the next generation can't figure out how to keep the lights burning,

I think it would only take a minor disruption, like 10 years, to lose some of the specialized functions like IC fabrication or DNA sequencing. Personally, I can't imagine how to build an oil refinery or start with iron ore and make several grades of steel.

how many people will actually benefit from learning calculus? Maybe 5% of those exposed to it, and maybe only 0.5%.

One of my friends was a structural engineer. When he retired I made a comment about letting that Calculus bump on his brain atrophy. He said it atrophied a long time ago. An entire career in structural engineering and he forgot Calculus a long time ago?

 

Do you ever wonder if, headed in the direction we are, we'll eventually reach a time when one generation passes from the scene and the next generation can't figure out how to keep the lights burning, keep clean water flowing from the taps, keep the petrol flowing from the gas pumps, and keep the roads maintained?

I do.

As do I! - Moreover, I certainly see a time when no single person (or, indeed, profession/trade) beholds 'the big picture' sufficient to preform even the most basic task sans recourse to 'consults', 'partnering' and otherwise outsourcing skill, intellect and basal common sense - sadly it's all but upon us!

how many people will actually benefit from learning calculus?

Right off hand I'd say 100% -- Mathematics is not merely an 'employment skill' nor merely a 'skill set' of any description! - It is, rather, the purest form of mental discipline! --- The suggestion that 95% of the populace are congenital 'dullards' is as misguided as it is offensive! -- That said, (at least) 95% of people are dullards for want of mental discipline!

Best regards
HP

 

Something beyond high school algebra.
To me "intermediate" did not mean "beginning".

Okay, so your understanding was based on just the title, not on any specific notion of the course content. That's the same as me for a long time. While the I've seldom heard the term "intermediate" associated with a college algebra course until pretty recently, I've heard the name "college algebra" for decades and assumed that "college algebra" had to be a higher level than "high school algebra". I was also always puzzled by the notion of a "pre-calc" course since I never heard of it until well after I had several semesters of calculus and beyond.

For a long time I wondered how I managed to get as far as I did without taking either of them and even wondered if I should go ahead and take one or both of them to fill in some gaps -- I know, for instance, that I have some holes that have haunted me because I've never taken a linear algebra class -- just picked up what I've needed along the way -- and so I am very uncomfortable working with matrix equations and eigenvectors and eigenvalues and such, and so I would still like to some day take it (as well as some courses in abstract algebra).

Another one that I'm still puzzled with is "Algebra III". Exactly what is it?

Part of the problem there is that my own recollections of my middle school math education is a bit fuzzy. In particular, I don't recall enough about my 7th grade math class to know if it was really algebra or not -- I don't recall any specific topics from that year except we spent at least some time working with fractions, but I don't remember any specifics and clearly it was more than just fractions themselves. I know 8th was when I was introduced to polynomial equations, number sets, complex numbers, exponentials, and such. In 9th grade we did a lot of functions and graphing and conic sections and such. I know that 8th and 9th were called "algebra" and so I think 8th was Algebra I and 9th was Algebra II. I think 7th was just "math class" the same way it had been in 6th grade.

The impression I have right now is that Algebra III, College Algebra, and Pre-Calc are largely condensations of several years of middle school and high school math aimed at preparing people to take Calculus who didn't take (or didn't pay attention) the preparatory classes. Further, that they are pretty ill-defined and vary a lot from school to school, possibly because they are either terminal math courses in non-techie majors or remedial math courses that don't count towards degree credit for techie majors.

 

This is only one example, but it, among a host of other examples, tells me that we have a widespread math deficiency before you even start talking about algebra. How many people over the years in various levels of leadership in that company didn't have a basic grasp on math? Apparently all of them; dozens of highly paid people.

This is a big time problem that I think us techie types don't really see and have a hard time grasping.

