Mr. McDoof seems to be getting all the love these days with his silly little videos but Beedeekay will continue to write!
Malcolm Gladwell is highly overrated. I remember reading one of his books (Outliers) when I came across a section that irritated me greatly:
Let’s read why he thinks Asian’s are good at Math (abridged source):
It turns out that there is also a big difference in how number-naming systems in Western and Asian languages are constructed. In English, we say fourteen, sixteen, seventeen, eighteen and nineteen, so one would think that we would also say one-teen, two-teen, and three-teen. But we don’t. We make up a different form: eleven, twelve, thirteen, and fifteen. Similarly, we have forty, and sixty, which sound like what they are. But we also say fifty and thirty and twenty, which sort of sound what they are but not really. And, for that matter, for numbers above twenty, we put the “decade” first and the unit number second: twenty-one, twenty-two. For the teens, though, we do it the other way around. We put the decade second and the unit number first: fourteen, seventeen, eighteen. The number system in English is highly irregular. Not so in China, Japan and Korea. They have a logical counting system. Eleven is ten one. Twelve is ten two. Twenty-four is two ten four, and so on.
That difference means that Asian children learn to count much faster. Four year old Chinese children can count, on average, up to forty. American children, at that age, can only count to fifteen, and don’t reach forty until they’re five: by the age of five, in other words, American children are already a year behind their Asian counterparts in the most fundamental of math skills.
That’s it folks! If you want your kids to rock Math classes like the kids with the last names Kim and Chang you best teach them to start counting eleven as ten-one. OK thats a wrap…or is it?
Every Mon, Wed, Fri, in elementary school, while many of my friends had “play-dates” or played “Biddy Basketball” I was sent to KUMON. I am not sure how Kumon is run now. But simply put, my mom drove my brother and I to a small office building one day where a lady gave us a sheet of math problems told us to figure it out on our own. No flashy powerpoint presentation, no opening speech about enriching youth, no discussion about “learning holistically”. Everyone there was Asian. If we were able to do this sheet of paper, we moved on to a slightly harder set of problems. This repeated itself for the next few years: 2 hours of work, 3 times of week. Inefficient? Probably. Effective? Definitely. I absolutely destroyed kids at “Around the World Math” and completed memorizing my times table in 3rd grade the fastest my teacher had ever seen. (Note: Being socially awkward at that time, I also became an unbearable douchebag, bragging about my arithmetic accomplishments to anyone at school. I did not realize this was probably the most uncool thing a kid could do and needless to say my friends were few during elementary school. I suppose a similar analogy could be the conversations I’ve seen between self-important banking/finance guys and normal members of society.)
it makes the whole attitude toward math different. Instead of being a rote learning thing, there’s a pattern I can figure out. For fractions, we say three fifths. The Chinese is literally, ‘out of five parts, take three.’ That’s telling you conceptually what a fraction is. It’s differentiating the denominator and the numerator.” The much-storied disenchantment with mathematics among western children starts in the third and fourth grade, and Fuson [some researcher he cites] argues that perhaps a part of that disenchantment is due to the fact that math doesn’t seem to make sense; its linguistic structure is clumsy; its basic rules seem arbitrary and complicated. Asian children, by contrast, don’t face nearly that same sense of bafflement.
A short reminder here before I go into this anecdote, my Korean sucks, hence part-time Korean school.
I remember one time in 2nd grade (the start of my disenchantment) when my teacher gave us a two-sided homework, one was simple addition while the other side was comparing fractions which we weren’t supposed to get until 4th grade. I also remember for some reason my dad was home that day (a rare occurrence; my father is MJ-like in his ability to scoff at the flu) He told me to show him my homework. Since it was rather easy I proudly beamed as showed him my A+ homework and even told him how I did in less than a minute. He then of course asked why I didn’t do the side with fractions. He thought I was lying, I said it was my teacher’s fault that she copied the wrong problem set on one side. He told me its never the teacher’s fault, and that the fractions were there for a reason.
Instead of rote learning? The next 3-4 hours was probably the most excruciating math lesson I ever had, as my father had to go through what a fraction was and why 3/5 was greater than 4/8. I practiced and he made up new sheets of problems for me to solve before I could leave. Even more ironic, what was even more difficult was the fact that my father whenever he taught me these things, the fractions I knew as three fifths, he kept on saying 5, some Korean phrase, then 3. (The Chinese is literally, ‘out of five parts, take three.’ ) The Korean system was the same, except I had no clue what my dad was talking about.
