Newsgroups: sci.physics,sci.math,sci.astro,sci.chem,sci.lang,sci.econ,misc.education
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!nntp.club.cc.cmu.edu!goldenapple.srv.cs.cmu.edu!rochester!udel-eecis!newsfeed.direct.ca!super.zippo.com!zdc!news.pbi.net!news.mathworks.com!howland.erols.net!surfnet.nl!ruu.nl!tijger.fys.ruu.nl!usenet
From: Elliott Oti <e.oti@stud.warande.ruu.nl>
Subject: Quit Whining
Sender: usenet@fys.ruu.nl (News system Tijgertje)
Message-ID: <3340B0F3.60F@stud.warande.ruu.nl>
Date: Tue, 1 Apr 1997 06:53:39 GMT
X-Nntp-Posting-Host: warande1078.warande.ruu.nl
Reply-To: e.oti@stud.warande.ruu.nl
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
References: <332c261d.93134852@news.airmail.net> <009B18A9.BFA14E61@Msu.oscs.montana.edu> <5gul1c$2u1u@b.stat.purdue.edu> <33360773.400E@nospam.wanted> <5h6knd$1h7p@b.stat.purdue.edu>
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01 (Win16; I)
Organization: The Gauge Variance Promotion Society
Lines: 48
Xref: glinda.oz.cs.cmu.edu sci.physics:254651 sci.math:191161 sci.astro:168973 sci.chem:92286 sci.lang:73298 sci.econ:68277

Herman Rubin wrote:

> This same problem holds, even more so, for formulating word problems.
> 
> I believe this to be THE most important part of algebra for most
> students, and frankly I doubt that most of our graduates in
> mathematics can do it.  This is the mathematical equivalent
> of being able to read and write sentences and paragraphs.
> 
> Notice that I said formulate, not solve, not see if there is
> enough to get a solution, or if a solution exists.  This is
> what is needed before putting the problem on a calculator or
> computer, or calculating the solution in the more common ways
> usually tested.

Fifty odd letters in this thread, all of them bemoaning
the fact that the youth just ain't what it used to be.
Not that the thread is original; since time immemorial the complaint
that the standards of education are declining rapidly, has been heard.
Over and over again.

The *facts* are that there are more graduates in the sciences and 
engineering than at any time before; the size of the average curriculum 
has swelled beyond recognition; subjects that were cutting edge 20 years 
ago are standard undergrad material now (subatomic physics,non-linear
dynamics
and solid state physics, to name a few). 

I don't study in the US, so details may differ, but here the size and
content
of the physics curriculum, including related neccessary mathematical
subjects, has
bloated completely beyond recognition in the last 30-40 years. The
*only* thing
that has remained the same, is the time we get to squeeze it all in.

Progress is subjective, but by almost any measure of progress
people in general are learning more, faster, and more efficiently. Not
only in the
sciences, but in most other areas as well. These awkward,
uncomprehending freshmen
will eventually turn up years later in research labs: competent,
capable,
and whining about the alarming decline in education standards.


------------ Elliott Oti ---------------
   ------------- http://www.fys.ruu.nl/~oti  ---------
