Plans to make Maths more difficult for all!!!!

furbey

Right so some genius came up with the idea of making maths harded.
No calculators for Junior Cert students or in primary school.
Change the Junior and Leaving Cert to make them harder beacuse somehow some idiot out there thinks it will encourage more people to do honours maths for the leaving????????
I think we can all spot the flaw in that logic...
And the reason?
They want to make engineers that are out of work Maths teachers.
First problem and I might be wrong here, but I would imagine that engineers are more suited to teaching applied maths.
This is an odd idea at best.
Anyone else think this is f***ing retarded???

pathway33

It is retarded in the sense that the Teaching Council won't recognise some engineering degrees despite the fact they are on their recognised list of qualifications. Slide over to the teaching forum and have a look at the 'engineering /teaching maths' thread http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055825180 where a 'qualified' maths teacher had their qualification taken off them because they did too much engineering. Engineers and Teaching Council need to get together and sing off same hymn sheet.

furbey

That is insane!! Thanks for the tip though. Interesting thread.

xoxyx

Since when are people allowed use calculators for the Junior Cert? We weren't allowed, and that's not all so long ago.
No harm in making maths harder IMO. I don't think even higher level maths pushes people to the potential they could reach. Ordinary level should make average people work hard. If you don't have an aptitude for maths, do it at pass level. But, there's no point in doing such a versatile and wide ranging subject if you don't learn as much as you can.

gemxpink

z_topaz wrote: »

Since when are people allowed use calculators for the Junior Cert?

Since at least 2004.

furbey

z_topaz wrote: »

Since when are people allowed use calculators for the Junior Cert? We weren't allowed, and that's not all so long ago.
No harm in making maths harder IMO. I don't think even higher level maths pushes people to the potential they could reach. Ordinary level should make average people work hard. If you don't have an aptitude for maths, do it at pass level. But, there's no point in doing such a versatile and wide ranging subject if you don't learn as much as you can.

I get what you're saying but there are a lot more subjects to think about and generally the maths teachers in schools are sh** with one or two exceptions. They think we're thick anyway and move way too slowly so there isn't time to get extra stuff in the course done.
Like I did nothng last year and I'm repeating this year so its a piece of piss but I think its a bit much to ask of kids to do more when the course is so broad anyway.

xoxyx

gemxpink wrote: »

Since at least 2004.

I never knew that! Learn something new every day eh!

And, having been in the working world for a few years now, I am sometimes still surprised at the random skills I learned in school that have a useful application in practise. Mental arithmetic is one of them. I don't work in a job that requires maths skills, but, from a timesaving perspective, if I need to do a quick scan of an invoice or submit receipts. Even if I'm organising a meeting with ten people arriving at 11am, two leaving shortly afterwards, nineteen coming in soon after, (but some have to leave halfway), a couple of maybes, take into account the no-shows and the people who arrive without warning, etc., and this is all done when I'm on the phone to a querying nit-picker, being able to do some quick head sums is very handy.

lc2010

I had an engineer teaching me maths last year and I must say he was the best teacher ever. Not only did he try and prepare us well for the exam, he also showed us loads of applications of what we thought was useless higher level maths. He really tried to develop a love for the subject.
No calculators for the J.C would not be a bad idea at all as it will really develop students basics in maths.

xoxyx

furbey wrote: »

I get what you're saying but there are a lot more subjects to think about and generally the maths teachers in schools are sh** with one or two exceptions. They think we're thick anyway and move way too slowly so there isn't time to get extra stuff in the course done.
Like I did nothng last year and I'm repeating this year so its a piece of piss but I think its a bit much to ask of kids to do more when the course is so broad anyway.

I know it's difficult. Believe me, I sympathise with people who have to grapple with exams in six + subjects in one year. But, then again, these are the same subjects that they've been examined on to an extent in the JC, and they've been studying them solidly for at least the last two years.
I think that, were specialised subjects like maths made more difficult, it would be a good way of really separating those who are good studiers/quick learners, from those who really have a skill in a particular area.
When I went to college, I was amazed to be told that any mark over 70% was spectacular and anything over 80% was almost never achieved. The upper sphere of marks is reserved for those with unusual ability.
Whereas, in the Leaving, 70%/80% is easily achievable.
I think bringing this element into the LC would be a good grounder for people who think that if they get a A in maths/physics they are destined for high positions in that field. Also, for certain courses/positions, it would be a better indication for colleges/jobs that the right person is coming in.

pljudge321

The report seems bang on in my opinion. Having calculators in primary school is a joke, kids should be developing their numerical skills properly not plugging numbers into calculators.