We had a Congressman that back in '95 or '96 was going around the talk-show circuit for several weeks pushing for the balanced budget amendment that he had co-sponsored. I was at work and had the radio on listening to KVOR in Colorado Springs and heard him say that his bill would make it much harder for Congress to raise taxes because it required a 3/5 majority vote while the opposition's bill only required a 2/3 majority. I hadn't been paying particular attention, so I figured I either heard it wrong or that he has slipped up. Then he said it again. And again. Clearly it was a major talking point. So I called in and got on the air. First I very carefully confirmed that (1) his bill required a 3/5 majority, (2) the opposition's bill required a 2/3 majority, (3) that his bill supposedly makes it harder to raise taxes than the opposition's bill. He confirmed all three. I then asked, "Despite the fact that 3/5 is 60% and 2/3 is about 67%?" He stumbled a moment and then said, "The point is that it will be very difficult to raise taxes under my bill." At this point I was cut off because it was "time to go to a commercial break," -- which they did and perhaps they were even telling the truth.

He was on a different talk show the next day (KOA up in Denver) and only stressed that raising taxes under his bill would be very difficult because it required a supermajority vote. No mention of specifics and no comparison to the other bill. I tried to call in to that show, but was not able to get through.

So here we had a U.S. Congressman that literally could not do third-grade arithmetic. That sure put Congress' inability to balance the budget into a new perspective. But far worse than that, he's on the road pushing legislation using glaringly bad arithmetic (and you know he probably did NOT put together his own talking points), and no one from his office, none of the talk show hosts, none of the members of the opposition, and none of the callers before me had caught and pointed it out.

 

Do you ever wonder if, headed in the direction we are, we'll eventually reach a time when one generation passes from the scene and the next generation can't figure out how to keep the lights burning, keep clean water flowing from the taps, keep the petrol flowing from the gas pumps, and keep the roads maintained?

I do.

THAT's the punch line of the Cash Register Syndrome.

For centuries checkout clerks (cashiers) did all the math in their head or on paper. Even when I was a young boy only the big stores had cash registers of any kind. Most stores had a sticker with the price stamped on each item and when you took your purchases up to the counter they wrote the prices on a receipt, added them up, and figured the tax using a simple chart, often taped to the underside of the top of glass display case. Most of them did this flawlessly and quickly most of the time. When the buyer gave them the money, the cashier had to give them their change back. Since very strong mental arithmetic skills were required to do a broad spectrum of jobs in the economy, schools taught students to have very strong mental arithmetic skills.

But not all cashiers had those skills and so too many mistakes were being made. Along comes technology to the rescue with the first mechanical adding machines. They could add, but not multiply, so cashiers would punch in the prices and add them up but still use the tax table to figure the tax. A larger fraction of the population could now be a cashier, but the math competency had decreased and so the schools reflected this by not emphasizing strong mental arithmetic skills as much.

But the lowered skills meant that about the same fraction of cashiers made mistakes figuring the tax. Technology to the rescue -- make the registers figure the tax when the total key was pressed (back then everything had a single sales tax rate specifically because it was impractical to apply different rates to different items).

The cycle repeats -- now cashiers make too many mistakes counting change back, so technology to the rescue and have the register tell them how much change to give back.

The cycle repeats -- now cashiers can't enter the prices reliably, so technology to the rescue and have the register scan the price from a barcode or, in some places with limited items such as fast food restaurants, have each item listed on a different button (and use a picture of a large drink instead of written words).

The cycle repeats -- now cashiers can't accurately give back the change that the register is telling them to give back. Technology to the rescue -- have the register dispense the change directly.

At each iteration of the cycle, the skills needed to be a cashier diminish while the skills needed to design the next cash register increase. Since far more students will be cashiers than cash register designers, the schools target education at the skills the cashiers need.

Eventually we will have cash registers that an infant can run flawlessly most of the time but only one person will know how that cash register works. When that person dies, civilization collapses.

 

The suggestion that 95% of the populace are congenital 'dullards' is as misguided as it is offensive!

The truth may be painful, but it remains the truth. For any measure you choose, good or bad, the human population will line up on a bell curve. The folks at the tails of the distribution will struggle in some ways and perhaps excel in others, but their life experiences WILL be different than those of the folks in the middle.

