Barbie is right. Math *is* hard. But that's exactly why kids should study it.

From Cohen's column:
 

"[Requiring Algebra] is the sort of vaunted education reform that is supposed to close the science and math gap and make the U.S. more competitive. All it seems to do, though, is ruin the lives of countless kids. In L.A., more kids drop out of school on account of algebra than any other subject. I can hardly blame them."

There are oh so many things I find troubling in this sentiment; the only one I agree with is that we cannot blame the kids.

The soft bigotry of low expectations, as the Bush folk are wont to call it, is a real thing.  And while I deplore their solution to it, this is like the archetype of it.  "Kids don't understand something; why make them learn it?"

First, algebra is the sort of vaunted reform that can help close the gap.  The very idea that we can develop more engineers and chemists and physicists without putting algebra into the mind of every kid is ridiculous.  Kids who already "get" algebra are becoming scientists at their current rate; one way to improve the number and/or quality of our scientists is to expand the pool from which we draw them.

Second, it doesn't have to ruin the lives of these kids, and to assert otherwise is preposterous.  If we teach them better at younger ages, algebra will not be some maze to find their respective ways out of.  Look, some kids aren't going to get it, that's true.  But don't pretend that new students thrown into algebra without proper preparation are a good test case.  I have a sneaking suspicion that a better approach to mathematics education for younger students, one that can demonstrate the transition to algebra, would improve their lives pretty substantially.

Is the leap from 4+5=X to 4+X=9 that big?  And from there, is the leap to 4X+5=17 that big?  And from there, is the leap to x^2-9=0 that big?  Not everyone's going to ace these classes, but saying "Why bother?" is a morally unacceptable approach to education.

Isn't it likely that he has used algebra in the last twenty years and is just mistaken because he doesn't understand what algebra even is?  How could one possibly get through twenty years w/o it?

Writing is the highest form of reasoning. This is a fact. Algebra is not. The proof of this, Gabriela, is all the people in my high school who were whizzes at math but did not know a thing about history and could not write a readable English sentence. I can cite Shelly, whose last name will not be mentioned, who aced algebra but when called to the board in geography class, located the Sahara Desert right where the Gobi usually is. She was off by a whole continent.

 4x + 6 = 26; x = 5.  This is a fact

Cohen is a moron; see above.  This is a fact.   

Kids who already "get" algebra are becoming scientists at their current rate; one way to improve the number and/or quality of our scientists is to expand the pool from which we draw them.

Oh, please.  If a kid can't "get" algebra just by looking at it, he/she will never turn out to be a scientist -- at least a scientist whose loss anyone should care about. 

Hmmm.  Is an algorithm a fact?

I think we get a glimpse of Cohen's thought processes.  He says, "Writing is the highest form of reasoning."  That is obviously not true.  Writing is not any form of reasoning, let alone the highest form.  He then follows it up with his version of proof, "This is a fact."  To Cohen, simply typing "This is a fact. " passes for reasoning.  I think his academic deficiency is not limited to math.  He seems to be quite proud of his typing skills.  Perhaps he should stick to that.

Njorl

Those rabidly criticising Cohen are displaying an inability to read closely and a lack of sympathy for "Gabriella."

Gabriella is not going to get her diploma.  Without it, she will likely fail to qualify for jobs which Cohen claims she could do -- except those millions of jobs where you've got to be able to do algebra.  Why has she been denied that benefit?

Simply put.  The Los Angeles "educators" want to show that they "believe" in "standards" and their tough -- at least tough when it comes to Gabriella's future.  As an aside, the idea that Gabriella's algebra knowledge will advance the country's scientific competitiveness is risible.

Gabriella is being harmed in order that high paid educators can look good to their constituents.  Hypocrites! 

Look, I feel terrible for Gabriella.  I do.  And I feel terrible for all the other kids who will not get a diploma because they couldn't pass algebra class.

But I don't feel in the least bit terrible about how hard the curriculum was.  Instead, I feel terrible about how poorly prepared the students were to deal with the curriculum.  I don't know whose fault this is.

Maybe there isn't enough money in the district for supplies, salaries, etc.  Maybe there is plenty of money but it is horribly distributed.  Maybe her teachers have been terrible.  Maybe she didn't apply herself to math all that much when she was younger.  Maybe it's none of those things and she really is one of the very rare people who just won't get it no matter what.  If it's any of those things I feel horrible about them.

But my criticism is not about sympathy.  A diploma should mark a certain standard of academic achievement.  And failing to meet its requirements should mean failing to get a diploma.  I don't like that it happens to anyone, but it does.  It is a tragedy that her job prospects will be harder, but we cannot avoid every tragedy.  Minimize, yes, but we can't eliminate them.

Scaling back requirements because they're too hard?  No way.  What about kids who just don't understand verb conjugation in English?  Should we exempt them?  What about kids who just don't get long division?  Should we exempt them?