Engineers do more then enough maths to become maths teachers. We do modules in multi-variable calculus, statistics, linear algebra(matrices), fourier & laplace transforms and differential equations. All of this goes far beyond leaving cert level, and thats only in the maths modules. Maths is featured heavily in all modules of an engineering degree. They would also be able to teach physics/chemistry easily enough depending on their discipline or with a small bit extra training.

pljudge321

z_topaz wrote: »

I know it's difficult. Believe me, I sympathise with people who have to grapple with exams in six + subjects in one year. But, then again, these are the same subjects that they've been examined on to an extent in the JC, and they've been studying them solidly for at least the last two years.
I think that, were specialised subjects like maths made more difficult, it would be a good way of really separating those who are good studiers/quick learners, from those who really have a skill in a particular area.
When I went to college, I was amazed to be told that any mark over 70% was spectacular and anything over 80% was almost never achieved. The upper sphere of marks is reserved for those with unusual ability.
Whereas, in the Leaving, 70%/80% is easily achievable.
I think bringing this element into the LC would be a good grounder for people who think that if they get a A in maths/physics they are destined for high positions in that field. Also, for certain courses/positions, it would be a better indication for colleges/jobs that the right person is coming in.

Agreed, the CAO system needs some sort of overhaul, doing honours maths can be seen as a pretty stupid move in the points race. I was the best maths student in the school, put loads of study hours into it and managed to get an A. In geography me and my friend did barely any work and both got A's in it as well for a fraction of the effort. Same difficulty with physics and chemistry. You can be naturally gifted in some subjects and do well in it with little effort. For the science courses it seems you need both talent and hard work to do well.

I remeber my relief when I was informed 70% was an A in college, getting 85%+ to get a top grade seemed pretty much impossible.

pljudge321

lc2010 wrote: »

I had an engineer teaching me maths last year and I must say he was the best teacher ever. Not only did he try and prepare us well for the exam, he also showed us loads of applications of what we thought was useless higher level maths. He really tried to develop a love for the subject.
No calculators for the J.C would not be a bad idea at all as it will really develop students basics in maths.

Most useful things in the leaving cert course IMHO.

Matrices - You don't learn enough about them in the LC. Pop up everywhere

Calculus - Use it for absolutely everything, physics becomes much more enjoyable with it, especially electromagnetism which I hated for the LC

Imaginary Numbers - An Electrical Engineers best friend. Never saw any point in them before.

Trigonometry/Algebra - Once again essential.

Actually now that I think about it thats pretty much the entire course.:o

PeakOutput

furbey wrote: »

I might be wrong here, but I would imagine that engineers are more suited to teaching applied maths.

your right you are wrong

the only time there is a difference between maths and applied maths is in secondary school all maths are learned to be applied

removing calculators is retarded you should be allowed use them in any exam that is not testing addition subtraction multiplication and division

other than that maths should definitely be made harder and our teachers better

Making It Bad

Good idea. Finally we'll have people teaching maths who actually understand it, and appreciate its applications. The no calculators in JC also seems a good idea, it will improve the arithmetic skills of the students, seems a good balance to strike now that the new formulae tables are in. The actual maths we do isn't hard, just the teaching of it, generally, sucks ass.

jumpguy

I can't find this report anywhere, could someone link it?

Who is this "genius"?

In JC, I think calculators are alright for honours maths anyway. Surely any honours student knows how divide, multiply, add and subtract.

Are calculators allowed in primary school though?! Surely not! They weren't when I was there anyway. That'd be a complete disaster. "Right Timmy, instead of learning how to add, subtract, multiply or divide, punch some keys on a calculator". I sincerely hope that calculators are not currently allowed (are they?) This means we have a generation of mathematically stunted students coming up.

lc2010

http://www.rte.ie/news/2010/0211/education.html

pljudge321

jumpguy wrote: »

I can't find this report anywhere, could someone link it?

Who is this "genius"?

In JC, I think calculators are alright for honours maths anyway. Surely any honours student knows how divide, multiply, add and subtract.

