Post-16 maths - but not as we know it
The introduction of post-16 maths is in the news again with a report from the House of Lords committee on Higher Education in STEM and many of the headlines from the Guardian, Independent and Times Higher have picked up on the recommendations regarding maths study post-16.
I have written a few thoughts here on my first impressions but would very much welcome comments.
Interesting view from a Biosciences perspective about the recent recommendations to increase the number of students taking Mathematics at A-level.
I've always had a problem with the way Statistics is taught at A-level, which is largely as a collection of recipes without much understanding of the underlying principles; would more emphasis on probability theory be a better way to go?
July 25, 2012 at 8:13 pm
…i thought the point of that blog was that most bio-sci researchers didn’t need A level? so why bother redesigning the A level?
July 25, 2012 at 8:21 pm
“would more emphasis on probability theory be a better way to go?”
Only if it starts by defining probability and getting it right, which is unlikely.
It took Jaynes’ explanation of RT Cox’s Bayesian view to show me that my poor understanding of probability was not due to my own inadequacy but to incorrect or incoherent teaching of the foundations.