You want clumsy linguistic structure? If anything, since I didn’t know any Korean this was adding to the confusion, not clarifying it. I faced more bafflement than your average elementary school student. I think it was after this incident that father told my mom my math was at a remedial level. At that was the start of KUMON.
Nonetheless, I learned somewhat how to compare fractions. (I also learned how to properly hide schoolwork from him. Note: Report cards with C’s and comments like your kid “needs to do his homework” or “can be quite disruptive in class” flush down the toilet but can clog a toilet and be fetched quite easily by plunger. From that point on, I learned also to burn my report cards to ashes before I flushed it down the toilet.)
Discipline is the real problem
I said this before and I’ll say this again: You wanna teach a kid how to be good at math, you beat him until he gets it right. I am half-joking of course which also means I am half-serious, but there’s no real sexy formula to do well in math. Think I am full of it? Fine, you take a bunch of kids, from an early age teach em how to count 11 as ten-one, 12 as ten-two, etc. Throw in all the little refinements Gladwell seems to insist upon (fractions, shorter numbers etc.) But also, give em their own rooms with a TV, computer and game systems (don’t wanna pressure Junior too much) and if they do poorly let them know there’s always next time. Meanwhile, I’ll take my sampling of kids and give em a math worksheet everyday (not that big a deal). Until they complete them, they won’t be able to watch TV or go to a friends house. If he gets too sassy, you punish him, and then send him to his room, a spartan dormitory designed for the sole purpose of sleeping. Make him aware there will be no next time. This is of course difficult this day and age, because it could entail:
- Your kid unfortunately not becoming your best friend (“my Mom loves to get drunk with me”, “My dad lent me some of his pot yesterday” were actually two phrases I heard more than once)
- Having to actually spend quality time with your kid and working through some problems (a solid method, that requires less beating your kids, but will also take away from your Bikram Yoga, Cardio Kickboxing and Golf game)
- Not putting up with crap that “Math is boring” (i.e. sometimes forcing your kid to eat broccoli)
- Not blaming the teacher every time junior doesn’t get an A. (One of my Spanish teacher’s gave half our class C’s, this was unacceptable so a few students got their parents to intervene. He gave all of us A’s. My Spanish remains at the “Yo quiero Taco Bell” comprehension level.)
This is an easy (or perhaps difficult?) solution, no sexy anecdotes and doesn’t actually require you beat your kids. You see Gladwell puts way too much stock in this vague linguistic nonsense (ten-one) avoiding anything politically incorrect and telling parents to occasionally discipline their kids. This is why I dislike reading Malcolm but also probably the reason why everyone else likes reading him. This reductionist PC drivel makes everyone feel good about themselves for sure, but I am not sure what else it does. It’s almost as if he’s saying, “Pat yourself on the back if you are not Asian and find yourself struggling in math, because there are no differences really between the Asians and you with Math problems; it’s just that the English system of counting is stupid, not you.” So, BDK, maybe Asians have a genetic superiority in handling mathematics problems? I doubt it. Don’t wanna turn into that girl from Harvard Law.
The thing is, this is not just a Chinese/Korean thing. Most of my friends whose parents immigrated to the US were at least above average in math. It makes sense, its a subject that can be universally taught by parents and practiced with a greater degree of accuracy than let’s say English or US History. Whether their last name was Patel, Ahmed or Salazar they shared the common element of a no-nonsense parent who insisted on excelling in Math. My buddy from Jamaica, similar concept. Got his butt kicked if he didn’t show his homework to his parents everyday.
Oh, it’s actually the rice paddies
Gladwell sort of hits this point when he talks about how Chinese people and rice paddies.
- Chinese people had an incentive to work hard because after a certain level they were allowed to keep the remaining amount of rice.
- Since, growing rice was difficult, the Chinese spent a lot of extra time on the paddies.
- Thus the Chinese saw a direct connection between efforts and results.
- Hard work = Good results!
An interesting narrative, except its also an incredibly condescending tautology. To Malcolm, Asians learned this [step 4] by working on rice paddies. The rest of you guys are only picking up on this now. He pretends sources like the Bible, thinkers like Ben Franklin and your everyday NFL analyst have never harped on this.