Are calculators allowed in primary school though?! Surely not! They weren't when I was there anyway. That'd be a complete disaster. "Right Timmy, instead of learning how to add, subtract, multiply or divide, punch some keys on a calculator". I sincerely hope that calculators are not currently allowed (are they?) This means we have a generation of mathematically stunted students coming up.

They are allowed them from 3rd class, I think. Its a complete and utter joke and horribly unfair to the students themselves in the long run.

Its almost like allowing them to use a dictophone to do english.

Lawliet

lc2010 wrote: »

No calculators for the J.C would not be a bad idea at all as it will really develop students basics in maths.

I disagree; it sounds completely unfair on people who have dyscalculia or dyslexia.

lc2010

Lawliet wrote: »

I disagree; it sounds completely unfair on people who have dyscalculia or dyslexia.

Well in the long run they are going to have to deal with in the real world. Perhaps they could bring in exceptions for people wit these conditions and allow them to use them

Making It Bad

Lawliet wrote: »

I disagree; it sounds completely unfair on people who have dyscalculia or dyslexia.

This might sound a bit non-politically correct but that will give a more accurate representation of those students' mathematical ability, won't it?

jumpguy

pljudge321 wrote: »

They are allowed them from 3rd class, I think. Its a complete and utter joke and horribly unfair to the students themselves in the long run.

Its almost like allowing them to use a dictophone to do english.

Oh wow...that's indeed terrible. Whatever about JC...but primary school is ridiculous. How long has this been in place?

xoxyx

Lawliet wrote: »

I disagree; it sounds completely unfair on people who have dyscalculia or dyslexia.

Not really - may as well say that having to read/write a paper in an English exam is unfair for people with a reading difficulty.
That's why there are exemptions and aids in exams.

Making It Bad

Indeed. Who's supposed to program the calculators if students don't even know how to add on paper/in their head?

eth0_

gemxpink wrote: »

Since at least 2004.

That is absolutely crazy. You should not need a calculator for junior cert maths.

Lawliet

Making It Bad wrote: »

This might sound a bit non-politically correct but that will give a more accurate representation of those students' mathematical ability, won't it?

Not necessarily. I have a mild form of dyslexia, I'm doing ordinary level maths and can easily get an A in most tests. But I use a calculator for any sort of sums, not because I can't work them out in my head, but purely to check that the number on the page is the one it's suppose to be. You wouldn't believe the amount of times I've mixed up 9s and 6s and 5s for 3s and so on. And don't even get me started on the signs.
Those mistakes have got nothing to do with my mathematical ability, it's a seperate neurological condition.

Also, often people with dyscalculia can understand very complex mathematical concepts and principles, it's usually the basics they have trouble with.

lc2010 wrote: »

Well in the long run they are going to have to deal with in the real world.

Because there are no calculators in the "real world"?

H2student

They allow calculators in primary schools now? Multiplying was about the only thing I learned from it....

I don't quite remember the Junior Cert(despite only being two years ago) so I don't remember what kind of questions comes up but I would hate it if I have to do use the quardratic formula without it. From what I can remember, there was a lot of decimals.... Apart from that, I don't think I used the calculator for anything.

^ Lol yeah calculators are too inconvenient to be used in the "real world".

jumpguy

H2student wrote: »

They allow calculators in primary schools now? Multiplying was about the only thing I learned from it....

I don't quite remember the Junior Cert(despite only being two years ago) so I don't remember what kind of questions comes up but I would hate it if I have to do use the quardratic formula without it. From what I can remember, there was a lot of decimals.... Apart from that, I don't think I used the calculator for anything.

Yeah, using the -b formula without calculators would be very annoying.

With the new maths and formulae tables though, it appears the SEC have dug themselves quite a hole. Get rid of calculators in primary school anyway, definetly. I don't think they're really that bad in JC.

lc2010

Lawliet wrote: »

Because there are no calculators in the "real world"?

I'm not saying that, but unless one carries a calculator with them every where they go, at some stage they are going to be faced with a situation where they have to do some simple maths.
However I admit I'm not an expert and if they feel that dyslexics are at a disadvantage then dyslexics can get aids/calculators, but for the majority of the students doing the exam it would be beneficial.

Lawliet

jumpguy wrote: »

With the new maths and formulae tables though, it appears the SEC have dug themselves quite a hole.