When it comes to playing basketball or running marathons, I'm probably well below the mean. When it comes to doing calculus, I may be a couple standard deviations above. Big deal. I want to live in a world where either talent can be put to good use, not one where I'm forced to spend my school years playing sports I'll never be good at and the athletes sit in calculus classes knowing that time spent will never pay off.

That said, I do believe a college education should expose students to a wide range of disciplines and people, and any student is welcome in any discipline. I have no idea who should decide what those topics should be, but it's probably not state or federal bureaucrats.

 

The truth may be painful, but it remains the truth. For any measure you choose, good or bad, the human population will line up on a bell curve.

But to ignore the nature of said disparity is to ignore the very truth you would embrace! -- To wit: 'idiots' are manufactured (via environment, education, and, to no small extent, societal/cultural legitimization of pernicious attitudes/perspectives) - not born!

but their life experiences WILL be different than those of the folks in the middle.

Hence education's obligation to move the population toward 'the top' (as opposed to abandon at 'the bottom' or herd toward 'the center')!

When it comes to playing basketball or running marathons, I'm probably well below the mean. When it comes to doing calculus, I may be a couple standard deviations above. Big deal.

That your uniquely human strengths eclipse mere animal ability is a big deal!

and the athletes sit in calculus classes knowing that time spent will never pay off.

But don't you see? The athletes' anti-intellectualism (and the highly lamentable corollaries thereof) is nothing more than a culturally conferred handicap! - Granted! By the time 'they' reach the post-secondary level, 'rescue' will be challenging on to impossible - howbeit, IMNSHO, such is a poor argument for abandonment!

I have no idea who should decide what those topics should be, but it's probably not state or federal bureaucrats.

No argument there! - But with the qualification that neither should it be via Freudianism, Jungianism, Functionalism nor indeed abject materialism of any caste!

I maintain that failure to apprehend the dichotomy of mind and body is simultaneously our species gravest moral error and issue of our foulest asperities -- as even a cursory perusal of history amply illustrates!

With sincere respect
HP

 

Dreadful on to deprave -- but not surprising!

To deny the basal requirement of mathematical appreciation is to deny all that distinguishes our species as creatures of mind!

Of course this is but another step in advancement of the fascist agenda oft promulgated via 'pleas for sensitivity' to the perfidious concept of 'innate skill' (or, CIP, lack thereof)! Clearly --excepting cases of neurological defect/injury-- 'idiocy' is an illusion! - a mere rationalization of abject sloth and/or base cowardice! - A decadence of mind that must under no circumstances be condoned, supported, or abetted in any way - is humanity to emerge as anything more than 'sophisticated primates'...

Best regards
HP

I feel a lot of it has to do with making everyone feel good about themselves for reasons that are not justly warranted.

It's like when I was married and my Ex made a fuss about her being smarter than only to get solidly beat down on a legitimate IQ test to which instead of accepting that she is not as smart as she thought she is or as I am she just figured all the seeded to do was find a IQ test that catters to her level and gives her the numbers she wanted so that she could prove that she was in fact as smart as me despite the gross oversight that no matter what test she found I would always score higher than her anyway.

The problem is everyone wants to think they are special and at the upper end of the bell curve in everything they do yet the reality is the majority are everywhere but there and their egos can't take it or the actual work required to achieve that level of play in life.
Then to top it off the few who can intellectually dwell there are now being subverted by the very educational systems to keep them from going further in life than they are naturally capable of, like with others examples of math majors who can't do basic real world applicable math to save their ass, simply because the educational system is so rigged to work against them that they have nothing but a background in irrelevant garbage math they can't use in any real job.

I for one totally get how the systems work now being I spent years of my life and 10's of thousands of dollars on a EE degree only to at the end when pushed to explain how I spent 3.5 years in college, only to have 1 -2 barrel relevant to EE classes, have my advisor tell me flat out that the only way I was ever going to get any real EE education would be if when I graduate that what ever company I hires sends me might send me to whatever classes they may provide in order for me to do the jobs the need me to do, basically proving that I wasted my time and money on a education in nothing of relevance to whatever piece of paper may come from it.

