What do you think?
Rate this book
The Math(s) Fix: An Education Blueprint for the AI Age
Why are we all taught maths for years of our lives? Does it really empower everyone? Or fail most and disenfranchise many? Is it crucial for the AI age or an obsolete rite of passage?
The Math(s) Fix: An Education Blueprint for the AI Age is a groundbreaking book that exposes why maths education is in crisis worldwide and how the only fix is a fundamentally new mainstream subject. It argues that today's maths education is not working to elevate society with modern computation, data science and AI. Instead, students are subjugated to compete with what computers do best, and lose.
This is the only book to explain why being bad at maths may be as much the subject's fault as the learner's: how a stuck educational ecosystem has students, parents, teachers, schools, employers and policymakers running in the wrong direction to catch up with real-world requirements. But it goes further too, for the first time setting out a completely alternative vision for a core computational school subject to fix the problem and seed more general reformation of education for the AI age.
The Math(s) Fix: An Education Blueprint for the AI Age is a groundbreaking book that exposes why maths education is in crisis worldwide and how the only fix is a fundamentally new mainstream subject. It argues that today's maths education is not working to elevate society with modern computation, data science and AI. Instead, students are subjugated to compete with what computers do best, and lose.
This is the only book to explain why being bad at maths may be as much the subject's fault as the learner's: how a stuck educational ecosystem has students, parents, teachers, schools, employers and policymakers running in the wrong direction to catch up with real-world requirements. But it goes further too, for the first time setting out a completely alternative vision for a core computational school subject to fix the problem and seed more general reformation of education for the AI age.
320 pages, Paperback
First published June 10, 2020
94 people are currently reading
199 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 30 reviews
June 10, 2020
The Math(s) Fix wants you to believe that computers are coming for your math.
Scary, isn’t it? You should find it scary. Computers are way better at calculating than we are, yet we insist that “real math” means learning how to do long division by hand!
Wolfram Media kindly provided me an eARC of this book via NetGalley in exchange for this review. I was definitely very interested in this.
Some positionality, because even though this review is not about me, my perspective informed my reaction to the book. I am a math and English teacher. I have taught high school in the UK, and I currently teach high school to adult students in Ontario who need their diploma. I have 7 years of intimate experience with how the math curriculum and our wider system of educating and assessing students fails them. My current position allows me a lot of latitude that I wouldn’t necessarily have if I had to answer to parents, so I’ve had the enjoyment of doing things like going gradeless. A lot of what Wolfram suggests in The Math(s) Fix aligns with what I am already doing or planning to do in my classroom—however, as he points out, teachers alone cannot implement this fix. For this reason, I am a proponent of radical change to all levels of our education system.
But what if you’re not? What if you’re someone who doesn’t know much about our current education system? You’ve been out of school for years. Maybe you’re a parent, maybe not. Will this book convince you that Wolfram is right, that there is a problem and he has the right solution? I hope so. I really hope so.
Here’s what you need to know about this book.
First, it’s not a math book. It’s not an education book. It’s not a policy book. There are no advanced equations in here. You don’t need anything beyond your basic education to read this. Wolfram also doesn’t delve too deeply into theory of pedagogy here (he brushes up against it, at times, but nothing that’s too hard to follow). Similarly, Wolfram keeps the aim of the book general enough, in terms of policy changes, to apply to any jurisdiction and any scale—local, regional, national. If you’re wondering, “Does this book apply to me, to my children, to my school, to my board or authority?” the answer is “Yes.”
Second, this is a book about the necessity of unity mathematics as a school subject with computational thinking, but it is not about how we should replace educators with computers, and if that’s the reading you take away from this, go back and read it again. I’ll admit I was skeptical as all-get-out when I saw who had written this. Indubitably Conrad Wolfram is qualified to speak on this subject, but would The Math(s) Fix just be a thinly-veiled advertisement for Wolfram products in schools? It’s unavoidable that Wolfram’s companies would benefit from the shift he outlines here, and he acknowledges this. Yet the arguments he makes for the necessity of this shift are persuasive and have nothing to do with the Wolfram bottom line. Moreover, Wolfram recognizes—indeed, is intimately familiar with—the limitations of computer-based math. At one point he condemns people who interpret calls for CBM to mean “computer-based assessments.” He argues that computers can help with the organization and presentation of material, that computers can help with computation, but that at the end of the day, both qualitative and quantitative assessments are best left to human educators. This is true even for quantitative assessments, because it is hard to quantify problem-solving. Which brings me to …
Third, this book clearly defines what math is and is not—or rather, what math has become in schools versus what it should be. One of the first things I say to my new math class full of anxious adult learners traumatized by their years of failing to do math in high school? “This,” I hold up my phone calculator, “is not math.” I proceed to explain how math is not “doing calculations,” because we have computers for that. I explain to them that real math is about creatively solving problems. And then I try, in eight weeks, 110 hours, to somehow undo as much of the years and years of abuse they’ve endured at the hands of our industrialized education system.