Build a better learning environment and there will be fewer Gabriellas.  But removing the single basic building block of any higher math or science is ridiculous.

One of those areas that relies on algebra is economics, and one of the most basic lessons of economics is that arguing from anecdotes is incredibly bad argument.  The saying is, "Imaginary people are more real than real people."

This sounds cold and unfeeling, and it is, but the truth is that the case of Gabriella cannot teach us anything about education policy by itself.  Neither can the case of Richard Cohen.

I think we have to ask ourselves what a high school diploma is supposed to represent.  What does it mean?  What does it say to potential colleges and/or employers?  If we answer that question, we'll be better able to answer what is appropriate as a graduation requirement.

No, but there are lots of facts which can be mathematically proven about algorithms.

I disagree a bit with your final paragraph (only a bit), but your second paragraph makes the point I've been trying to make in a far more eloquent manner than I have been making it.  Ergo, 4.

It's obvious the school system has failed this girl, in any case.  kingcrim99

But that's not how the Los Angeles school system sees it.  They say Gabriella failed them. 

Well, the superintendent of LA schools blamed the phenomenon of algebra failure on the system's "cumulative failure to teach math," so I'm not sure that's completely true.  In any case, that's neither here nor there as regards Cohen's column, which was not really about education policy in any meaningful sense.

Okay, then what should it mark?  If you're advocating getting rid of diplomas, that's fine, but otherwise it ought to be symbolic of something.

MY didn't explain this very well but Ellen's explanation is correct.

This is a particular problem in news reporting because a lot of the figures we talk about in public policy are percentages:  the rate of inflation, the rate of unemployment, interest rates, tax rates, dropout rates, etc., etc.  If you are sneaky you can use this ambiguity to your advantage.

In particular, I seem to recall that the the administration -- back when it was openly pushing iits Social Security plan -- quite intentionally blurred the difference between two percent of FICA payroll tax revenues (which, if you fiddled with that amount, would be just a small tweak to the system) and a percentage point of the FICA tax rate (which is only 8% or thereabouts, so changing that figure by 2 percentage points would be quite a big deal).  Maybe someone recalls better than I do.

I'm completely serious.

The fact that a high school student can -- with great effort -- be taught calculus says nothing about whether that effort was worthwhile.  An increase in the student's self-esteem is all well and good.  Whether or not he turns out to be something more than a math drone -- the usual result for the vast majority of "successful" math students -- is problematic, at best

Future scientists of a quality and imagination that society requires never need a Jaime Escalante to teach them Calc I.

Fair enough.  The LA times article outlines the efforts they are making to improve math education in earlier grade levels, which, if they manage to do it, is certainly a big part of a long term solution. 

However, they don't seem to be too interested in helping current students meet the standards they set (which they set *after* these kids had years and years of poor math instruction at lower grade levels, setting them too far back to meet them by the end of high school), which is a travesty.  And yes, it's more the fault of the eduwonks than the kids if they fail to meet these standards in percentages like LA Schools.

I don't think that otherwise passing students should be denied diplomas due to 12 years of failure by the school system in a single subject.  That said, Cohen's column was utter garbage other than this single point.

b1ff: In fact I can't think of a single person in my high school who was a "whiz" at Math and couldn't get at least a B in English. And that includes several whose first language wasn't even English.

Actually, I was a "whiz" in Math in highschool with mediocre grades in my mother tongue and English.  On the other hand, I never really learned ordinary differencial equations and my understanding of Galois theory is rather superficial,  so perhaps my language skills have similar patchwork character as my math skills.

 More seriously, I think that many people suffer from "mental vertigo".  The fact that someone freezes and cannot coordinate his movement in the close proximity of, say, 1000 ft cliff does not mean that he cannot properly walk in other circumstances.  Similarly, people who can otherwise follow complex instructions or who can perfectly well visualize how different parts of a car engine operate may mentally freeze when you try to explain them the basic properties of logarithms.  This phobia of mathematics is like asthma epidemic.  One of the reasons for asthma may be an insufficient exposure to various microbes in the childhood; probably letting children to get dirty while playing in the backyard would be a good prophylactic.  Similarly, the lack of exposure (or a traumatic exposure) to mathematics in childhood may cripple the ability to comprehend a mathematical argument.

Look, I feel terrible for Gabriella.  I do.

Don't..... she's a piece of fiction, created by Cohen. Examine the entire article with an eye toward veracity....it's full of outright lies and misrepresentations.  

Ellen, No. that was a mish-mash of cut and paste that I was working on. As soon as I saw my error I jumped on it to edit but you were too fast.  Sorry about that folks. Larry

I tried and got tied up in  some sort of "not authorized to access etc." so I gave up and just replied to your "Really" - I'll pay a bit more attention from here on.

How quickly do you think you'd pick up a passing knowledge of differentiable manifolds and Lie groups?  And read here, here, and here.