Steve Underwood wrote: ...> Although educators are eager to inflict useless language learning on > technical students, I don't see the same eagerness to fail someone in > French literature because their calculus wasn't up to scratch. Double > standards seem to apply here, wherever I look around the world.Calculus is truly one of the liberal arts. Nobody should be awarded a liberal arts degree without having an understanding of it. jerry -- Engineering is the art of making what you want from things you can get. ¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
School maths standards
Started by ●August 12, 2007
Reply by ●August 16, 20072007-08-16
Reply by ●August 16, 20072007-08-16
On Aug 16, 12:56 am, glen herrmannsfeldt <g...@ugcs.caltech.edu> wrote:> Steve Underwood wrote: > > (snip) > > > Although educators are eager to inflict useless language learning on > > technical students, I don't see the same eagerness to fail someone in > > French literature because their calculus wasn't up to scratch. Double > > standards seem to apply here, wherever I look around the world. > > Caltech requires Math 1abc and Math 2ab, which are calculus > of one and multiple variables, linear algebra, differential > equations, and probability and statistics. That is, 1 and 2/3 years > (five terms). It used to be two years (six terms). > > http://pr.caltech.edu/catalog/courses/listing/ma.html > > Even for literature majors. I did know of one. > > -- glenIn 1969 it included 2 years of math, 1 year of chemistry and 2 years of physics (then taught from the Feynman Lectures on Physics Vol. 1-3). The requirements today are similar, totaling 138 units of technical content required for graduation of any student of any major. An additional 108 units are required in social sciences and humanities. Until the late 60's there was a drafting class requirement. I guess they once thought well rounded technical people should be able to document their work. Dale B. Dalrymple http://dbdimages.com
Reply by ●August 17, 20072007-08-17
dbd wrote: (snip on Caltech required classes)> In 1969 it included 2 years of math, 1 year of chemistry and 2 years > of physics (then taught from the Feynman Lectures on Physics Vol. > 1-3). The requirements today are similar, totaling 138 units of > technical content required for graduation of any student of any major. > An additional 108 units are required in social sciences and > humanities.I believe the change to 5 terms of math reflects a better math background for incoming students. In 1976, we finished what should have been Ma1abc in two terms, and did Ma2a work in Ma1c. Also, Ch3a (chemistry lab) is also required.> Until the late 60's there was a drafting class requirement. I guess > they once thought well rounded technical people should be able to > document their work.That was gone by 1976. -- glen
Reply by ●August 17, 20072007-08-17
Steve Underwood wrote: (snip)> I really don't see why a literature major needs such maths, though, > however basic those courses might seem to an engineer. Few literature > graduates are going to engage in computational linguistics. :-) It seems > just as artificial to block someone bad at (or just plain uninterested > in) maths from a language degree, as it is to block someone bad at > languages from a technical one.I did know a literature major, but he didn't start out that way. I also knew a Geology/Literature double major. -- glen
Reply by ●August 18, 20072007-08-18
dbd wrote:> On Aug 16, 12:56 am, glen herrmannsfeldt <g...@ugcs.caltech.edu> > wrote: >> Steve Underwood wrote: >> >> (snip) >> >>> Although educators are eager to inflict useless language learning on >>> technical students, I don't see the same eagerness to fail someone in >>> French literature because their calculus wasn't up to scratch. Double >>> standards seem to apply here, wherever I look around the world. >> Caltech requires Math 1abc and Math 2ab, which are calculus >> of one and multiple variables, linear algebra, differential >> equations, and probability and statistics. That is, 1 and 2/3 years >> (five terms). It used to be two years (six terms). >> >> http://pr.caltech.edu/catalog/courses/listing/ma.html >> >> Even for literature majors. I did know of one. >> >> -- glen > > In 1969 it included 2 years of math, 1 year of chemistry and 2 years > of physics (then taught from the Feynman Lectures on Physics Vol. > 1-3). The requirements today are similar, totaling 138 units of > technical content required for graduation of any student of any major. > An additional 108 units are required in social sciences and > humanities. > > Until the late 60's there was a drafting class requirement. I guess > they once thought well rounded technical people should be able to > document their work.In the days before CAD, how could an engineer work without at least some basic drafting? The civil and mechanical guys needed this a lot more than the electronics guys, but we still had to draw stuff well enough for the drawing office people to take our and produce final artwork. Steve
Reply by ●August 18, 20072007-08-18