Don’t get me wrong: Ontario probably has one of the best math curricula out there. Yet I still want to tear it up and start fresh, because I think our whole approach is fundamentally backwards and obsolete in the world of computation.
Wolfram is very passionate about this change. He explains why this is not something we teachers can tackle alone. We need politicians, parents, and basically everyone else on board too—after all, this affects everyone. The Math(s) Fix is impeccably organized in such a way to lead you through the problem, the solution, and counterarguments to those who think this is unnecessary or unworkable.
What’s missing from The Math(s) Fix is probably a patina of prosaic writing. Wolfram admits he has shortcomings in this area. The arguments are logical, and the rhetoric itself isn’t bad. Yet despite his frequent references to experiences with his daughter, not to mention his own days learning defunct subjects like Latin, Wolfram is not great with the emotional appeals. As a reader, I definitely value these elements of a manifesto. There are others who have made similar arguments in more accessible, emotionally-intelligent ways. And there will hopefully be more to come. Wolfram himself acknowledges that this book cannot be the beginning nor the end of this movement for a new “core computational subject,” as he calls it.
So here’s my evaluation and my recommendation: The Math(s) Fix should be read by anyone with a strong interest in education policy, reform, or decision-making at any level. If you are a school board trustee, an educator, a politician … this book is for you. If you are a member of the general public and you feel like you have the stamina to wade through a book that is not at all math-heavy but definitely logic-encumbered then I’d recommend this book to you as well. If you want a book that makes a plea based more on anecdotes or broader social data, then you won’t find that here (and that’s ok). The Math(s) Fix is an important, well-presented addition to what is one of the most crucial conversations of our age. We are either going to get ahead of the computational revolution or we are going to do our children a disservice.
Will you contribute to the fix?
Other good education reform reads: Hacking Assessment , For White Folks Who Teach in the Hood , The Curiosity of School
Hook me up with more education reform reads in the comments!
Scary, isn’t it? You should find it scary. Computers are way better at calculating than we are, yet we insist that “real math” means learning how to do long division by hand!
Wolfram Media kindly provided me an eARC of this book via NetGalley in exchange for this review. I was definitely very interested in this.
Some positionality, because even though this review is not about me, my perspective informed my reaction to the book. I am a math and English teacher. I have taught high school in the UK, and I currently teach high school to adult students in Ontario who need their diploma. I have 7 years of intimate experience with how the math curriculum and our wider system of educating and assessing students fails them. My current position allows me a lot of latitude that I wouldn’t necessarily have if I had to answer to parents, so I’ve had the enjoyment of doing things like going gradeless. A lot of what Wolfram suggests in The Math(s) Fix aligns with what I am already doing or planning to do in my classroom—however, as he points out, teachers alone cannot implement this fix. For this reason, I am a proponent of radical change to all levels of our education system.
But what if you’re not? What if you’re someone who doesn’t know much about our current education system? You’ve been out of school for years. Maybe you’re a parent, maybe not. Will this book convince you that Wolfram is right, that there is a problem and he has the right solution? I hope so. I really hope so.
Here’s what you need to know about this book.
First, it’s not a math book. It’s not an education book. It’s not a policy book. There are no advanced equations in here. You don’t need anything beyond your basic education to read this. Wolfram also doesn’t delve too deeply into theory of pedagogy here (he brushes up against it, at times, but nothing that’s too hard to follow). Similarly, Wolfram keeps the aim of the book general enough, in terms of policy changes, to apply to any jurisdiction and any scale—local, regional, national. If you’re wondering, “Does this book apply to me, to my children, to my school, to my board or authority?” the answer is “Yes.”