This is why I hate when people say Gladwell is so profound. Either he takes a bunch of loosely-interconnected pieces to try explain something to fit into his nicely non-offensive politically correct worldview. He’s a clever writer so you are lulled by his ingenuity but then you realize none of the research is his own but is cherry-picked from people who understand their work a lot better than he ever would. Or he states something insanely obvious. You nod your head when he crafts a dramatic story about how Bill Gates thrived because he worked really hard (10,o00 hours+) and had a nurturing environment around him. Then you ask yourself “did this guy work in management consulting?”
“Learning should be fun”
For math, hunkering down and practicing is the best way to get things done. Listen, I think rote learning has its limitations and even wrote overemphasizing “cram schools” can actually be a Prisoner’s Dilemma (wasted money, crutch for poor study habits etc.) Nonetheless, I think there’s a fault in over-romanticizing how to educate. The blogger “Ask a Korean” hits this point when he discussed learning English. He criticizes what he calls the “myth of fun, language immersion”. He writes (referring to himself as “the Korean”):
Mind you, the Korean loves America. The Korean practically writes a love song to America every chance he has. But there are certain things about contemporary America drives the Korean crazy, and this is one of them: the idea that the process of learning is somehow supposed to be fun. Just drop it. Forget it. What is fun is the result of learning – the infinite amount of fun when you finally put the finished product to use. And truly, that applies to second language acquisition as well as anything else. Your horizon will expand beyond the limit of your imagination. You will gain perspectives that you couldn’t have even dreamed of. Don’t be a whiny bitch. Your sacrifice will be worthwhile.
I feel arithmetic (a much easier task) and a lot of fundamental mathematics require the same sort of plow ahead attitude. The secret lies not in a “logical, counting system”. Gladwell writes:
They [Asians] can hold more numbers in their head, and do calculations faster, and the way fractions are expressed in their language corresponds exactly to the way a fraction actually is—and maybe that makes them a little more likely to enjoy math, and maybe because they enjoy math a little more they try a little harder and take more math classes and are more willing to do their homework, and on and on, in a kind of virtuous circle.
I actually agree with this, though it has nothing to do with his original thesis. Learning is fun to the kids only when they have the tools and knowledge to attack problems or puzzles. When you realize that the math concepts you learned can apply in rich and abundant ways to life, you acknowledge it can be kind of fun, or at least interesting. Of course, you tell this to a kid right now he’ll tell you “Math sucks!”. This is not a concept a kid is gonna embrace easily. Take his computer and all its games, set it on fire in front of him and tell him to get his butt to work. Don’t worry, this is the start of the virtuous circle. He will thank you later.
College is overrated
This Obama quote about college irritates me a lot:
After graduating high school, all Americans should be prepared to attend at least one year of job training or higher education to better equip our workforce for the 21st century economy. We will continue to make higher education more affordable by expanding Pell Grants and initiating new tax credits to make sure any young person who works hard and desires a college education can access it.
This is not unique to Obama, in fact every presidential candidate mentioned how they are going to expand the federal loans for college or something to that effect. Rather this overarching obsession over college is infuriating. Many colleges promote the fact that “people with college degrees will make a million more dollars in their lifetime than those without”. I won’t breakdown why that implied causality is so silly, but lets move on.
College bubble ~ Housing Bubble
Remember in the early 2000’s when everyone was saying “invest in housing, its a sure bet!” Switch housing to college and you’ll realize how eerily similar they can be. Or when you remember how the government says it needs to, “make housing affordable” you realize we are on the same path to financial instability when we decide to make “college affordable”
I would argue there are huge parallels to our recent financial crisis
1.) You apply and pay to go to college/trade school etc. (You invest tens of thousands in cash on the latest and sexiest financial instrument)
2.) Well except, you don’t have the money to pay for said school, so you ask for a loan (Not actually having tens of thousands, you use leverage to pay for said instrument)
3.) Federal loan approves, informing you that your education will empower you with a job to service this debt later in life. (Loans approved on the basis of “housing prices rising”/”growing economy”)
4.) Colleges collect their share of the dough (Banks collect their fees for guiding you through this nonsense)
5.) You get hit with thousands of dollars in debt, the real world hits you with a paltry job, government promises of increased returns is a mirage (We all know what happened here, housing prices didn’t go up, the economy didn’t grow, BDK got laid off)
College has terrible returns
Notice how the money trickles down to everyone, well except to the people it needs to trickle down to. Much like housing is subsidized (mortgage interest is a tax write-off, home-buying tax credits etc.), so is college (federal loans, tax-free debt issuance, non-profit status etc.).Corporations, I mean colleges, will respond to incentives, and when the government says we will pay you money if you teach our kids something, people will do it; just not well….
