Is America really as advanced as we think we are? In a recent New York Times article by Andrew Hacker, the mathematical skills of American adults were put to the test to discover whether or not the way schools teach this subject is the most effective and long-lasting. Hacker believes that although basic classes such as geometry and algebra are critical to everyday life, more advanced classes like calculus are not nearly as applicable. America has become more of a quantitative country, squeezing in as many possible areas of math as possible, not taking into account the qualitative side- the side that really determines the usefulness of the course. "What citizens do need is to be comfortable reading graphs and charts and adept at calculating simple figures in their heads... Decimals and ratios are now as crucial as nouns and verbs." Math is a language that must be mastered. However, even with the recent rise in advanced statistic courses this country is still not on the path towards creating a statistically sophisticated citizenry. The idea is certainly there, but the information that these classes focus on does not allow students to recognize how such formulas connect with the lives they'll be leading in the future.
The assumption that all this advanced math will make America more numerically adept is certainly flawed, for the majority of the content focused on in these classes will never again appear in the students' lives once they enter the real world. "In the real world, we constantly settle for estimates, whereas mathematics- see the SAT- demands that you get the answer precisely right." I couldn't agree more with this statement, for I certainly can connect to feeling lost and confused when I am taught specific topics in my math classes. How is finding the asymptote of a exponential function ever going to help me in the life besides passing one test? As a prospective AP Stat student it worries me that the information I will be taught next year will not be as useful as I hoped it to be. If I wish to pursue business as my major in college, math is certainly something I need to be fluent in in order to be successful, however, success in areas that are not applicable to my life in the future is not going to allow me to be very prosperous. As Hacker clearly stated, maybe the one thing this country does need to do better is refocus our mathematical curriculum.
Sunday, February 28, 2016
Sunday, February 21, 2016
TOW #18- Why Do We Teach Girls It's Cute to Be Scared?
"Shouldn't you be scared?" they would say. Coming from a prestigious, prominent background as the first woman in the San Francisco Fire Department, Caroline Paul, now a New York Times opinionist, surprisingly experienced a plethora of unnecessary comments, all directed towards her capabilities as a woman to handle the task at hand. Offended, as many would be, Paul synthesized that these remarks are too often directed towards young women, especially around adolescence. Parents tend to "baby" or protect their young daughters much more than they would with a son, since males have always been expected to be the more powerful and dominant gender, able to fend for themselves. Detailing several anecdotes from her childhood and experiences on the fire force, Paul can vividly remember many instances in which this attitude was directed towards her, whether it be from her elders or simply a friend. No matter where it came from, it left an impact on Paul and how she viewed herself.
Naturally anyone would be terrified when faced with a disastrous and deadly situation, such as a fire, and of course Paul was, but so were the men too, and this is why it gives them no right to treat her any differently. Fear is no reason to quit, it is a motivation to strive to overcome. Paul "put her fear where it belonged, behind (her) feelings of focus, confidence and courage, and headed into the burning building with her crew," it didn't matter that she was a woman, she could still handle it. Issues over the roles of women have been around since the beginning of time, constantly pushing them into the shadows of society, struggling to have their voices heard and truly respected. Being a strong woman doesn't mean backing down from something that could possibly end in an injury or embarrassment, it means proving yourself in front of those who think you would never have the possibility to succeed.
Risk taking is an important part of growing up, therefore I believe that parents should caution their children equally, not a daughter more than a son. Fear conditioning for females starts at a very young age, and must not be enforced any stricter than it would for males. Both races are capable of performing the same tasks, at the same pace, and at the same moment in time. Women have proven countless times, in past athletic events and academic competitions, that they can be smarter, stronger, and braver than men. So why should they be protected more? Who decided that women were weak? I think many would be surprised just how amazing and tenacious the female race can be.
Naturally anyone would be terrified when faced with a disastrous and deadly situation, such as a fire, and of course Paul was, but so were the men too, and this is why it gives them no right to treat her any differently. Fear is no reason to quit, it is a motivation to strive to overcome. Paul "put her fear where it belonged, behind (her) feelings of focus, confidence and courage, and headed into the burning building with her crew," it didn't matter that she was a woman, she could still handle it. Issues over the roles of women have been around since the beginning of time, constantly pushing them into the shadows of society, struggling to have their voices heard and truly respected. Being a strong woman doesn't mean backing down from something that could possibly end in an injury or embarrassment, it means proving yourself in front of those who think you would never have the possibility to succeed.
Risk taking is an important part of growing up, therefore I believe that parents should caution their children equally, not a daughter more than a son. Fear conditioning for females starts at a very young age, and must not be enforced any stricter than it would for males. Both races are capable of performing the same tasks, at the same pace, and at the same moment in time. Women have proven countless times, in past athletic events and academic competitions, that they can be smarter, stronger, and braver than men. So why should they be protected more? Who decided that women were weak? I think many would be surprised just how amazing and tenacious the female race can be.
Paul, Caroline. "Why Do We Teach Girls That It’s Cute to Be Scared?" The New York Times. The New York Times, 20 Feb. 2016. Web. 21 Feb. 2016.
Monday, February 15, 2016
TOW #17- Against Headphones
"Maybe the danger of digital culture to young people is not that they have hummingbird attention spans but that they are going deaf." In the recent New York Times Magazine article, Virginia Heffernan argues that the ongoing abuse of headphones is causing several problems for todays youth. Not only is the blasting of music through headphones detrimental to teenage health, but it also creates a sort of escapism that limits their ability to connect with others and their surroundings. Ultimately any real awareness to surrounding noises or movements is limited, making it harder for individuals to enjoy their private auditory experiences.
Created more than a century ago, headphones served a much different purpose than they do today. Giving a detail account of this shift in purpose over time, by using sources of historical facts, Heffernan exemplifies how they are being utilized in a rather ironic way. Originally implemented during World War II, headphones were used in order to block out crowd noise and hear sermons. Workers and soldiers greatly favored the ability to mute noises of machinery/artillery while simultaneously receiving orders from another source through the wire. From this information it is clear that headphones have always been a "technology of submission (to commands) and denial (of commotion)" however nowadays they are solely used for entertainment, and are being maxed out to their highest volumes, tearing apart the eardrums of many.
The inclusion of factual evidence on the history of headphones shows a much more drastic change in the invention than if Heffernan were to simply state how they are being utilized today. Headphones are packed with technology, changing the way music is heard and envisioned. The concept of actually "hearing" however is limited, as in exchange for the music the ability to truly be a part of the surrounding moment is constrained. It can be simply stated that "headphones work best for people who need or want to hear one sound story and no other."
Created more than a century ago, headphones served a much different purpose than they do today. Giving a detail account of this shift in purpose over time, by using sources of historical facts, Heffernan exemplifies how they are being utilized in a rather ironic way. Originally implemented during World War II, headphones were used in order to block out crowd noise and hear sermons. Workers and soldiers greatly favored the ability to mute noises of machinery/artillery while simultaneously receiving orders from another source through the wire. From this information it is clear that headphones have always been a "technology of submission (to commands) and denial (of commotion)" however nowadays they are solely used for entertainment, and are being maxed out to their highest volumes, tearing apart the eardrums of many.
The inclusion of factual evidence on the history of headphones shows a much more drastic change in the invention than if Heffernan were to simply state how they are being utilized today. Headphones are packed with technology, changing the way music is heard and envisioned. The concept of actually "hearing" however is limited, as in exchange for the music the ability to truly be a part of the surrounding moment is constrained. It can be simply stated that "headphones work best for people who need or want to hear one sound story and no other."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)