Second, this is a book about the necessity of unity mathematics as a school subject with computational thinking, but it is not about how we should replace educators with computers, and if that’s the reading you take away from this, go back and read it again. I’ll admit I was skeptical as all-get-out when I saw who had written this. Indubitably Conrad Wolfram is qualified to speak on this subject, but would The Math(s) Fix just be a thinly-veiled advertisement for Wolfram products in schools? It’s unavoidable that Wolfram’s companies would benefit from the shift he outlines here, and he acknowledges this. Yet the arguments he makes for the necessity of this shift are persuasive and have nothing to do with the Wolfram bottom line. Moreover, Wolfram recognizes—indeed, is intimately familiar with—the limitations of computer-based math. At one point he condemns people who interpret calls for CBM to mean “computer-based assessments.” He argues that computers can help with the organization and presentation of material, that computers can help with computation, but that at the end of the day, both qualitative and quantitative assessments are best left to human educators. This is true even for quantitative assessments, because it is hard to quantify problem-solving. Which brings me to …
Third, this book clearly defines what math is and is not—or rather, what math has become in schools versus what it should be. One of the first things I say to my new math class full of anxious adult learners traumatized by their years of failing to do math in high school? “This,” I hold up my phone calculator, “is not math.” I proceed to explain how math is not “doing calculations,” because we have computers for that. I explain to them that real math is about creatively solving problems. And then I try, in eight weeks, 110 hours, to somehow undo as much of the years and years of abuse they’ve endured at the hands of our industrialized education system.
Don’t get me wrong: Ontario probably has one of the best math curricula out there. Yet I still want to tear it up and start fresh, because I think our whole approach is fundamentally backwards and obsolete in the world of computation.
Wolfram is very passionate about this change. He explains why this is not something we teachers can tackle alone. We need politicians, parents, and basically everyone else on board too—after all, this affects everyone. The Math(s) Fix is impeccably organized in such a way to lead you through the problem, the solution, and counterarguments to those who think this is unnecessary or unworkable.
What’s missing from The Math(s) Fix is probably a patina of prosaic writing. Wolfram admits he has shortcomings in this area. The arguments are logical, and the rhetoric itself isn’t bad. Yet despite his frequent references to experiences with his daughter, not to mention his own days learning defunct subjects like Latin, Wolfram is not great with the emotional appeals. As a reader, I definitely value these elements of a manifesto. There are others who have made similar arguments in more accessible, emotionally-intelligent ways. And there will hopefully be more to come. Wolfram himself acknowledges that this book cannot be the beginning nor the end of this movement for a new “core computational subject,” as he calls it.
So here’s my evaluation and my recommendation: The Math(s) Fix should be read by anyone with a strong interest in education policy, reform, or decision-making at any level. If you are a school board trustee, an educator, a politician … this book is for you. If you are a member of the general public and you feel like you have the stamina to wade through a book that is not at all math-heavy but definitely logic-encumbered then I’d recommend this book to you as well. If you want a book that makes a plea based more on anecdotes or broader social data, then you won’t find that here (and that’s ok). The Math(s) Fix is an important, well-presented addition to what is one of the most crucial conversations of our age. We are either going to get ahead of the computational revolution or we are going to do our children a disservice.
Will you contribute to the fix?
Other good education reform reads: Hacking Assessment , For White Folks Who Teach in the Hood , The Curiosity of School
Hook me up with more education reform reads in the comments!
June 6, 2020
“How this plays out affects us, our children and society profoundly. Allow maths education to continue in its current mould, and we will increasingly remove most students’ opportunities for success in a wide range of fields: the AI age requires more, different, computer-augmented computational thinking for human empowerment, not more of the same maths.”
Wolfram’s central message is one of change and empowerment. He reaches out to anyone who cares about math education or education in general— not just teachers and policy makers, but parents, students, employers, and the educational community at large. This book is a powerful, passionate, and critical analysis of the current system and a vision of what math education should be. Central to math education is empowerment of the learner— and this consistent theme is present throughout Wolfram’s vision as he articulates the “fix” for math education.
Having not known much about Conrad Wolfram before reading this book (come to find out he is arguably one of the most important thinkers and innovators in mathematics), I was pleased to see how closely his reimagining of math education aligned with other critical thinkers in the field as well as research, evidence, and effective educational practices and theory. I found many similarities with Jo Boaler’s essential work in math education, as well as Alfie Kohn’s insights.