But the problem has deeper effects than hurt feelings: the 54% graduation rate means that around 46% of all money used to finance college tuition results in no degree. Which means that financially speaking, the spectacularly high dropout rate boils down to a spectacularly bad investment.
Here’s another problem, when the government gives an unequivocal and categorical stamp of approval for “higher education” its almost like rating agencies dumping a “AAA” rating on terrible bonds. We all assumed it was a sure thing when Moody’s told us that, when its got the backing from the damn Federal government of course we will label it a worthy investment. Much like the label of AAA can make bonds are more pricey (in the form of a lower yield), this promotion causes colleges to be more pricey (in the form of higher tuition). Couple that with the fact that there is a lot of easy money in the form of federal loans in this sector, this demand can also artificially drive up the price of college. Kind of like how housing prices rose when we all bought them with our own glut of low-interest money. Much like the financial crisis people are finding out they aren’t really getting a super-safe investment, but one that carries an obscene amount of risk with a shaky return.
If you are reading this, you are probably not a representative of the population as a whole
Now you say, BDK you went to college, and so did I and we are doing pretty damn well. No? Well, true but I would also argue this is not as important as you think for many reasons.
1. ) Much of my college experience was largely irrelevant to my financial success (although I am unemployed). I moped around a lot; with most of my days spent farting and playing video games in my dorm. When difficult classes came I hunkered down and learned how to work hard, I gamed the system and dropped or Pass/Failed the class. For this, I earned a respectable GPA. Many of my peers, spent more time damaging their livers in a week than they did actually studying. The bank that I worked at (supposed to be a nice job) proudly lauded the fact that people of so many different majors were able to succeed. While that diversity might be nice, I think the bigger story might be most of the stuff you learned in college was not all that relevant. You take into account grade-inflation, soft degrees and
2.) I got a scholarship that immensely reduced what I had to pay for school. Paying interest on over hundred thousand dollars versus paying it out on a few ten thousand dollars can be a huge difference. This becomes more pronounced when you go to a school and end up with a job you could have had right out of high school.
3,) Some of you doctors and engineers might say “WTF, I worked my butt off!”. College actually does help certain people; especially people who are training for a position in high demand. Problem is, objectively not everyone is smart enough to be a doctor or an engineer. Most of the people reading this blog probably should have gone to college, that’s not the argument I am debating. It’s just that the majority of people aren’t preternaturally gifted to get 30+ MCAT scores or understand advance physics principles. I am not saying we should say screw ’em, but I don’t think miring them in debt to feel good about ourselves is the right solution either. Reality tells us that a lot of people are wholly unprepared for college. Many students are unable to handle the workload of college. But our insistence on universal higher education is terrible for somebody who can barely pass high-school material. Much like “affordable housing credits” Freddie and Fannie subsidies brought about a higher default rate, freely disbursing loans to anyone regardless of their aptitude will only increase dropout rates. Thus I am not talking about you specifically, but those out there who got totally screwed by colleges. Look I think most of my friends made out well after college (not implying causation here), perhaps even a majority of students can definitely evaluate the costs and benefits and say the same. But there remains a large chunk of people who are getting totally f’d by this system we promote so heavily and insist on everyone to join.
4.) College serves for most others looking for jobs largely as a signal to employers. As mentioned before most majors don’t learn direct applicable skills. Now I am not sure this is worth the opportunity cost in 4 years and 200k. While certainly college is a great experience to meet friends and explore new horizons, it certainly isn’t a necessary condition for either. I almost think by indirectly driving up the price of college we are creating vicious cycle in which job-givers are raising the bar for prospective employees unnecessarily (Prisoner’s Dilemma?). Not sure why sustained work experience in a low-wage position couldn’t serve a similar and less expensive signal. If you are worried about smarts, how about a job-related test and interview?
I don’t think nobody should go to college, its just that we have vastly overrated its usefulness. While telling someone to work in a vocation is not sexy it is more realistic solution for many. As for college itself, we shouldn’t be passing out these loans as freely as we are. Perhaps the government could see a student’s performance in school before it dishes our some dough to a student to continue his studies. As I said before, by making these loans so easily available, we are also driving the price of the college up. Big picture, whenever the government places its hands on stuff there are a ton of unintended consequences. I wonder if the default rates on student loans is gonna increase to the point where it becomes nationally painful, especially amidst our economic slowdown.