What I specifically dislike is the question "what am I ever going to use this for" or versions of it. Which I only ever hear about mathematics, but which can be asked about every other subject as well.
Yes, math is hard and definitely not for everyone, which I think is perfectly fine. But arguing that something has no use to you, because the first time in your life you actually have to engage in complex logical thinking is just lazy. The value of mathematics is independent of how hard it is.
I don’t think it’s the abstraction, I think it’s the perceived lack of usefulness. I’ve known many individuals who are bad at math but can understand the abstraction of most programming constructs. I think it’s mainly because the pay off of learning programming has a higher immediate value (it can be used for a variety of tasks and can even help score a high paying job).
I feel your complaint is valid, but I your ire should be directed towards people who are supposed to answer this question, not the people who are asking it.
My guess is that answering "what am I ever going to use this for" is easier for other subjects, sometimes almost intuitive. For Maths, it needs to be defined as soon as it starts getting abstract.
"what am I ever going to use this for" is a perfectly valid question. People who are supposed to answer it should do a better job of doing so, writing good curriculum, and overall communication.
>My guess is that answering "what am I ever going to use this for" is easier for other subjects, sometimes almost intuitive.
How so? What am I ever going to use my skills in analysing 20th century literature for. What am I ever going to use my knowledge about Roman history for? What am I ever going to use my knowledge about the structure of our government for? Certainly no employeer of mine ever cared, my University didn't care, nobody seems to have ever cared, except my teachers.
The question is bad because:
- People ask it, but only of mathematics
- People answer it, as if mathematics alone has to face that challenge
If school is about job training the answer is simply "because it contains the broadest possible techniques to understand the world and is vital in basically any data-based scientific pursuit and a basic understanding is needed for any trade which uses measurements". Somehow I think ancient history does not have such an answer...
> What am I ever going to use my skills in analysing 20th century literature for.
You can use the same skills to spot when a news article is trying to manipulate you.
> What am I ever going to use my knowledge about Roman history for?
You can see how empires fall, and vote against those things.
> What am I ever going to use my knowledge about the structure of our government for?
Understanding why things happen around you is the first thing you need if you ever want to try and change something you don't like.
> Certainly no employeer of mine ever cared, my University didn't care, nobody seems to have ever cared, except my teachers.
You might care, though. Or you might not know what you know now without them.
Thankfully you did all those things, so now you can write a well-written letter to the correct person in government, citing the parallel problems with the current education system and the fall of Rome, and stop children being taught this stuff (-:
You are completely missing the point here. If you know "why empires fall" (nobody does) then you could just teach that, the historical context would be almost irrelevant and even the premise of a cyclical history, which can be broken by voting, seems completely insane.
>Thankfully you did all those things, so now you can write a well-written letter to the correct person in government, citing the parallel problems with the current education system and the fall of Rome, and stop children being taught this stuff (-:
Okay, that was funny.
I think what you are trying to articulate is education as a hollistic system, not with the goal of expertese, but with the goal of offering some moral foundation and grounding in the world and society. But if you believe in that the utilitarian stance of education immediately becomes irrelevant and "when am I ever going to use this" becomes a non-sensical question, which misses the point.
I said see how they fall. Not every way, and not necessarily why, but how.
> then you could just teach that, the historical context would be almost irrelevant
I don't think you can see how they fall without historical context. That is the how.
> even the premise of a cyclical history, which can be broken by voting, seems completely insane
I didn't mention a cyclical history. Some things repeat, but that doesn't mean in general history is cyclical.
I don't mean to comment in a way that's too much on the nose, but I've just broken out various statements of yours and shown how they didn't follow from what I said. Spending time studying literature in a controlled environment, can help train children to read what's being said, as opposed to what they guess is being said. It's not perfect, but it can help a lot.
I always disliked Irish (and languages, in general) in school. However, now that I'm over a decade out of college I find it to be one of the few subjects I wish I'd paid more attention to when I'd had the chance... Sure, it's not particularly useful in adult life, but neither is organic chemistry, for most folks.
The main difference for me is that it's relatively easy to "fill in the gaps" for any other subject we learned from the ages of 12-18. Irish however, is niche enough - and learning resources generally technologically behind - that it's still quite tricky to self-teach or "quickly google" answers to things. That makes it unique from most other primary/secondary school subjects which are more universally taught across the world.
I asked that question in school (strange to look back on, as I'm now fascinated by languages), and the only answer the teacher could give was that doing well in Irish would give extra Leaving Cert points. That struck me at the time as depressing.
Yes, math is hard and definitely not for everyone, which I think is perfectly fine. But arguing that something has no use to you, because the first time in your life you actually have to engage in complex logical thinking is just lazy. The value of mathematics is independent of how hard it is.