The first problem with this piece is the assumption that maths courses in schools are provided to prepare future engineers. What are the grounds for this assumption? There are many reasons for teaching maths beyond this. Why shouldn't university engineering courses be responsible for the kind of maths engineers need?

The second problem is the unwarranted shift in the argument from Johnson's statement that demand in schools has plummeted to the author's pet topic about standards. The more important question is why students are choosing not to take higher level maths. (No doubt the author would want to conscript them.)

I recall one university where the engineering course required the inclusion of maths because it was argued to be a requirement for success in engineering. Year in and year out the engineering students failed the maths course in large numbers, while passing all of their engineering subjects. Clearly the claimed link between maths and engineering was false or at least greatly exaggerated.

The claim that success or failure in engineering has something to do with students' secondary school maths studies may well be a passing off of responsibility by university engineers and needs much more evidence than is provided here.

Firstly Godo there are plenty of math courses in high school for those who want a low [business] level.

Secondly in the school my kids went to the main problem was teachers. There were 60 kids wanting maths B, & 45 wanting C, but only one teacher who could actually do math at that level, let alone teach it. Unfortunately for the kids, he was a union delegate/official, who was missing from action at least 15% of the few hours he was supposed to be teaching. One of the others used to ask my daughter how to do things, knowing she spent each Saturday at a coaching class at QUT.

The only kids who succeeded were either very brilliant, or had a considerable amount of outside coaching.

John your universities are far from blameless in all this. A case study.

When my eldest daughter found the time table at her preferred uni would often involve a lecture at 8.30AM, followed by one at 5.00PM, she decided this institution, 90 minutes from home, & obviously run for the staff, did not suit her requirements.

The more local one she found after enrolling, was however even worse. She found they started the math for a BsC at mid year 10 level. It was going to take two & a half years to get to the level she was all ready at. I suppose this is realistic, given the poor high school teaching, but a little wasteful.

She transferred to the first student unfriendly institution at the end of the first semester. It may not user friendly, but may teach something. New horror, they really had been teaching some math, & she found herself in trouble, because she had missed it.

Continued

Continued

So she was told, contact a math tutor, that should fix things for her. Great, only one new problem with this user unfriendly institution, it took 7 weeks to make contact with a math tutor. He/she/it/they were never in the office, & did not ever return calls, or respond to messages.

Fortunately I did still have enough math left from 35 years ago to help her out, but it was very rusty, & mad things much harder for her than it should have been.

All are at fault, & I can see the loss of any decent education for most kids today. I got a better education at a small country NSW high school, with just 12 kids in 5Th year, sitting in with junior classes, than my kids received at a 1700 kid Queensland high school today.

The basic premise of this argument, that deficiences of maths and science in all levels of our education system are leading to a lack suitably qualified engineers and that will impact negatively on our future development, is a very narrow view that brings to light the actual deficiency across both public and private education systems.

Gogo comes close to asking the appropriate question but he/she also exhibits the same narrow view.

The appropriate question is why is our education system so narrowly focused on producing people who are able to function as practitioners within a particular field without due emphasis on producing, at all levels, thinkers.

The traditional English Liberal Education comprised English, Maths B, Maths C, Physics, Chemistry and Latin.

Such a course was once designed for young men and taught them to think rather than to complete tasks, in an apprentice like approach.

THe apprenticeship Tertiary Educated Engineers complete is approximately three years practical work experience with the option of completing the Engineering Professional Qualification. Most don't take that option...now. There is simply nolonger great need.

My personal experience is from my son's engineering cohort from QUT.
In the final year there were five completing the 5 year engineering component of their education. Four were also completing an associated Applied Science(Maths) Degree. All four graduated with Distinctions in the 3 Yesr Science degree and with Honours in their Electrical Engineering Degrees. One of the four went on to furthur study and completed an Honours Degree in Science.

Of the five, two had undertaken the Traditional English Liberal Education at college, two had completed similar with the exception of Latin. German was substituted. One did not learn a language.

The results were 2 first class honours, two second class honours and one pass. The results mirrored the relative adherence to their college educations.

My son today after a few years in the workplace is now starting to exercise his intellect in the field of history and phisolophy. He is reading and discussing the great ideas of the West, in a structured but informal manner.

His intellect is astonishing.

Of his cohort from college, with who we are still in irregular contact, and particularly those who now follow careers in other professional fields, none possesss anywhere near his intellectual ability, nor match his ability to become as involved in interesting and successful interpersonal relationships, travel, sport and adventure.