I don't know what they were thinking with those new tables. It will be interesting to see how they'll change the questions next June. Something tells me we wont be getting any easy marks for slotting numbers into given formula.

lc2010 wrote: »

I'm not saying that, but unless one carries a calculator with them every where they go, at some stage they are going to be faced with a situation where they have to do some simple maths.

Most phones have calculators now

Fad

furbey wrote: »

They want to make engineers that are out of work Maths teachers.

First problem and I might be wrong here, but I would imagine that engineers are more suited to teaching applied maths.

This is an odd idea at best.

They would brilliantly qualified to teach it (They could even be better maths teachers, than people with a degree in maths).

A person with a degree in maths would obviously have far beyond what is needed to teach Leaving Cert maths, but they study very abstract maths that is of much less practical use than that of what an engineer studies.

Engineers study A LOT of maths, it is a very mathematically driven profession. Not only that, but they can apply the maths they've learned to real life situation, which especially when you're teaching stuff like matrices and imaginary numbers, will help you to teach students.

Applied maths would be something they're especially qualified to teach.

Basically, you dont know what you're talking about

lc2010

Lawliet wrote: »

Most phones have calculators now

You know what I mean!!
As H2student said there is an inconvenience in using them in the real world.

pathway33

Apart from engineers what other graduates/professions would be good for teaching maths to show its real world applications. Economist? Actuary? Surveyor?

pljudge321

pathway33 wrote: »

Apart from engineers what other graduates/professions would be good for teaching maths to show its real world applications. Economist? Actuary? Surveyor?

Physics graduates, possibly comp sci grads as well.

If they want to get really serious they might consider upping the pay scale for maths teachers and making the regulations much stronger.

jumpguy

We had an okay JC maths teacher. She gave out if you asked questions "I EXPLAINED THAT YESTERDAY, WERE YOU NOT PAYING ATTENTION?!?!" even though I just couldn't see how whatever concept was employed in the context.

In contact, we have an excellent LC maths teacher, and she can explain new things very well, goes through the course in a very organised yet thorough way (no "oh, we'll skip this chapter and come back to it later") and explains all the concepts, instead of rote learning them, and is very patient. She'll explain something a million times until you understand.. I nearly find doing the maths in LC easier and far more enjoyable than JC (well, it'd be grand if it wasn't for the sheer lenght of the course) now.

So yeah, good teachers are of course important!

Fad

pathway33 wrote: »

Apart from engineers what other graduates/professions would be good for teaching maths to show its real world applications. Economist? Actuary? Surveyor?

One maths/applied maths teacher in my (old) school used to be an actuary.

pathway33

pljudge321 wrote: »

If they want to get really serious they might consider ....making the regulations much stronger.

Like what? Make it tougher to become a maths teacher?

pathway33

pathway33 wrote: »

Apart from engineers what other graduates/professions would be good for teaching maths to show its real world applications. Economist? Actuary? Surveyor?

Here's another...According to the teaching council list on their website the degree in biotechnology from DCU will qualify you to teach maths

H2student

I don't see how they can penalise someone for doing too much engineering o_O. How abstract the maths course is best demonstrated by the introduction of "project maths" so shouldn't they WANT teachers capable of explaining the applications better?

I agree that you need a basic level of maths for everyday lives, but the example listed in this thread doesn't seem to exceed simple addition and multiplication. You learn them in primary school don't you?

Mayoegian

eth0_ wrote: »

That is absolutely crazy. You should not need a calculator for junior cert maths.

I disagree. How would you find the Tan, Sin or Cos angle of a triangle? Completely impossible if you have not got a calculator. To do away with calculators, you would have to reform the curriculum.

pljudge321

pathway33 wrote: »

Like what? Make it tougher to become a maths teacher?

Making sure they can actually teach.

pathway33

pljudge321 wrote: »

Making sure they can actually teach.

but that would be discrimination. What about all the other teachers?

furbey

MaighEoGoDeo wrote: »

I disagree. How would you find the Tan, Sin or Cos angle of a triangle? Completely impossible if you have not got a calculator. To do away with calculators, you would have to reform the curriculum.

Yes for the junior cert they would have to change the cirriculum to give more time to do calculations when there are no calculators.
But for the leaving not necessarily.
I would have thought the same until i started doing applied maths and the guy teaching me rarely uses a calculator. I gave it a try. Feel more confident doing the calculations using fractions and my head now in case i make a mistake putting in the numbers. Seriously you'd be amazed how much better you get at maths without the calculator. Thats the one part of their plan thats a good thing!!

imitation

MaighEoGoDeo wrote: »

I disagree. How would you find the Tan, Sin or Cos angle of a triangle? Completely impossible if you have not got a calculator. To do away with calculators, you would have to reform the curriculum.

