I Can't Count! Confesses Boe Economist

[Peter Pedant]

yes boys and girls he thinks: 1+ 1 = 3
No wonder we are in the crap

I wish I had A level Maff says Banks top economist
Times today
Nicla Woolcock: The Bank of Englands chief economist has admitted that he has struggled at times with his career because he did not take Maff A level. Andy Haldane who has recorded a speech ....

says really it could have been better
[by golly he can say that again]
the admits that he often wondered if one plus one was fwee - a very large number

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-8314897/Bank-England-chief-economist-reveals-struggled-times-not-taking-maths-level.html

if you have wondered why we are in the economic crap
well wonder no more

er OK a question - what do ABers think ?

[jackthehat]

Jim - Most of us have to transport our 'learning' into the real world where we can use and apply those things to our jobs and professions.
Simply learning for learnings own sake or to use each 'parcel' as a stepping stone to another advanced 'parcel' in the rarified atmosphere of academia is simply *not* an option.

[Peter Pedant]

and he said - quite right my dear no one needs to count ....

you will have done exponentials ( and ee to the ecks ) and differentials bt not linked which is kinda what epidemiology requires.

Fatty Barret was keen on numba theory and dynamics -
so I watch number theory videos and even worked froo Elementary Number theory David Burton - a crazy has been good enogh to put all the answers on the internet and so i can have a little go myself and compare .....

[jim360]

Never realised I didn't live in the real world...

Calculating the area under a curve has such wide-reaching applications that somebody who clearly wasn't paying attention in maths rediscovered it in the early 1990s and named it after themselves.

I think the message I'd want to communicate is that the practical applications of Maths are often surprising and far from obvious. It's perhaps to the shame of A-Level Maths that they never properly made this clear, but there are practical uses to all of it there all the same.

[pixie374]

Men always name everything after themselves. Even other humans... it means nothing.
For me to learn and remember something, and believe it or not, I'm not totally a moron, it needs to have some relevance.

[jim360]

// Men always name everything after themselves. //

This was a woman :P

[NickorWan]

The real world doesn't just have to mean our jobs though. I find nature more interesting knowing how Fibanacci applies flowers etc. and why that is. Similarly with the golden ratio and sunflower seeds etc.

[pixie374]

How unusual and refreshing:-)

[jackthehat]

I'm not implying that you aren't living in the 'real world' I mean that for the vast majority of 'us' the existence of Mathematics boils down to the application of what we would describe as 'Maths' in our every day activities.......and there really isn't much evidence of it, nor the necessity for it.

The seemingly random nature of lower level Maths (GCSE, etc) with no real explanation of how things may be applied in 'real life' made many of my schoolfriends really discinclined to study it further. It was just a series of numbers/letters chalked up on the board to be 'understood' and then regurgitated in a manner pleasing to the Maths Teacher....

I can't think of many people I know who have needed to use Logarithms on a single occasion since they left school.

[jim360]

It's a failure of certain maths teachers, then, if they haven't made the point about the applications and relevance. It's true that, almost by definition, the more technical Maths gets the less instantly applicable it is, but that is true of every subject. Mathematics underpins engineering, computing, all the sciences, economics, data analysis, etc etc.

In regards to logarithms, at least a passing understanding of them might be helpful in interpreting the stats behind a certain topical disease.

[pixie374]

Tbh, I often see people claiming that about algebra... but I think it is just a way of thinking, and everybody uses it, knowingly or not. But there are definitely things further on, that the majority of people will never need to know. A bit like physics or chemistry. We need to change the core subjects.

[jim360]

What would you keep and what would you remove, and why?

I've assumed that A Level education is meant to be a stepping-stone to University studies of that subject or a related one, so it's not clear to me that it should be scrapped. But perhaps some sort of alternative, designed to focus on developing core skills across the board, wouldn't be a bad idea. Except that it's hard to agree what those core skills are.

[pixie374]

I wouldn't scrap anything, personally, each to their own.
However, I don't believe all subjects are necessary, unless you want to continue at university.
For me, I could well have done without chemistry, physics, history, geography. There just wasn't enough choice to go for useful practical subjects. I would have known that at 12. Waiting to 16 seems silly.

[jim360]

I suppose the logic is that most children don't know what they want to do -- I mean "really" know -- when they are so young, so better to offer them everything for as long as possible.

The other irony here is that in the UK it's often suggested that we specialise too early, in comparison with the approach in other countries. Eg at Universities outside the UK they talk about "majoring" in such-and-such a subject, because students can take courses from all over the place rather than being obliged to choose what their specialism is from the first year.

[Ken4155]

I thank all my maths teachers for their tuition. How else could I make sense of; 1, 5/4, 6/4, 7/4, 15/8, 2/1, etc. etc, etc :-)

[pixie374]

I would disagree... most people know what they do or don't like, by about 12,13. There just aren't enough choices to go with. I was at a girls' grammar school, who wanted us to be boys. A lot of the choices for A levels ended up being discontinued, though lack of interest, without any proper female options.

[jim360]

I knew what I wanted to do when I was 12 too but I'd still hold that it's relatively exceptional, and in any case I would also still say that education can't be confined to what we "need" to know for "our career". Even if you know you want to be a such-and-such then you may not -- indeed you cannot possibly -- know what stuff you'll need to learn for that.

[pixie374]

No, not necessarily. I wanted to be a vet since I was 3. But you do know which subjects work for you by then..
Which leads you in the right direction. We had nothing vocational at all offered. And every girl I ever met, was considering, from about 5, which work would fit in with childcare. I doubt most men consider that with their career choices. But this is the real world.

[NickorWan]

A lot of what we get taught should be aimed at making our lives richer, and triggering interests not necessarily to do with our careers.

[pixie374]

It does seem to be now, at secondary schools. But not st grammar schools.

[Peter Pedant]

// or to use each 'parcel' as a stepping stone to another advanced 'parcel' in the rarified atmosphere of academia is simply *not* an option.// yeah surprisingly enough it has to have a use
( pure maff that is)

but erdos - he was lucky enough to secure a way of life that allowed him basically to do what he wanted innit ( "a man is a machine for turning coffee into ..... theorems")