Category: Misc

I had a Cub Scout Den meeting tonight and had to pick up one of the Scout before the meeting. There wasn’t any school today so I had no access to the school to hold the meeting, so I had it here at my place. This particular Scout goes to a local private school, so he had a little homework and, amazingly, he wanted to get it done since there were only 4 problems and he figured he could get them done before the meeting started.

We got back to the house and he settled in to work on his problems. The boy and I got ready for the meeting and when I came back down, his friend asked me if I could help him with his homework. So here’s the first of 4 problems he’s working on:

Which of the following helps you solve 35 + 16?

1. Think of 16 as 10 + 6
2. Think of 16 as 8 + 8
3. Think of 35 as 40 – 5 Explain your answer:

35 + 16 = ?

I had to look at this a bit to figure out what the heck was going on, it was understandable that the boy’s friend was having trouble with. After looking at it a bit, then squinting at it and looking at it from some other angles, I figured this is how they make math have “no wrong answers.”

To the Scout’s credit, he new the answer. To the math part that is. So, trying to help him answer the homework question, I asked him how he figured it out. He said “I just added to two number together…” The sheepishness in his voice was a nice touch.

The fact is, this type of thinking needlessly complicates math. It was clear that the Scout was having trouble with the concept of substitution. But there was no need to use substitution to solve this problem. For whatever reason, “new math” does a lot of this- complicating simple problems.

My old school mentality will come screaming through here, but the best way to learn addition, is to do addition. That means know all the single digit problems, then teaching carrying. Learn single digit subtraction, then teach borrowing. Give them practice word problems. Boom. Done.

The boy has been coming home with dots and “fast tens” and “fast doubles” and “doubles +1” all these terms that allegedly help the kids learn how to add. But what does it teach? The idea behind “doubles +1” is for a problem like “8+7”, the student is supposed to think, “Well, 7+7 is 14, plus 1 is 15.” Am I the only one who thinks this is ridiculous?

Happily, I can say “No.”

We ran out of time for finishing his homework. After the meeting ended, when his father showed up, I explained what we were doing. The father, who teaches accounting, rolled his eyes and said something to the effect “Yeah, that’s the ‘New Math’…” At which point, one of the Mom’s nearby, who teaches science, overheard and said “Oh my God, it’s ridiculous. Their coming home with dots and games and spinning things… why can’t they just learn the math?” At which point, another father, who is a pilot, jumped into the conversation rolling his eyes about these new teaching methods.

After all, it’s not like any of us were able to figure out math…

I see a lot of articles along these lines on the intertubes anymore:

When are Americans going to wake up and realize that the 60s and 70s-era nostalgia for the “value” of a college degree is just that — nostalgia?

A degree does not guarantee you or your children a good job anymore. In fact, it doesn’t guarantee you a job: last year, 1 out of 2 bachelor’s degree holders under 25 were jobless or unemployed. Since the recession, we’ve lost millions of high- and mid-wage jobs — and replaced a handful of those with lower-wage ones. No wonder some young people are giving up entirely — a 16.8 percent unemployment rate plus soaring student loan debt is more than a little discouraging.

I really don’t have any idea about this. When I got to be a junior in high school, everyone was talking about college. Or it seemed that way. It was a forgone conclusion that college was a required next step before getting a meaningful job.

Strictly speaking, that thinking was incorrect. But it seems more incorrect than ever now, with the debt load that college imposes on a student, or their parents.

I often think about the plumber for my parents. He’s been taking care of plumbing needs for my parents for years now. He charges minimally $300-$400 for a visit. He typically makes 3 visits a day, 5 days a week. Do the math and that’s a pretty good living. Add in the fact that it’s there are almost certainly a lot of jobs that he charges way more than $400 and it’s likely a real good living.

It’s not just plumbers either. I know other trades people that also make a nice living for themselves.

It’ll be interesting to see where things like this end up by the time the boy and the lass have to worry about these kinds of choices.

I never made any comment about Oscar Pistorius during the Olympics because, well, I just didn’t feel it mattered that much. But I’ll do so now because of this. In short, Pistorius was beaten in competition by someone with better prosthetics, and he didn’t like it. (hattip: Althouse)

Pistorius should not have been allowed to compete in the Olympics, because it should be obvious to everyone that he doesn’t belong in competition with non-disabled athletes because there is no clarifying purpose to his competition. The whole point of competition is to clarify who is the best. When a variable like prosthetics are thrown into the equation, that distinction has been clouded because everyone will suspect the prosthetics of having given an unfair advantage.

