I can't help but think this is completely missing the point.
TED has had people cover this a number of times, but the problem with math isn't that the the _syntax is too hard to parse_ its that the _problems in math class are stupid_.
"The bucket is depth X, diameter D and full of water. When you open the tap, how long will it take to drain if the water drains out at rate Z?"
I've never had to apply solving a problem like this, in my entire life (and if I were in a job that I _did_ have to, the complexity of a real life situation would mean I would still have to learn domain specific tools to solve the problem (eg. how big is the air intake? Does that limit the rate of flow? etc)).
Tangible problems in the real world require mathematical models (often probabilistic models) to solve them.
How do you take a real world problem, break it down into bits, and then use the mathematical tools available to solve them?
By creating a model, and then guessing what the rules that govern that model are, then comparing the model to reality, and refining the rules; and when you can't figure out the rules, thats when its time to whip out the text book and say, well, guess what, someone has had that problem before and this is how they solved it~
Teaching kids how to create models and reach out into the mathematical library available to them when they need it would be vastly more helpful than trying to creating more abstract alternative ways of understanding obscure math concepts that will never to relevant to them.
I've never been more frustrated than I was the other night when I was at a party and a boiler maker (who incidentally earns 3x what I do. damn mining boom) was telling me about all the cool math he's learnt since he started his job. It's all geometry and rate of flow differentials and he said "why did I have to learn matrices at school? total waste of time. they should have been teaching us useful things"
I find the syntax of math very hard to parse (and I write and use parsers as part of my job).
For people who "get" math, I agree it's very difficult to understand how another, obviously intelligent person can find math difficult to understand and use – especially someone who has put in substantial, sustained effort and has zero problems with the command line, programming, algorithms, parsers and just computer science in general. It doesn't make any sense.
Except they do exist (I'm living proof).
Frankly, I'm baffled by the problem. I've read numerous books on math, taken tons of courses, and spent quite a bit of time trying to figure out why math, as a tool, is out of reach to me.
Sure, I can apply the "rules" at a purely syntactic level, but a good example of where math-like thinking is needed as a tool is with a language like Haskell, which I also find completely opposed to how I think about and see the world. I wish I knew why, because I'd like to use it. :(
So while I think the presentation is at least part of the problem, there's something about mathematics that needs to "click" before you can really make use of it, and that hasn't happened for me yet, despite literally _decades_ of trying.
If anyone has pointers for books, I'll be checking back here for comments.
> "why did I have to learn matrices at school? total waste of time.(...)"
Unless you're doing game programming as a hobby, or encounter problems that can be modeled as a set of equations, which then can be easily solved using few matrix tricks, giving you lots of fun and $$$.
But I do agree with your sentiment; even though math can be fun on its own, it's easier (and probably better) to get people interested in it by showing how to use it to solve complex problem. After all, math is just formalized, applied rational thinking.
The problem with what you write is that it is very hard, if not impossible to understand these highly complex probabilistic models if you have not first practiced with simpler ones.
TED has had people cover this a number of times, but the problem with math isn't that the the _syntax is too hard to parse_ its that the _problems in math class are stupid_.
"The bucket is depth X, diameter D and full of water. When you open the tap, how long will it take to drain if the water drains out at rate Z?"
I've never had to apply solving a problem like this, in my entire life (and if I were in a job that I _did_ have to, the complexity of a real life situation would mean I would still have to learn domain specific tools to solve the problem (eg. how big is the air intake? Does that limit the rate of flow? etc)).
Tangible problems in the real world require mathematical models (often probabilistic models) to solve them.
How do you take a real world problem, break it down into bits, and then use the mathematical tools available to solve them?
By creating a model, and then guessing what the rules that govern that model are, then comparing the model to reality, and refining the rules; and when you can't figure out the rules, thats when its time to whip out the text book and say, well, guess what, someone has had that problem before and this is how they solved it~
Teaching kids how to create models and reach out into the mathematical library available to them when they need it would be vastly more helpful than trying to creating more abstract alternative ways of understanding obscure math concepts that will never to relevant to them.
I've never been more frustrated than I was the other night when I was at a party and a boiler maker (who incidentally earns 3x what I do. damn mining boom) was telling me about all the cool math he's learnt since he started his job. It's all geometry and rate of flow differentials and he said "why did I have to learn matrices at school? total waste of time. they should have been teaching us useful things"