re: TOPs will require ACT of 28

quote:

---

math is one of those areas that requires effort

you want to know why asiasn do so well in math? they believe math ability is a learned trait and not some sorcery

and you're not just rolling up to the ACT with its trig and pre-calc questions and naturally understanding them without a knowledge base, regardless

---

Exactly.

Math is human-made. So there is no way you would have an innate ability to do math.

Parts of innate abilities, when applied will help you get up to speed faster, but no one is born with a math brain.

It is a skill that you get better at the more you do it and the more you pursue it.

spatial awareness and pattern recognition are innate.

quote:

---

you're choosing between harvard, yale, or stanford

---

Not true. I know two kids with these stats who didn't even get wait listed. One at Harvard and one at Yale. It's insanely hard to get into these schools.

quote:

---

but no one is born with a math brain.

It is a skill that you get better at the more you do it and the more you pursue it.

---

This just isn't true for some people.

But WHEN timing wise is the issue ... I say you can't affect those currently UNDER TOPS and meeting requirements for retention.

And NO I do NOT have one currently under TOPS; I do have a senior that qualifies with a 29 ACT and a 3.5 GPA.

When they changed the requirements for graduation for TOPS, a class got at least 2 or 3 years of a "heads up" if you will. Students still in high school should have time to achieve the requirements.

quote:

---

quote:
Minnesota


Isn't the entire state a solid block of ice until June?

---

No, it's usually gone in April. Minnesota consistently ranks in the top 5 states in the US in which to live, while Louisiana is in the bottom 5.
I do wish we had warmer winters, however.

quote:

---

Gotta disagree with you SFP. Math comes easy to some people. There can be a natural logic to it. I was one of them. And I taught the subject as well.

---

"I'm Not a Math Person" is No Longer a Valid Excuse

quote:

---

Generally, people believe their learning ability works in one of two ways, according to research conducted by Patricia Linehan from Purdue University. We classify our learning abilities in a given subject as "incremental orientation" — the belief that we can continually improve our ability by studying and practicing, or we think about our learning as an "entity orientation" — the belief that we can't get any better no matter how hard we try. One person can have different orientations for different subjects.

Entity orientation toward math — basically saying, "I'm not good at math and so I never will be" — is a dangerous thing. When someone with entity orientation about learning math gets a math problem wrong, they think it's just an indication of the poor math ability they were "born with," according to a study published in Personality and Individual Differences in 2010.

This can have a very negative impact on motivation. If we don't believe we can improve, we won't bother trying.

---

quote:

---

"While intelligence as assessed by IQ tests is important in the early stages of developing mathematical competence, motivation and study skills play a more important role in students' subsequent growth," Kou Murayama, the lead researcher on the study, said in a press release.

You can see the difference it made in the chart to the left. Students listed as high-growth believed they could get better at math the more they practiced and used in-depth study techniques. Students listed as low-growth were more likely to believe that math ability is something you're born with and it can't be improved, and they relied more on memorization when studying.

---

quote:

---

It's been well studied, if you feel so strongly about your opinion, you should defend it against the copious amount of research on the topic.

---

No Math Gene

quote:

---

"We found support for a task specificity hypothesis. You become good at exactly what you practice," Sigmundsson says.

---

quote:

---

It is this finding that might in the end help change the way math is taught.

Support in neurology The fact that you are good at precisely what you practice is probably due to the fact that different kinds of practice activate different neural connections.

---

How I got through all my math classes in high school and college was just to learn the steps. That meant I did the homework. All of it.

That was it. If I memorized the steps it would work out.

Until I had to change the equation or make my own equation...then it got trickier. But I learned how to do that too.

I still am basic at math, but the thing is, I can tell if my answer is right or not...and if it's not...I do it again. Because I know what number to expect.



Statistics in this sense was the easiest. I could do any problem in statistics. It just made sense, but it's not because I was born knowing statistics.

To your point and what others are arguing: I was born being a good guesstimator at space, time, and choices vs chances. When those natural abilities are applied correctly and with practice I could guess, do the math, and see if my prediction was correct.


I am not trying to sound like a savant here...I am just showing that SFP is right. Math is human-made calculable organization of natural arrangements.

that's an excellent point. i was a horrible student in high school. i was given a C in all my classes for playing sports and rarely attended after my sophomore year. i graduated high school with a 2.583

this hurt my act score, but it was my own fault.

i did study for the act and made a 27. i studied quite a bit, probably close to a month leading up to the test.

no excuse for someone with any smarts to not be able to make a decent score.

for some people it is nerves, but they've got to beat that at some point.