It’s unfortunate that he doesn’t have lower legs, and it’s fantastic he’s been able to push the envelope as far as he has. But if he’d actually been able to medal, how could anyone escape the conclusion that he was there only because of his prosthetics? We already know he has a different set of prosthetics for competition versus his normal life- that right there should be all we need to know that his track performance isn’t entirely tied to his training.

That’s what the article demonstrates about competitors with prosthetics- they can be gamed by equipment selection.

What will the Olympics do when the next Pistorius comes along at 6′ 5″ with prosthetics that give him (or her) a shot at a medal? Because believe you me, the only reason for the lovefest with Pistorius at the Olympics was because he was a complete non-threat for a medal. As soon as that changes, you can bet your bottom dollar that the other athletes will complain, loudly and often. That’s the nature of the athletic competition at that level.

The Olympics, and other current world-level events, should craft a simple rule that prohibits competition with assistance of any sort. Life may not have been “fair” to Pistorius (whatever that means), but spreading that “fairness” to those without disabilities doesn’t improve competition. It complicates it to the point of making it meaningless.

Obviously, he was a bit before my time, but everyone knows him and his famous moment and line. It seems inappropriate to not mark his passing.

Here’s a nice writeup about him.

The USADA has stripped Armstrong of his titles and banned him for future cycling competition for good. Armstrong was up against a deadline and decided he would not fight the charges, though he hasn’t admitted guilt.

Count me as one who has believed for a long time that Armstrong is guilty of doping. That said, after reading though this over at Deadspin, I think this whole thing stinks to high heaven. You really do have to read through it to get a feel, but apparently the evidence was so flimsy that it the federal investigation was turned over to the USADA, whom apparently has lower hurdles. Generally, it comes down to who to believe, the cheaters who testified against him or the 7-time Tour winner. It certainly stretches the “presumption of innocence” concept.

On the one hand, I have to wonder why this was ever a federal matter to begin with. Doesn’t the federal government have more interesting things to do than investigate a cyclist? Isn’t that what the cycling bodies are for? And if the federal government couldn’t get the evidence together, why should we suddenly believe it just because some other government agency says it’s good enough?

As I said, I think he’s guilty of doping but the amount of effort to prove it seems like it’s gone beyond reasonable bounds. Sometimes, the best that can be done is to drop an issue, as there’s no way for either side to win. In this case, I think everyone knows Armstrong cheated and that he was exceptional at hiding it, so he’s lost on that front already. The government stands to lose as well, by chasing down a private citizen over what, from a government standpoint, should amount to piffle- a bike race.

Let’s just move on.

Here’s an interesting interview with a PR guy for professional athletes.

A sample:

Questioner: Is there a direct correlation between an athlete’s alma mater and the amount of illegitimate children they conceive?

AnonymousPRGuy: Of course. Damn the SEC

and:

Questioner: How has High school recruiting changed the way you do your job?

AnonymousPRGuy: None. I don’t go after college kids. Too many scumbags and sleazeballs to compete with. But I will say – high school sports are dirtier than pro sports, both from a money and a steroid-usage level.

I know there was a point where eggs were bad for you. But then, they were good for you again. Then, apparently earlier this week, they were, like, really bad for you. Like the equivalent of smoking cigarettes bad.

But it’s all good again because, eggs are good for you, once again. Details here, with the short version being that the study was not quite so scientific.

This is a huge relief because I’ve been eating a lot of eggs lately.

(hattip: Instapundit)

This muggy, sucky, weather can’t be gone quick enough. I’d hoped it would be gone after the weekend, but now it looks like another week of it is on the way.

I’m ready for the Fall and more pleasant air.

Apparently, nightlights may lead to depression:

A study from Ohio State University Medical Center found that hamsters with chronic exposure to dim light at night showed signs of depression within just a few weeks: reduced physical activity compared with hamsters living in normal light-dark conditions, as well as less interest in sugar water (a treat for the hamsters), greater signs of distress when placed in water, and changes in the brain’s hippocampus that are similar to brain changes seen in depressed people.

The kids both sleep with a nightlight and I often wondered if the lights mess with their circadian rhythm. I know that our bodies respond to light and dark, essentially our bodies shutdown in the dark and come back in the light. So having a nightlight could conceivably put us in some kind of not-quite-asleep state.

Then again, the study involved hamsters.