I think while in the past the traditional courses favoured young men I think the same doesn't apply today as the only girl in his QUT cohort was the graduate who went on to complete the Honours in Applied Science (Maths).

Only one of the five in the cohort attended a private school. He passed but did not achieve honours.

Change the emphasis in all levels of our education systems for our future professionals from learning how to do things to learning how to think.

Can't be all that difficult in a clever country.

Nutter, there are always those annoying people, like your son, who could be thrown in to a library age 10, & come out 3 years later, better educated than most of us can ever be. Unfortunately most of us need help, by knowledge people, if we are to get there. Most of us need those flashes of enlightenment that come from a good teacher, for us to progress.

I was one of 4 kids, in a country town high school, with a total of 12 kids in 5Th year, doing Math 2 & Physics honors. The girl was slightly annoying. She just picked it all up so effortlessly, & knew how to do everything, but it was one of the boys who really used to upset me.

He would be reading a book on Greek mythology, or similar interest, hidden in his math/physics text book, while the other kid & I, two thirds of the front row of the schools senior football team, required every bit of help our long suffering master could give. The whole course was done out of hours, & the 6 or 7 hours he gave us every week was all needed.

Still, in our defense, she became a house wife after a couple of years teaching, the brilliant one earned a precarious living playing the Sydney Town Hall organ part time. & selling self published records, then Cd's of obscure organ music.

It was the other footballer, & I who went on to build your bridges & jetties, power houses & factories, & fly your aircraft.

Those of us less gifted do require a good well structured system to be able to get what we need to be constructive. Quite often the truly brilliant are too busy in their mind to do much. It is usually those of us, a few rungs below the top of the ladder, that get on & do the work, but only if we have received the help we need when young.

Seems to me hasbeen by your own admission quite a few people annoy you.
With a little more guidance maybe you could have come to have had a career that you might have held in a better light than the one you describe.

It seems I merely contribited financially and rather thanklessly, to your wages, for the building of all those bridges etc

My son was never gifted. At age 10 he had a speech impediment, lacked reading skills and was a very average student.

The pathway of his education was determined by me and a couple of very experienced College Maths and Science teachers, until his university years.

What we did was very effective.

My point was not that he was in any way brilliant or gifted (Where it seems you think he was) but only that the traditional English Liberal Education pathway he followed led him and those of his university cohort to be a very well rounded and contributing, hardworking individuals.

Settle down there Nutter, you paid stuff all for my B Sc. Half of it was done, with some encouragement while I was a pilot in the RAN fleet air arm. Encouraged, but it was done in our own time, & expense. The rest I payed for, after I returned to civvy street. No free or subsidised uni courses back then.

Perhaps I over stated, my annoyance was with my lack of ability, compared to the two mentioned, who were gifted, not with them.

I feel I was lucky with the quality of teachers we had, in a backwater country town, compared to what is offered today, even in larger centers.

It appears your son was also lucky. Good teachers are getting very thin on the ground.

We did get a more rounded education in the 50s, for which I am grateful, however, if you wish to get a science education, it is not much use coming out of year 12, nicely rounded, if tour math/physics is rounded at year 10 level, an event that is all too common today.

Hasbeen

The difference between our educations in the 50's and 60's and today's education is that were were taught to think.
Today kids are attempted to be taught how to do things.

Initially we learned basic arithmetic by rote, reading by rote, English spelling by rote, writing by rote, then some simple arithmetic problem solving, English grammer and simple reading, writing then comprehension and expression exercises, some simple sciences, geography and history. As the years passed these processes didn't change much. All that occurred was that as our intellects developed and we refined the learning how to learn process the subject matter simply became more complex.

By the end of year ten very few people hadn't skills of simple maths, English comprehension, writing skills, an understanding of the world around them, an ability to learn and therefore most were able to slot easily into the workplace. Those who had the ability and aspired for more went on to year twelve and studied Maths B, Maths C, English, Chemistry, Physics and Latin or one of the latin languages, usually French.

In my opinion I think my son not so much talented but assume had he been educated in the 50's and 60's (and produced the effort he did)he'd be an average Graduate. I think that because I think the education system in Australia has been 'dumbed down' so much. The processes which once produced functioning young adults and superior disciplined intellects is no longer a widespread occurance.

Regards

Interesting digressions from Hasbeen and nutter.

My children are at high school at present, one in grade 10 and one in grade 8. While the teachers seem reasonably dedicated to their task, the curriculum seems to me to be hopelessly inadequate and there is little emphasis on achievement, with at least as much weight given to behavioural aspects in reports.

