1. The author seems to be arguing that the class was not well taught, given its goals.
2. The author disagrees with the goals of the class.
The goal of a math for non-majors class isn't to give them a chance to explore math. It's to force them to learn as much applied math as they can handle, and to figure stuff out independently.
I'm guessing it's presumed that students are doing one of the last math courses they will ever do, before going into a field where they need to be able to use mathematics. I bet that when there's a meeting between the science or engineering professors and the math professors, the the math department doesn't hear "give them more support so they learn what's on the syllabus properly", but "give them hell so they learn to figure stuff out for themselves, because after this they're on their own".
From the article:
> Princeton promises students a “liberal arts education,” and defines that as an education offering “expansive intellectual grounding in all kinds of humanistic inquiry.”
Yes, this probably isn't the goal of most of the math (and even most of the science) courses. They are more about grinding out highly proficient professionals. IMO there should be more courses where there's scope for students to just chill and do some intellectually engaging stuff, but when should that happen? I don't think it's possible to run a fun course when the students are stressing out over assessment in another course and expect the students will get much value out of it.
There's things like Terrance Tao's Masterclass, or Youtubers like Veritasium if you want to learn about science and don't care about a piece of paper.
I get that it's an issue that there's no piece of paper to earn to say you got a "expansive intellectual grounding" in STEM in a humanistic way, but if it's a credential it needs to be assessed somehow (or you get a Python Paradox - employers will take it as a signal for passion, then it will be swamped with people who just want to signal that they're passionate).
They could also make a third stream (2nd year math for non-STEM majors, as well as the math for STEM and math for math majors streams), but it may not be viable in terms of student numbers.
1. The author seems to be arguing that the class was not well taught, given its goals.
2. The author disagrees with the goals of the class.
The goal of a math for non-majors class isn't to give them a chance to explore math. It's to force them to learn as much applied math as they can handle, and to figure stuff out independently.
I'm guessing it's presumed that students are doing one of the last math courses they will ever do, before going into a field where they need to be able to use mathematics. I bet that when there's a meeting between the science or engineering professors and the math professors, the the math department doesn't hear "give them more support so they learn what's on the syllabus properly", but "give them hell so they learn to figure stuff out for themselves, because after this they're on their own".
From the article:
> Princeton promises students a “liberal arts education,” and defines that as an education offering “expansive intellectual grounding in all kinds of humanistic inquiry.”
Yes, this probably isn't the goal of most of the math (and even most of the science) courses. They are more about grinding out highly proficient professionals. IMO there should be more courses where there's scope for students to just chill and do some intellectually engaging stuff, but when should that happen? I don't think it's possible to run a fun course when the students are stressing out over assessment in another course and expect the students will get much value out of it.
There's things like Terrance Tao's Masterclass, or Youtubers like Veritasium if you want to learn about science and don't care about a piece of paper.
I get that it's an issue that there's no piece of paper to earn to say you got a "expansive intellectual grounding" in STEM in a humanistic way, but if it's a credential it needs to be assessed somehow (or you get a Python Paradox - employers will take it as a signal for passion, then it will be swamped with people who just want to signal that they're passionate).
They could also make a third stream (2nd year math for non-STEM majors, as well as the math for STEM and math for math majors streams), but it may not be viable in terms of student numbers.