What I don't understand, though, is why you're not providing this very compelling evidence along with your comment.
Or that mathematical modeling does have applications in both personal and professional life? Isn't it trivial to come up with numerous examples?
Or that mathematical modeling is so important it deserves place in the curriculum? Now that would be hard to show, but I never claimed it does. I just said it is relatively more valuable than pen-and-paper arithmetic, which is obvious from above two points.
Also, status quo does not get free pass. I imagine you would find it really difficult to defend pen-and-paper arithmetic, especially when everyone can see it's just bureaucratic inertia and technophobia.
I'm loving how everyone is proving such good examples of the things I'm talking about in my root post. First, to be clear I'm not engaging with your proposal.
But the point is that you seem to have a very strong opinion. Strong enough at least to muster yourself to type a fairly substantial reply (now two) to me using very strong language like "instanity" and "propagainda". Yet where does this opinion come from. I can respect if it comes from experience. Unlike a lot of posters on HN, I put value on expertise and experience. Yet you are not claiming to have expertise or experience, so why is your opinion so strong?
I expected on your second reply that if you had evidence to link to, you would supply that, but you have neglected to. Instead you claim that what you argue is obvious to you, and I guess by extension should be obvious to us all.
To address your overall point directly, your premise is flawed from the start.
There's been plenty of mathematical modeling added to the curriculum over the years, and the existence of students doing arithmetic on pen and paper doesn't really negate that. Read the book "Mindstorms" by Seymour Papert, it goes over a lot of the reasons why arithmetic is done the way it is in the school system. But actually it's principally about how to change it with mathematical modeling, and makes a compelling case for the usage of computers in the classroom beyond mere calculating engines. I'm sure you would enjoy it.
But I mean, why couldn't you cite that body of work to me. And no, the dynamics at play here are not in fact obvious in reality. You think these things are obvious because you haven't actually thought about this issue at any depth beyond consulting your feelings. I'm not saying that to be rude, but you've literally told me exactly this in your last reply.
Honestly I was expecting you would cite Papert given what your were arguing. But the reply you gave me is a perfect instance of the problem I was complaining about in my root comment. Even if you're right, the fact that you can't back up your position beyond "isn't it obvious" is very troubling for the sake of discourse.
Because if you look into this body of work, you'll see vibrant efforts to bring mathematical modeling to young learners, that have been going on for decades, spearheaded by educators and teachers around the world. So no, teachers don't need to be told. They're actually doing these things you are complaining they are not doing. So are they "insane", or is it just that you are ignorant as to the status quo?
> Isn't it trivial to come up with numerous examples?
And yet you didn't offer even a single one.
> Also, status quo does not get free pass.
The status quo has the benefit of being an existence proof tho. If you're going to call someone administering the system insane, given how wildly successful the system has been at driving innovation, then you better have a very strong argument.
But what have you brought to the table? You don't claim to have any relevant experience, you don't claim to have spoken to anyone who does, you provided any research to support your claim, you don't even claim to have done research, and you don't even feel the need to offer even a single example or hypothetical to support your argument. All you've said is that you've consulted your feelings, and you find your argument to be obvious. I mean... would someone else presenting an argument this way convince you? This is not an argument, it's a shell of an argument.
P.S. I actually very much agree that mathematical modeling should be taught to children instead of arithmetic and long division.
Your demands for evidence for the obvious are just a form of red tape intended to protect the status quo. This sort of behavior is the definition of bureaucracy: no action can be taken until approved by the bureaucrat (via curriculum, law, funding, or management decision). In the end, everyone in education just wants to be protected from the stress of change and the challenges of technology.
I provided to you just the kind of evidence that would be necessary to convince people, and I have used to convince many people of exactly what you're trying to push here. Published work by experts in the field who have thought deeply about the subject, published works on the subject, and even designed and tested new curricula in a scientific manner. That is what you need to show people, not just glib statements about how what you're saying is "obvious" and how the people who are doing differently are "insane".
But I didn't go about it calling people "insane" in their actions, because that's the fastest way to get an immediate stonewall. These people are not insane, they are in fact as sane as you think you are, and a huge chunk of them (could even be a majority, certainly every teacher in my department) actually agree with you. But your whole approach of disparaging the very people trying to make a difference, trying to implement the change you want to see. You are calling this system rotten and you literally have no understanding of it, as you've shown here in your posts to me.
I'm open to being convinced that you know what you're talking about, but you keep telling me that you don't want to convince me, so I'll take you at your word that you know nothing about this topic you feel so passionately about. Definitely worthy of a bookmark for the best example of "Big Important Feelings" I've found in the wild so far. Cheers.