 

I feel a lot of it has to do with making everyone feel good about themselves for reasons that are not justly warranted.

It's like when I was married and my Ex made a fuss about her being smarter than only to get solidly beat down on a legitimate IQ test to which instead of accepting that she is not as smart as she thought she is or as I am she just figured all the seeded to do was find a IQ test that catters to her level and gives her the numbers she wanted so that she could prove that she was in fact as smart as me despite the gross oversight that no matter what test she found I would always score higher than her anyway.

The problem is everyone wants to think they are special and at the upper end of the bell curve in everything they do yet the reality is the majority are everywhere but there and their egos can't take it or the actual work required to achieve that level of play in life.
Then to top it off the few who can intellectually dwell there are now being subverted by the very educational systems to keep them from going further in life than they are naturally capable of, like with others examples of math majors who can't do basic real world applicable math to save their ass, simply because the educational system is so rigged to work against them that they have nothing but a background in irrelevant garbage math they can't use in any real job.

I for one totally get how the systems work now being I spent years of my life and 10's of thousands of dollars on a EE degree only to at the end when pushed to explain how I spent 3.5 years in college, only to have 1 -2 barrel relevant to EE classes, have my advisor tell me flat out that the only way I was ever going to get any real EE education would be if when I graduate that what ever company I hires sends me might send me to whatever classes they may provide in order for me to do the jobs the need me to do, basically proving that I wasted my time and money on a education in nothing of relevance to whatever piece of paper may come from it.

I truly feel that 'higher' (i.e. 'Liberal Arts') education lost all legitimacy/appeal upon 'transmutation' to it's present sorry 'incarnation' as little more than a 'job ticket'!

Best regards
HP

 

One of my friends was a structural engineer. When he retired I made a comment about letting that Calculus bump on his brain atrophy. He said it atrophied a long time ago. An entire career in structural engineering and he forgot Calculus a long time ago?

Why would he use it if he knew of a more practical way to do the same calculations?

I collect old technical books covering any field I can find them in and what is interesting is how all of them from the pre 1950's cover pretty much every major aspect of today's engineering work with simple rational mathematics and scientific principles. No heavy math or nothing. If yo know your basic arithmetic and geometry there is very little in practical engineering design that can't be factored out using it.

Mostly I just love those old books because they are written in a way to make what so many today think are supposed to be heavy math concepts simple and easy to follow. So easy that most people in those modern fields would have a hard time accepting that the way they were taught to do something is in fact a sloppy overly complicated bunch of nonsense that really serves no purpose other than to keep the average person from finding out they too could do that sort of work, just as our grand and great grandfathers did with simple slide rules and pencil and paper mathematics 2, 3 or 4 generations ago.

Just because something can be done with algebra and calculus does not mean it actually has to be done with it.

 

I truly feel that 'higher' (i.e. 'Liberal Arts') education lost all legitimacy/appeal upon 'transmutation' to it's present sorry 'incarnation' as little more than a 'job ticket'!

And it not even a job ticket being most any business that wants to actually stay in business and competitive will not hire people that just have a college degree and no real life applicable experience.

I have family that work ite public school system and by their account finding new teachers fresh out of college that can actually teach anything is getting harder and harder every year.
Same with the accounts of extended family members who work in government service jobs who say they too see the same dismal drop in the quality and capability of everyone they get in that is fresh out of college as well.
Same again with what my buddies who work in the public service and technical trades say about the gross lack of young new hires ability to do anything that the higher education says they can do.

Then to make it worse, for anyone who does have some sort of actual capacity to do the work far too often they have one or more of the failures that did somehow manged to sneak into whatever business to contend with that will do their damnedest to make sure that no one who is truly more qualified and capable of them ever gets hired or if they are hired will ever say there long enough to do any good because they know that they can not do their job proficiently enough to keep it plus they know that the odds are their real limited skill sets will put them in some far lower position if they lose their job where they are.

A's hire A's and B's hire C and lower but now we have a generation of C's and D's that managed to work their way into the system who will not hire anything above a F- for sake of risking losing their jobs thusly keeping anyone who is above a D- from ever getting decent work where they can do the most good with what they are capable of.

