Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[dei]

I don't stereotype Asians as being good at math because I've known plenty of them who were terrible at math.

[Ultimuh]

Don't you guys think eating fish contributes to this a bit?

Line of thought:
Eating fish makes you smart => Lots of Asians eat fish => Asians are smart

[olemars]

Don't you guys think eating fish contributes to this a bit?

Line of thought:
Eating fish makes you smart => Lots of Asians eat fish => Asians are smart

Unless you're from Minamata.

In my experience as a coastal norwegian, eating lots of fish only makes you dislike fish somewhat. OK, I have a degree in maths and physics, but my grades were poor.

[Eagle_eye]

Grades really aren't the best indicator of intelligence.

[Mech#4]

Don't you guys think eating fish contributes to this a bit?

Line of thought:
Eating fish makes you smart => Lots of Asians eat fish => Asians are smart

Unless you're from Minamata.

In my experience as a coastal norwegian, eating lots of fish only makes you dislike fish somewhat. OK, I have a degree in maths and physics, but my grades were poor.

Lutefisk probably counterbalanced the beneficial effects of fish there.

[Muz]

The Chinese abacus system does help a lot in doing difficult arithmetic, like multiplying/dividing 4 digit numbers in your head. Works really well considering how the human brain does calculations. Though I never actually had to use it in a real world situation, because we all have calculators now.

Do you mean multiple/divide 4 digit numbers as in 1200/60, or as in 5672*1238? Because I've noticed that a lot of people seem to feel adding zeroes to a number makes it tougher when really it barely changes anything at all.

Yeah, I mean things like 5672*1238. Easier than 'do on paper' methods, because you can do it from the more natural big number to small number rather than the other way around. It's still really painful to do, but basically it greatly improves storage of multiple values in the brain. I can see how it gives an advantage to any backwards system that doesn't allow calculators.

As an engineer, I would choose a calculator over it any day, because of no human error. I've probably lost most of my marks in uni by arrogantly doing calculations in my head instead of simply using a calculator.

Also explains why Asian-Americans are top of the ivy leagues but underrepresented in the business world. They're culturally encouraged to short-term 'game the system'. Math is the easiest system to game. And since math is much like a language, they don't need to really understand it to get past the learning curve.

[Skyrunner]

I wish they let us use calculators in tests. Dx
I think a good fraction of the problems assume you don't have a graphing calculator... :/
Makes the opinion that Asian math teaches tricks feel valid, since a lot of it is basically finding ways to solve problems with arbitrary restrictions in the form of calculation time.

[Starver]

In my experience with supervising maths[1] exams here in the UK (below university level[2]), there are usually two exam papers in a row, in the same session.  A "Calculators" one and a "No Calculators" one, in that order.

Even in the Calculator paper, written workings-out are encouraged even if not explicitly requested.  Iif you mis-key something and multiply by 6 instead if 3, you can get credit for the bits of the calculation (before and after) that you got right, as is true with all non-calculator answers as well of course.

Once the time-limit is reached for the first paper (say, one hour, with one further hour for the second paper), the devices are conspicuously placed on the floor.  If the first paper is 'finished' prior to this hour, then there's nothing to do but check you got everything 'right' (FCVO...).  When you're in the second paper's time, though, any spare time can be used to go over either paper (although you may not pick up the calculator again).


Ultimately, the first paper is geared more for understanding.  Indeed, the calculator is expected to do the calculations themselves (e.g. stuff like Sins and Logs, these days they no longer having "table" booklets to use to refer to) and do the more complex digit-crunching for you, but you are still tested on whether you can apply the methodology.

(And yet still, there's a fuss at the beginning of each exam as people who have forgotten their calculators are sorted out and usually the teacher who had specifically informed them that they needed to bring one makes a note so that they know who to have 'words' with after the exam has finished.)

The second paper continues with the theme of testing methodology but now also tests mental (or at least non-automated) arithmetic skills, actual drawing of graphs and other things that a calculator couldn't so easily do[4].  I'm sure that any 'savant' who can work out logs in their head, etc, is not going to have a problem (calculator or no) with this paper and will be capable (assuming not stymied by social incompatibilities and lack of empowerment due to other factors) of rising to a level of education far beyond secondary school level.  If they lose marks for not noting things down[3] then they have been failed by their special-needs tutors/whoever not making it clear they need to do something about this, but they'll probably be fast-tracked beyond this level, regardless, in any decent school system that recognises their respective needs and abilities.


I never did actually use slide-rules (beyond playing around with them in my own time), back in my day, but I think their use/non-use was equally governed, and while only useful for reference for their specific range of functions the Log and trigonometric table booklets that I (at least once) was issued were not given for every mathematically-inclined (i.e including Physics) exam, much as the "booklets of common formulae" that might have featured some times (while in other papers I will have been expected to know the formulae for solving a quadratic or for calculating time dilation at a given speed, and was thus tested upon that as well).


[1] Math(ematic)s. 

[2] I can't even remember how it went for me when I was going through the exams, but calculators (albeit primitive by today's examples) weren't outright banned, but may also have been allowed/disallowed in turn.  I remember having an early programmable calculator, at one stage, and showing the examiner/an invigilator that I had wiped the memory clean of any pre-existing programs.  (Although I also recall knowing that the examiner was pretty much in the dark about my device, in those early days, and I could easily have snuck something through, if I thought it would be worth it and had actually wanted to...)

[3] I'm not sure if perfect answers can be marked down for no workings out.  Probably they can where it says "show your workings out".

[4] Yes, they can often display graphs, these days, but as you don't get the chance to let them do that and then copy the results onto paper 2 it's rather moot anyway.

[Skyrunner]

That's how they do it in the US, too.