Moreover, the teachers seem either unwilling or unable to identify problematic areas for individual children. For example, my son was having trouble with simple algebraic problem solving using transposition of terms (which they call "back-tracking" in his text book). For some 3 weeks the boy struggled with the problem, trying to work it out for himself before I noticed he was avoiding doing maths homework and got to the bottom of it. After a bit of help and some practise he got it sussed and was away and running. The teacher simply didn't care enough about his achievement of competency to pay the small amount of extra attention he required, or even to draw it to anybody's attention. After all, he's a good boy, does what he's asked, doesn't disrupt the class - he's invisible.

I'd also suggest that a large part of the problem is that our educational institution have become a front in the feminist war on all things male, including maths. Since the girls who make up 2/3 of the uni student population are mostly NOT going to need rigorous maths training, that is sufficient reason to let it wane as a serious discipline in our schools. The drive for feminisation of the workforce has produced some very curious distortions of the educational process.

We don't want or need Aussy engineers or scientists.

They take too long & cost too much to train and educate when we can immigrate 'em for 10 a penny.

Besides they tend to get political and upset our corporate
apple carts by informing the hoi-polloy about ridiculous claims that corporations are corrupt and only benefit Australia short-term.

HSC maths? -- Keep 'em in the dark and grow mushrooms - not mathematicians. We've invested heaps in I-Tech gadgets and NBN just so we can divert their attention while we steal their future. Don't attempt to undo our good works!

JB Pitbull
CEO
BHP Gro-a-Con Forteskewer Corporation

Yes Anti, they have developed this wonderful system which suites the girls beautifully.

Rather than having major exams, where some actual retained knowledge, & the ability to work under pressure is required, we now have assignments. These have feminised the education very well.

Apart from the fact that the work can be done by mum or dad, it can also be done by a tutor, to achieve the desired result.

Even if done by the pupil, girls have always been much better at sitting down & doing home work. Add to that teachers who want as little hassle as possible, & the boys are in a false heaven. They simply don't do the assignments, & are allowed to go through a couple of years thinking they are getting away with it.

The lax reporting system, with no marks, just computer generated bland statements, keep parents uninformed, until far too late to demand better. It is only the poor OP result that finally tells the tale.

If you want your kids to get an education, you will have to keep a damn close watch on what's happening.

We only got a reasonable result for my son, after I convinced him it was him loosing out, not the teacher. Once I had him convinced he had to grab the education system & shake the daylights out of it, to get what he wanted, he did as well as possible with the existing system.

My education had been so good at a country high, that I would never have known how bad things had got, if my wife & I had not set up, & run for 15 years, a textbook hire system for the P&C. Close contact told us how bad some departments were, & the $170,000PA it put into the school meant that we were listened to when we had suggestions.

As an older than usual dad, & all ready a grumpy old bugger, I made my presence felt when ever I found slackness, both at "our school" & at district office. Be prepared, you may have to do similar

hasbeen:"We only got a reasonable result for my son, after I convinced him it was him loosing out, not the teacher."

I've taken exactly the same approach with my kids. My son has thrived on it, but my daughter feels a bit crushed by the weight of personal responsibility, I think. It's also hard when their mother doesn't insist on any formal homework or study time, preferring to farm it out to tutors, which means I am constantly battling to make it happen when at my place and the kids actively avoid coming over at times for that reason. I can't blame them for that, I'd have done the same as a child.

I'm afraid the school thinks I'm something of a pain in the neck, which I'm quite proud to be. Another of the problems being caused by their mother is absenteeism and the school was simply not addressing it. It took a very public threat to make a formal departmental complaint before anything was done.

I don't blame the teachers for the poor outcomes, but I do blame them for not caring enough about achieving better ones.

Ah, The Australian bulk Immigration system is truly working at last.

All the dead wood australian families are struggling to survive while we immigrate the best, cheapest brains the world offers to take their place. This is NATION BUILDING and DEMOCRACY at its best:

Kill off all the weak loosers and replace them with folk that appreciate the LAbor and Liberal Coalition Governments in their turn. Folk we all can look up to and who are appreciative enough to VOTE for US, for NO mining taxes and making pepole PAY through the nose for any NBN content that could possibly allow them to get ahead in life.

Australia's starting to look a lot like like a first world NATION at last. A nation where rich people get richer while securing loyalty by PRETENDING to trickle down their riches to the lower classes.

And all the extra immigrant & boat-people GST going to reducing corporate taxes!

I'm so proud, I feel a tear coming on!

Zeich Heil!

JB Pitbull
CEO
BHP Gro-a-Con Forteskewer Corporation