 

But not all cashiers had those skills and so too many mistakes.

Funny thing is yesterday I went to Walmart and Bought a Bottle. The cashier says I can't sale you this I need my Manager. So he calls over his CSM to perform the sale. I had a 41 bottle, 2 loafs of bread. Total was 48.28 and I have never seen someone have so much trouble trying to give me change back from 60.00 I was like how does someone that is in charge of handling money get a job or Position of Management if they can't even count out that easy amount of change. I was about to tell him after he put it back in the drawer and started over for the second time, what it was and I didn't even need to look at a screen that he was looking at over and over again. Some people shouldn't touch other people money.

 

I was like how does someone that is in charge of handling money get a job or Position of Management if they can't even count out that easy amount of change.

They either lied their way into the position or the person above them is as equally inept and went with like hires like and the system is now set up so that its almost impossible to get rid of anyone for incompetence related issues no matter how much money or good employees it costs the company.

 

Funny thing is yesterday I went to Walmart and Bought a Bottle. The cashier says I can't sale you this I need my Manager. So he calls over his CSM to perform the sale. I had a 41 bottle, 2 loafs of bread. Total was 48.28 and I have never seen someone have so much trouble trying to give me change back from 60.00 I was like how does someone that is in charge of handling money get a job or Position of Management if they can't even count out that easy amount of change. I was about to tell him after he put it back in the drawer and started over for the second time, what it was and I didn't even need to look at a screen that he was looking at over and over again. Some people shouldn't touch other people money.

Sadly, very few companies expect anyone to be able to count change back -- nor do they make any effort to train them how to do so. I run into perhaps one person every couple of years that counts change back correctly -- and when I do I make a point of complimenting them on it. Back when I was working fast food (25 to 30 years ago) it was hit and miss. I had a couple jobs where they expected you be able to count change back when needed, but usually just expected you to give them the change all at once and regurgitate what the register said. But I also had a couple jobs where the manager got upset if you counted change back because they felt it was a waste of everyone's time.

But it's SO far worse than that, even. A few months ago I was at an Arby's and I bought something and -- I forget the exact numbers so I'm just going to make some up that are close -- the total was $4.87. I gave them a $5 and was fishing in my pocket for some change I happened to have (I usually don't carry cash at all) and in the meantime they had punched in the amount. I handed them 12 cents and they stood there perplexed at what to do. So they called over the manager, who told them that they had to void the entire transaction and re-enter it and then enter the actual amount I had given them. As the manager gave me my quarter in change, he told be to be sure next time to let the cashier know I'm going to give them more so that this doesn't happen again. I wanted to say, perhaps next time Arby's should hire managers and cashiers that can add 13 and 12 so that this doesn't happen again. But I didn't. No point.

Several years ago I was in a small store and the young lady running the cash register counted my change back properly. When I complimented her on it she said that the owner made it clear the first day that she would be fired on the spot if she ever didn't count change back correctly. So I asked her if she thought that was an unreasonable requirement. She started to say that it was a bit extreme, but then paused and did a bit of reflecting and then told me that in all the jobs she had worked before, her till very seldom had ever come out even -- it was always a bit over or a bit under, but that in all the time she had been working at this place (over two years, if I recall) she had never once been off on her till. She hadn't linked the two together until that point, but she no longer felt it was extreme.

 

Sadly, very few companies expect anyone to be able to count change back -- nor do they make any effort to train them how to do so. I run into perhaps one person every couple of years that counts change back correctly -- and when I do I make a point of complimenting them on it. Back when I was working fast food (25 to 30 years ago) it was hit and miss. I had a couple jobs where they expected you be able to count change back when needed, but usually just expected you to give them the change all at once and regurgitate what the register said. /--/.

