[Russ]

Medicine is far more likely to pay the bills

[pi]

Although, I'm curious to know what made them decide to pursue their career paths. What happens to all the maths you had learnt guys?  *sob*

Well I actually did consider a career in actuarial studies for a while, but realised that I just wasn't good enough at maths to make it a successful career. And maths was a passion of mine, but it wasn't my only passion and in terms of career options, didn't tick as many boxes as other fields (social interactions, wages (let's be honest, it is important), job security, variety of work, etc.).

It depends on what your profession is of course, but is the maths you use Year 12 standard, or just things that you learn by Year 10? (I suspect the majority of people only really use basic arithmetic..)

Reminds me of what my old Methods teacher used to tell us, paraphrased: "This course is total bullshit. Most of what any of you guys will be using are either basic arithmetic to make sure you can get the best buys while shopping and dealing with banks, and basic probability so you can gamble." Eh. kinda true

[Guest]

This is why, when you get an amazing maths teacher, everybody loves him/her

Well I guess we're lucky for that fact. You, having gone to Scotch, would have had a smaller bite of the national curriculum. Apparently your textbooks are written by your graduates as well...need I say more?
Going to a school specialized in maths, I can expect to be taught proofs and concepts stepping up from textbooks.

But what about the rest of the state?
Teachers in most other schools are confined to the textbook and only adhere to what is required. They don't see the need in enhancement; only confinement.

The only way to make a meaningful change is to redesign the National Curriculum. The idea is sound as it stands but simply hasn't been emphasized well enough. Even worse, people don't realize this, as evident in the title of this thread.

Medicine is far more likely to pay the bills

True. But it's a sad reality that people are motivated by money and not knowledge. Ever seen the movie "Pursuit of happiness"? Sometimes it's not money that brings the smile to your face.

Moderator action: Merged double-post