That's the conclusion of a new study from Harvard and the University of Virginia, anyway:
Researchers at Harvard University and the University of Virginia have found that high school coursework in one of the sciences generally does not predict better college performance in other scientific disciplines. But there's one notable exception: Students with the most rigorous high school preparation in mathematics perform significantly better in college courses in biology, chemistry, and physics.
This is not terribly surprising to me, as the biggest weakness I see in entering students is usually in the area of math skills. The students who struggle the most in intro physics are the ones who have the shakiest math preparation, and it's not just a matter of being unable to do algebra-- it's a larger problem with systematic thinking.
Still, it's always nice to have folk wisdom confirmed by research.
- Log in to post comments
More like this
This is good news indeed.
What my wife and I found, teaching Science courses in colleges and universities, was the problem of students being under-prepared for Science, particularly because of weak Math.
The Harvard University/ University of Virginia study is, to me, another justification for my nearly completed time in the trenches of an inner city high school, teaching Algebra. A few of my students have a chance, now, if they go on to college.
In early September, I'll start teaching Chemistry, Earth Sciences, and Biotechnology at a school-witin-a-school (Health Careers Academy) at that high school. This will allow me to asses, for this school, the level of hands-on lab technique, and qualitative abstract reasoning, with the dreadful level of math that I observed.
Social Promotion seems to be one culprit. Some of my summerschool students explicitly, in writing, wondred why they had been allowed to pass "pre-algebra." As a result, I spent more time reviewing "pre-algebra" -- i.e. how to add, subtract, multiply, and divide fractions and decimals, than I did hammering home what equations were, how to manipulate them, and how they related to the physical and social world.
Yesterday being the anniversary of Syncom 2 (26 July 1963), I took my class back to the Age of the Beatles, told them stories about how Arthur C. Clarke lost a billion dollars in his spare time, and guided the kids through finding diameter, and circumference, of cricular orbits of various radii, and the speed a stallite needed to go to be synchronous, and how fast the Earth was moving around the sun.
In the process, I had to confiscate a skateboard and 3 iPods being used in violation of posted classroom rules. had I moved faster, I'd have had 2 skateboards in use (inside!) and 6 iPods. These get locked in the Principal's office safe, and need a parent to retrieve.
Those students who cooperate get to (quietly) play Chess and cards during class.
Carrot and stick.
But Math seems to be at the root, beyond behavioral problems, for these poor kids. Some live in Group Homes. Some are technically homeless. Many do not see a father.
If I cannot save my students, with all my passion and expertise, I don't know who can. If I can make a difference, then I can have hope for Western Civilization.
Public education is badly dysfunctional in America. Better to light a candle than curse the darkness.
Jonathan -
If they can't do fractions or long division, maybe you should ask what curriculum was used in the K-8 program. Based on what I have learned about TERC and Everyday Math from the (mostly NY based) parents blogging in
http://kitchentablemath.blogspot.com/
it would not surprise me to learn that those curricula were in your student's past. Symptoms would be if they use a strange triangular way of doing multiplication or an iterative guessing method for division.
I don't think it is an exaggeration to say that some of these "discovery" approaches to basic math are doing for arithmetic what "look say" (now called whole language) did for reading.
I saw this article and wondered if you were going to blog it. My first reaction was "Duh." My second reaction is "Duh". Obviously the people who are good at math and therefore take the more demanding high school math courses are going to do better in science: Math (at higher levels than, say, arithmetic) is all about dealing with abstract concepts in a rational and systematic way. The people who can do that well are also the same people who can apply rational and systematic thinking to other aspects in their coursework -- notably science courses that also reward the same approach.
I have a hunch that students who take advanced math in high school also do better in non-science classes too. Why? Because people who are good at math are probably just plain smarter (on average) than those who aren't.
Wow, shocking.
Ciao Asad
can one be taught to be good in math? Or are most people just not smart enough, inspite of talented and brilliant teachers? There certainly are very smart people that will be good inspite of terrible teachers. Can a good teacher make a difference? If he cann't then is he really good?
goffredo: I'll answer as briefly as possible, summarizing a great deal of literature on mathematics education.
(1) Can one be taught to be good in math?
Yes, quite often; the earlier, the easier. We don't know if we can teach someone to be Great in Math.
(2) Or are most people just not smart enough, in spite of talented and brilliant teachers?
No. Only about 1/3 of students diagnosed with clinical Dyscalculia (Math Disorder) have the wiring of the brains such that they genuinely CAN'T learn, from any teacher. 2/3 of those with Dyscalculia went off the tracks at some point, usually due to bad parenting, bad teachers, and destructive environment in some combination.
(3) There certainly are very smart people that will be good in spite of terrible teachers.
True. The problem is not, however, with autodidacts, who know how to learn on their own.
(4) Can a good teacher make a difference?
Yes! Even the 2/3 who have severe Dyscalculia can be put back on track, by methods which depend on how far they must be regressed to the branch point, and what their learning style is. This is VERY HARD and takes exceptional teachers and teachers who teach teachers.
(5) If he can't then is he really good?
Depends. It is not very hard to teach good students in a good environment; if one can't, one is not a good teacher.
It can be very hard to teach non-good students in a good environment, or teach good students in a non-good environment.
Some professors excel at research, or administration, or bringing in the big bucks, but can't teach well at all.
Some people are clumsy, even clueless at research, but have the gift of empathy to be good teachers.
My mother, NOT orginally trained in or good at Math, late in life got a M.S., teaching credentials, and specialized in teaching math to inner-city kids whose parents, schools, and peers had given up on them. I saw how far she brought them, beyond the "smart" middle-class white kids. I still have the letters the kids wrote to my mother while she was dying the hopistal, aged 46.
There is no known limit to what a properly trained teacher, with insight in human nature, and energy, and organization, and love can achieve.
Assuming that the Educational Bureacracy doesn't stop the good teachers...
I will be forever grateful to a particular Algebra teacher in central New York. I failed the Algebra NY Regents exam in the 9th grade. I'd had an elderly teacher who used to fall asleep in class. A year later I understood little, and it showed. My math-phobic mother insisted I got to summer school and take the course over. WOW! I hit a great teacher who literally re-wired my brain. From there it was steady progress through Geometry, Trig, and Calc 1 and 2, plus any number of chemistry and physics undergraduate classes; and, graduate courses in linear programming and econometrics classes through the 700 level. A good teacher can make all the difference in the world. This report comes as no surprise to me.
# 6 | MaryKaye:
I hope that it's okay with you that I cross-posted your inspiring comment on the equivalent thread of the Pharyngula scienceblog.
Robert A. Heinlein's Legacy
As they say on the moon, "There ain't no such thing as a free lunch!"
BY TAYLOR DINERMAN
Thursday, July 26, 2007 12:01 a.m. EDT
Wall Street Journal
http://opinionjournal.com/la/?id=110010381
"... Bemoaning the state of U.S. education in the 1970s, he wrote that 'the three-legged stool of understanding is held up by history, languages and mathematics . . . if you lack any one of them you are just another ignorant peasant with dung on your boots.'"