In my senior year of high school, I went to apply for a job at a fast food restaurant that has already been mentioned. I sat outside on a table for the interview. After a few details, he gave me a list of math problems printed on a sheet of paper. He went back inside to get me some scratch paper. When he came out, I had had already finished the problems. Math prodigy? Hardly, the problems were based on change making....100-25=? 10+10+5=? He hired me (low bar I would say) and I started the next day. My first two hours he had me read a company manual (probably waiting for someone to finish a shift so I could learn how to make fries without incinerating anybody). I actually enjoyed the manual. Incredibly detailed cost breakouts - cup prices to 4 places to the right of the decimal - everything was programmed for profit and a tremendous amount of effort went into that and I was impressed.

I lasted exactly two days. I found having to deal with the "public" to be a form of torture that I thought should be reserved for our worst criminals. The others there could deal with it skillfully and efficiently - apparently I am 4-5 standard deviations below the mean on that metric (and BTW they are not always normally distributed).

Years later, I paid for fast food using a half dollar. The cashier treated it as a dollar and gave me too much change. He was completely resistant to any new idea about what the coin was. While I was truly civil and patient, I was soon talking to the manager who was there to rectify my complaint. I had no complaint sir, I was given excess change...see right here on the receipt...see the half dollar? The manager bent over backward to please me but also seemed impervious to understanding the situation until I had a frank discussion about various Presidents and legal tender. Instead of passing the information on to the cashier, he issued some confusing instructions and, again, the cashier wanted to give me more money back. Losing patience, I simply said here - you charged me to little - put this money in the register. Satisfied, he moved on.

These folks are being trained, in fact they are being trained a great deal I think. Try to order something at a very popular fast food place, but do it out of the trained sequence....I want this order to go (they are trained that the to-go button is hit at the end) then ask for fries, but not extra large (before they can ask you), then the drink etc... Instant discomfort. You are not ordering food, you are answering a series of intensively trained multiple choice questions in a set sequence.

I have purchased a single item at a Department store and been faced with a cashier who was struggling to type a medium length essay...it's a towel...it's $5..what are you writing a book? They had not even started on the "do you want to save 20% by become a blah blah member" script.

After seeing so much of that, I am always as patient and polite as I can possibly be, realizing that these folks are paid very little to do a complicated job that was made complicated unnecessarily. They are trained plenty, just not on intuitively normal stuff like how to make change.

Yep, we need to get rid of that pesky algebra - what's next, understanding how credit cards work??

 

realizing that these folks are paid very little to do a complicated job that was made complicated unnecessarily. They are trained plenty, just not on intuitively normal stuff like how to make change.

Yep, we need to get rid of that pesky algebra - what's next, understanding how credit cards work??

And that's the key right there. Too much of this world wants to take simple practical things and make them unnecessarily complicated. Just like algebra and most applied real world mathematics in general hence the want to get rid of them simply because so little of it and how it's presented actually does serve any workable purpose for anyone anymore.

One of the biggest things in life now is the cutting out all the unnecessary and inefficient stuff from our lives that we do not actively have an active want or need for.
If it wastes our individual time and serves no easily foreseen gainful purpose while detracting from whatever wants we do have, no matter how pointless or self defeating, people just don't want it.

I know I don't waste my time with unnecessary overly complex math to solve simple problems so why should I expect others to be any different? Even though I can do fairly complex applied mathematics in my head better than most that does not mean I wont grab a calculator if I have one anywhere near me. Especially now that good basic scientific and engineering grade calculators can be found at most every dollar store!

 

These folks are being trained, in fact they are being trained a great deal I think. Try to order something at a very popular fast food place, but do it out of the trained sequence....I want this order to go (they are trained that the to-go button is hit at the end) then ask for fries, but not extra large (before they can ask you), then the drink etc... Instant discomfort. You are not ordering food, you are answering a series of intensively trained multiple choice questions in a set sequence.

I don't know that I can agree that they are being trained a great deal. Or, perhaps more precisely, regardless of how much training they receive, I see little indication that they have become well-trained.

When I was working in restaurants (Taco Bell, Burger King, Pizza Hut, Village Inn, among others) in the 1983 to 1993 time frame, it was pretty rare that an order would get messed up, despite special orders being the norm. Today it is unusual for me to get an order that is filled correctly -- barely one time in ten (for a year I kept track and it was right at 87% error rate).

