Things that make you go.......WTF?

[David]

I've been enrolled in three: Bachelor of Arts (ANU), Bachelor of Journalism (Monash) and Associate Degree of Professional Writing and Editing (RMIT). The latter is the only one I graduated from (I spent one and two years on the first two respectively).

[Pies4shaw]

[Mugwump]

^She sounds like an excellent person and I am sure she is. In addition to her many achievements she apparently forms a basis for broad public policy in education. You are fortunate indeed to be married to such a principle. I'm sure you're right that mathematics is only as important in intellectual and economic life as obscure piano pieces. if we had realised earlier how irrelevant STEM subjects are, we might have led the world in pontification as well as in coal and rocks by now.

[David]

Point is, maths is relevant to fields of work that maths is relevant to and not relevant to fields to which it isn't. And I dare say there are more than a few job descriptions in the latter category.

Otherwise, is it a good general life skill? For sure. That's what high school is for.

[Pies4shaw]

Yes, that is the point. I suppose I could add that maths is entirely irrelevant to my present occupation. I happen to be good at maths but, happily, I'm not so smug about it that I think that other people who can cross-examine well should be prevented from doing so because their differential calculus is poor.

How stupid would we have to be as a society to exclude clever people from doing the work for which they're best suited merely on the basis that they don't have the technical required to do some other work?

[stui magpie]

Yes, that is the point. I suppose I could add that maths is entirely irrelevant to my present occupation. I happen to be good at maths but, happily, I'm not so smug about it that I think that other people who can cross-examine well should be prevented from doing so because their differential calculus is poor.

How stupid would we have to be as a society to exclude clever people from doing the work for which they're best suited merely on the basis that they don't have the technical required to do some other work?

My highest formal qual is yr 12 and I'm currently acting head of HR. Most of the PA's are more highly qualified.

[Mugwump]

Point is, maths is relevant to fields of work that maths is relevant to and not relevant to fields to which it isn't. And I dare say there are more than a few job descriptions in the latter category.

Otherwise, is it a good general life skill? For sure. That's what high school is for.

As I said above I'd consider it a positive educational policy if people were taught mathematics competently to school leaving level, and we could then assume that at tertiary level wherever it is necessary. Unfortunately our unruly public schools are not an easy place for people to learn rigorous and mentally challenging things (though mathematics is, in truth, easier to teach than English) so the universities have to pick up the slack, as they frequently do in English as well.

If we are to treat universities as trade schools then clearly there are a few tertiary subjects where maths is not relevant - music might be one - literature, perhaps. And advanced mathematics, as I said above, is not really the issue here. Tertiary courses where maths is irrelevant, however, are relatively few and these could be justified by exception.

The reason for keeping pressure for some mathematics in most degrees is that most people are more competent in most tertiary fields if they have sound mathematical skills. There will of course be laudable exceptions like P4Ss wife, but I suspect she is probably not typical. Without the positive pressure for graduates in most disciplines to have a reasonable grasp of mathematics, our universities will continue to turn out the semi-literate and largely innumerate young people who routinely find it hard to find work in the modern economy, and our economy will continue to fall down against the powerhouse economies of Asia.

In that regard, of course, a far, far greater issue in my view is the fact that we lag so terribly behind the Asian economies of the future in the number of STEM graduates we produce, and this is one factor behind our relative economic decline and poor innovation. In truth, I would be happy to leave the Sociology graduates alone if there were far fewer of them. But since we do educate large numbers of people in narrative-weaving and attitudinising, (often because we failed them earlier in their education, so they don't have enough maths for more practical subjects) it would be a good idea to ensure that they learnt something rigorous along the way.

[Mugwump]

Yes, that is the point. I suppose I could add that maths is entirely irrelevant to my present occupation. I happen to be good at maths but, happily, I'm not so smug about it that I think that other people who can cross-examine well should be prevented from doing so because their differential calculus is poor.

How stupid would we have to be as a society to exclude clever people from doing the work for which they're best suited merely on the basis that they don't have the technical required to do some other work?

My highest formal qual is yr 12 and I'm currently acting head of HR. Most of the PA's are more highly qualified.

Yes but you probably learned more by year 12 than most of today's Nintendo generation.

[think positive]

[stui magpie]

OK, here's a basic maths question in a practical sense.

You get a new job, your employment offer quotes a total remuneration figure rather than a salary.

the TR figure is $100,000pa.

You ask, and are told the TR is your salary plus the compulsory super component, which is 9.5% of salary.

So your salary plus 9.5% of your salary equals $100,000.

How do you calculate the salary?

[Pies4shaw]

By going and getting a new job with a proper salary?

[What'sinaname]

OK, here's a basic maths question in a practical sense.

You get a new job, your employment offer quotes a total remuneration figure rather than a salary.

the TR figure is $100,000pa.

You ask, and are told the TR is your salary plus the compulsory super component, which is 9.5% of salary.

So your salary plus 9.5% of your salary equals $100,000.

How do you calculate the salary?

Ask HR as they should give you the breakdown, or

100,000 / (1.095)

so you'll earn 91,324pa and get 9.5% super $8,676

[Jezza]

I discovered just a few years ago that kids are getting to high school without knowing their times tables. Do you all remember (maybe not baby Jezza) chanting them at the start of every school day?

I'm not that young!

I remember learning my times tables in second and third grade (2002/2003) from 1 to 12 and I was able to understand the patterns and trends very quickly so I have no issues answering a multiplication question in my head within a few seconds.

Whether they still teach this to primary school kids these days is something I'm not sure about, but I've always assumed they continue to teach it.

[stui magpie]

OK, here's a basic maths question in a practical sense.

You get a new job, your employment offer quotes a total remuneration figure rather than a salary.

the TR figure is $100,000pa.

You ask, and are told the TR is your salary plus the compulsory super component, which is 9.5% of salary.

So your salary plus 9.5% of your salary equals $100,000.

How do you calculate the salary?

Ask HR as they should give you the breakdown, or

100,000 / (1.095)

so you'll earn 91,324pa and get 9.5% super $8,676

Keerect and you may (or not) be surprised at how few people can figure that out.

[HAL]

They are not available right now, would you like to wait?