Santosh ( 12 years ago )
It's true that very few people need to know the math that's thguat in schools, including Algebra, let alone Geometry, Analytic Geometry (which is what Algebra II consisted of in my day), or trigonometry.  This is true even for most kids who will go on to college.Statistics, even if it were predominantly qualitative, would be useful to teach.  Especially the fundamental statistical truth (which still eludes many people) that there is a difference between "some" and "all" and "most" and "none".  I.e., if I say that women tend not to have as much aptitude as men for math, I mean most women, not all women.  And the mention of a single counter-example - one women who is very adept at Math - does not change the truth of that statement.But why study Algebra?  How about in order to exercise their minds.      For many students in the mid-range, even if they'll never use it, the study of it may make them smarter, at least within the limits of their innate intelligence.

Aastra ( 12 years ago )
before, though it is imilpcit in Steve's many posts on this topic: those engaging in the Standards of Achievement arms race have a flawed premise as their motivation.They believe that any kid can learn any material so long as they are properly taught it and its prerequisites.Starting from the end and working backwards, the prerequisites part is motivation for the standardized tests in NCLB. If kids don't know 6th grade math, you can't age-graduate them to 7th grade then expect them to make it. Fair enough, but there is an obvious error.Some kids aren't smart enough for 6th grade math. At least at the typical age for 6th graders. So, while you can hold them back until they do understand the material, it is obvious this approach doesn't scale. 7th graders driving to school and 11th graders that can buy beer make for disruptive classmates.Finally, even if one were solve the problem of what to do with markedly older kids, it should be obvious every person has a limit to which they can intellectually grasp. At the extremes this is obvious, Differential Equations is the realm of engineers and mathematicians. But everyone has a limit, and for some it may lie within the regular high school curriculum.So, the question, paraphrasing what was orginally put by  is, what makes everyone so certain the high school curriculum is within the mental abilities of 100% of the US population aged 18-20? And what makes everyone so certain making the curriculum harder necessarily makes students smarter?And so it is here where the IQ deniers meet their Waterloo. They cannot admit to IQ or a bell curve for its distribution. Thus they are left with the  in which all children are capable of learning all the same material. Thus everyone must be capable of college (and a tier one at that). Thus the only jobs worth caring about are those of the college graduate.