Err using a log tables ? I thought this was a good idea before reading this, but now its cemented in my mind.

There is nothing wrong with calculators, but doing maths out longhand is a very valuable skill and helps develop the ability to use numbers in your head, which is absolutely vital in some careers, and extremely useful in others.

Its easy for maths to devolve into just running through the motions without realising what your actually doing and calculators can easily reinforce that.

Plus since when could you use them before Jr Cert level ?!

Herb Powell

I already despise maths as it is, this would just turn me off even more.

furbey

Its easy for maths to devolve into just running through the motions without realising what your actually doing and calculators can easily reinforce that.

I agree 100% Excellent point

Plus since when could you use them before Jr Cert level ?

Came into national schools around 2003 and for the junior cert about the same time, probably even earlier. Ridiculos right?

seanaor

My maths teacher told me that theyre making probability compulsory for both junior cert and leaving cert... I think this is a good thing. Anybody else have an opinion?

imitation

furbey wrote: »

Came into national schools around 2003 and for the junior cert about the same time, probably even earlier. Ridiculos right?

Just as I was leaving heh.

Maths isnt hard, I went through secondary thinking it was, mainly because I screwed myself over by slacking on doing homework (and by having a teacher who didnt enforce it on me). I had my mum demented from giving me maths grinds, because I just flat out didnt want to do it.

Then I went to do electronics, which seems crazy for somebody who hates maths, but I love tech and it was my only option. I struggled at the start but eventually I got to grips with it. The main reason is that some good lecturers showed me the point behind alot of maths. It also becomes less about the numbers and more about the transformations.

All I can say to somebody who hates maths is just give it time, and what ever you do, dont let it stop you from doing what you want. I`m now working in industry working with mathematically based software as well as programming and other IT related gubbins, I love it and most people think I`m pretty proficient at it, not bad for somebody who got a D in ordinary level maths :pac:

EDIT:

My maths teacher told me that theyre making probability compulsory for both junior cert and leaving cert... I think this is a good thing. Anybody else have an opinion?

Yes, its very good thing, probability isnt massively complex and its applications are obvious & useful.

furbey

seanaor wrote: »

My maths teacher told me that theyre making probability compulsory for both junior cert and leaving cert... I think this is a good thing. Anybody else have an opinion?

Yes and no.
Its cool but its hardly hard core maths its definately not as cool as differentiation but i guess people can relate more to it if they dont like/understand maths. unno lotto, gambling on horses would be common examples(maybe that isn't a good thing though)
Okay i dunno just talked a load of sh** and cant make up my mind.
meh!!!

randylonghorn

MaighEoGoDeo wrote: »

How would you find the Tan, Sin or Cos angle of a triangle? Completely impossible if you have not got a calculator.

Lol, you do realise that tangents, sines and cosines, and the other trigonometric functions, were around long before calculators?

pljudge321

furbey wrote: »

Yes and no.
Its cool but its hardly hard core maths its definately not as cool as differentiation but i guess people can relate more to it if they dont like/understand maths. unno lotto, gambling on horses would be common examples(maybe that isn't a good thing though)
Okay i dunno just talked a load of sh** and cant make up my mind.
meh!!!

I wouldn't consider it core to the course either, but it definitely is one section of the course where it is much easier to have questions based in reality where the usefulness is quite obvious. You could easily demonstrate the usefulness of calculus to students doing physics and applied maths but I have vague references of my physics teacher telling me that this is not allowed as it would be unfair on honours physics students who are not taking honours maths.

imitation

furbey wrote: »

Yes and no.
Its cool but its hardly hard core maths its definately not as cool as differentiation but i guess people can relate more to it if they dont like/understand maths. unno lotto, gambling on horses would be common examples(maybe that isn't a good thing though)
Okay i dunno just talked a load of sh** and cant make up my mind.
meh!!!

Its as handy to have as differentiation, it crops up again a few times if your doing engineering and the like, for instance in manufacturing its used to determine the reliability of products. Its not hard core beard maths, but I think the jc & lc could benefit from some of that.