I have three particular pet peeves. I always order no tomatoes, I always order drinks with no ice, and I always request fresh fries. I almost always get tomatoes, lots of ice, and dead fries.

The fries were the worst (though not any more since I can't have them any longer). I would be very explicit and say, "I would like FRESH fries -- as in the fries are currently frozen as we speak." Never do I get fresh fries but they will lie to my face every time and say that they just came up, when in fact that are limp, soggy, long-dead fries. I found the only way to get fresh fries is to order them with no salt. Then they have no choice but to drop them fresh. Of course, then I ask for salt at the window and put the salt on the fries right in front of them.

There was no reliable way to avoid the tomatoes. The best I could do was conclude with, ".. and what magic phrase do I need to use to actually get NO tomatoes, since I am allergic to raw tomatoes." Of course, always the similar response, "Just ask for no tomatoes." My response, "No, that phrase doesn't work. Is there a better one?" The usually response then is, "Oh, we won't put any tomatoes on there." When I would then check, about one time in three there would still be tomatoes. I don't let it slide any longer -- I make them remake the order.

Just last week I went through the Arby's drive-through and was the only one there, either in drive-through or in the restaurant, "Yes, I'd like a small mozzarella sticks with ranch instead of marinara, and a large Diet Pepsi with no ice." He repeated the order, "That's a small mozzarella sticks and a large Dr. Pepper." The mistaken drink name is an easy error to make over the intercom, problem. I said, "No. It's a large DIET PEPSI, with NO ICE, and also ranch instead of marinara." He responded, "So that's a Large Diet Pepsi." To which I replied, "With NO ICE! -- and with RANCH instead of marinara." He comes back, "Yes, with ranch." So I replied, "And NO ICE in the drink!" He finally acknowledges, "Right, no ice." I pull forward and he opens the window, "Here's your large Diet Pepsi." And it's crammed full of ice. I hand it back and say, "I stated four times -- NO ICE." The reply, "Oh, sorry. I forgot."

Whenever I would say something to a manager, it was always the same old cliché: "We have a bunch of new people still in training," -- even when I know the person that messed it up has been there for months. But that's beside the point, a place like that is high turnover, so they will ALWAYS have a bunch of new people still in training. So now I just respond, "How long will it be until your people are properly trained and supervised, so that I know when I should come back?" They usually don't have a response to that (which is probably for the best).

 

Hi,

Not sure if anyone mentioned this yet, but a ratio is a concept of algebra, and anyone who goes to school should know what a ratio is and how it works for us in everyday life. That may be considered "pre-algebra" though, so at least that much should be taught i think.

I think maybe what the original article was addressing was a little more advanced algebra, like linear algebra where we have things like simultaneous equations. This isnt needed for many people, but i believe the concept of a ratio should be understood by everyone.

 

Why would he use it if he knew of a more practical way to do the same calculations?

This Thread is about education. The question is, "Why would he be forced to pass all the Calculus classes for a BS degree in order to use Algebra and Geometry?"

 

This Thread is about education. The question is, "Why would he be forced to pass all the Calculus classes for a BS degree in order to use Algebra and Geometry?"

Because they are required by whomever sets up the class load for that degree so either you take them or you don't get your degree.

Do you think I really needed both world and a US history classes to get a EE degree?
How about public speaking?
What about downhill skiing and canoeing?
How about arts and crafts and art history?
What about introduction to literature? (read and discuss books and that was it)
Same with my half dozen electives that could be anything I wanted. I could not just skip them since they could all be classes that were totally irrelevant to EE but still to get the degree I had to take them and pass just the same.

All that crap class load stuff ate up a good year and a half worth of a 4 year degree because it was required and there was no way out. Even testing out of most of it was not an option either.

Now as far as my math class load I think I had 4 -5 I had to take of which I can say 3 for sure were pure useless nonsense taught by emotionally unstable arrogant out of touch with reality goofs and the last 1 - 2 were barely relevant to any form of practical engineering mathematics at all and taught more by woefully under qualified math major student teacher half wit twits than the professors who were assigned to the classes.