Steve Underwood <steveu@dis.org> writes:> dbd wrote: >> On Aug 16, 12:56 am, glen herrmannsfeldt <g...@ugcs.caltech.edu> >> wrote: >>> Steve Underwood wrote: >>> >>> (snip) >>> >>>> Although educators are eager to inflict useless language learning on >>>> technical students, I don't see the same eagerness to fail someone in >>>> French literature because their calculus wasn't up to scratch. Double >>>> standards seem to apply here, wherever I look around the world. >>> Caltech requires Math 1abc and Math 2ab, which are calculus >>> of one and multiple variables, linear algebra, differential >>> equations, and probability and statistics. That is, 1 and 2/3 years >>> (five terms). It used to be two years (six terms). >>> >>> http://pr.caltech.edu/catalog/courses/listing/ma.html >>> >>> Even for literature majors. I did know of one. >>> >>> -- glen >> In 1969 it included 2 years of math, 1 year of chemistry and 2 years >> of physics (then taught from the Feynman Lectures on Physics Vol. >> 1-3). The requirements today are similar, totaling 138 units of >> technical content required for graduation of any student of any major. >> An additional 108 units are required in social sciences and >> humanities. >> Until the late 60's there was a drafting class requirement. I guess >> they once thought well rounded technical people should be able to >> document their work. > > In the days before CAD, how could an engineer work without at least > some basic drafting? The civil and mechanical guys needed this a lot > more than the electronics guys, but we still had to draw stuff well > enough for the drawing office people to take our and produce final > artwork.I'm old enough to remember actually drawing schematics by hand and then handing those into the documentation department, which their draftsmen promptly redrew using all the notations and official symbols (and lovely draftsmanship). I can still remember Bob Norman, the draftsmen's supervisor at GTE Government Systems, telling me, "You write like a monkey fucking a football" after I handed them my schematics. -- % Randy Yates % "With time with what you've learned, %% Fuquay-Varina, NC % they'll kiss the ground you walk %%% 919-577-9882 % upon." %%%% <yates@ieee.org> % '21st Century Man', *Time*, ELO http://home.earthlink.net/~yatescr
Reply by ●August 18, 20072007-08-18
On Aug 16, 6:12 am, Jerry Avins <j...@ieee.org> wrote:> Steve Underwood wrote: > > ... > > > Although educators are eager to inflict useless language learning on > > technical students, I don't see the same eagerness to fail someone in > > French literature because their calculus wasn't up to scratch. Double > > standards seem to apply here, wherever I look around the world. > > Calculus is truly one of the liberal arts. Nobody should be awarded a > liberal arts degree without having an understanding of it. > > jerry > -- > Engineering is the art of making what you want from things you can get. > =AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF==AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF= =AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF I laughed and laughed. If liberal arts majors had to take calculus they would flunk out but the results would still be the same. "Sir, do you want fries with that?". At least they wouldn't have four years of college debts if the flunked out early. Peter Nachtwey
Reply by ●August 18, 20072007-08-18
pnachtwey@gmail.com wrote:> On Aug 16, 6:12 am, Jerry Avins <j...@ieee.org> wrote: >> Steve Underwood wrote: >> >> ... >> >>> Although educators are eager to inflict useless language learning on >>> technical students, I don't see the same eagerness to fail someone in >>> French literature because their calculus wasn't up to scratch. Double >>> standards seem to apply here, wherever I look around the world. >> Calculus is truly one of the liberal arts. Nobody should be awarded a >> liberal arts degree without having an understanding of it. >> >> jerry >> -- >> Engineering is the art of making what you want from things you can get. >> ����������������������������������������������������������������������� > I laughed and laughed. If liberal arts majors had to take calculus > they would flunk out but the results would still be the same. "Sir, > do you want fries with that?". At least they wouldn't have four years > of college debts if the flunked out early.Oh, a Bachelor of French Literature or Bachelor of Beekeeping is fine without calculus, even a Bachelor of Fine arts, but what could truly be called a Liberal Arts degree is a mockery without it. When I was a student at the Engineering School at CCNY, the Dean of the Liberal Arts School agreed with that opinion. Of course, he has been the head of the Math Department before he held that post. (He kept trying to get me to switch my major to physics. That would have come under his scope.) Jerry -- Engineering is the art of making what you want from things you can get. ¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
Reply by ●August 21, 20072007-08-21
On Sat, 18 Aug 2007 09:14:21 -0400, Randy Yates <yates@ieee.org> wrote: (snipped)> >I can still remember Bob Norman, the draftsmen's supervisor at GTE >Government Systems, telling me, "You write like a monkey fucking a >football" after I handed them my schematics. >-- >% Randy Yates % "With time with what you've learned,I've always considered the gentle curves of a football to be very sexually appealing. That's because my first wife was shaped like a football. Ha ha. I'm just jokin'. [-Rick-]