The fix that he proposes follows effective educational design (“backwards design”) where, after examining the purpose, he delves into outcomes or standards. Overall, the goals of transfer are apparent, as is the foundational belief that students need to be engaged in real-world math— this can happen through open-ended questioning and using real-world technology and not made-for-education technology. While only discussed briefly, it’s easy to see how this would result in much higher engagement from students— who in the current system question how math will help them in real life and rarely, if ever, find a satisfactory answer to that question as they stare down endless sets of decontextualized practice problems. He critically identifies, “This confusion between calculating as a means to a problem-solving end and as an end in itself is the central and fundamental misunderstanding at the heart of today’s math education crisis.”
Instead, Wolfram argues for a constructionist approach, even a project-based one, where there are “actual problems solved by real people in the real world with today’s technology”, and where computational literacy is not solely the purview of math teachers. However, he doesn't neglect the necessity of scaffolding, careful curation, and skill development that would give students the ability to do well in a problem-based setting. This is a critical point because many iterations of project-based learning fail students on this level.
Those looking to affect change in the way that Wolfram describes will find solidarity in his struggle to develop and refine his ideas. Because he and his team went through the process of designing a computational subject curriculum, they can sympathize with teachers and recognize the ins and outs of curriculum design and pedagogy. However, he makes several important points that should not go unnoticed— for example, that much of the uses of technology in the classroom at present are computer assisted and not computer based— a very important distinction that educators and curriculum developers need to examine closely.
Wolfram is particularly perceptive when it comes to assessment— the seemingly unavoidable determinant of modern education. “. . . [Yet] in the modern concept of exam legitimacy, questions set up for easy reproducibility of quantitative scoring trump questions that more accurately simulate real life, but are harder to mark . . . when in real life did you pick from 4 or 5 answers, one of which you knew “has to be” right?” Rather, Wolfram calls for more complex but better aligned assessment: “ . . . questions which need explanation and judgement calls can be much more representative and therefore legitimate and fairer tests of the student’s ability at the real-life subject, even if working out who did better and worse needs more complexity to achieve acceptable reproducibility.” This might make many in the education field uncomfortable with the task, but anyone who has suffered at the hands of standardized testing and recognizes the deleterious role that it plays will also recognize the validity of what he calls for.
I found Wolfram to be particularly insightful and even motivational in his discussion of the profound implications of a computational subject— or lack of one— for individuals and society. His powerful, passionate expression communicates the urgency of a computational subject in today’s “post-truth” society. In his view, “Those poorly educated in the rich computational thinking I talk about more easily succumb to that megaphone [of misinformation or mis-understanding]. They can be blinded by quantitative certainties or bamboozled by the aura of computational complexity. They can confuse abstract representation with the reality it was supposed to be representing, even when the two have diverged.” He even goes so far as to say that most people are “easily misled” and perhaps even “no longer believe any logic.” The critical implication of the failure of our calculation-based math education upon society is continuously, powerfully, and necessarily reiterated.
I do wish that Wolfram would have included a deeper discussion of how computation-based math improves equity for students, beyond just a selling point. He does point out that certain key aspects of math education, such as the qualitative experience of the concepts of cause versus correlation, usefulness and reliability of models and algorithms, or understanding bias, “cause a ‘computational divide’ between those who are empowered with computers and those who aren’t: having a computer and being able to work it doesn’t mean you can effectively apply computation or think computationally.” His comparison of the historical power of literacy to the power of computational literacy for the present and the future is important, however his discussion does not go much beyond these points. The bridge that computational thinking and education can provide for many students who are traditionally disadvantaged when it comes to calculation-based math is a critical— and one that Wolfram, while covering a great many other aspects— sort of skims over.
In the end, Wolfram’s carefully thought out arguments show incredible amounts of hard work and dedication. His rare vision and clarity for where math education needs to go in order to empower and engage students and prepare them for the kinds of logical and computational thinking that is so necessary, both now and in the future, is perceptive and compelling.
Note: the publisher provided an advanced copy for review but all opinions are my own.
Wolfram’s central message is one of change and empowerment. He reaches out to anyone who cares about math education or education in general— not just teachers and policy makers, but parents, students, employers, and the educational community at large. This book is a powerful, passionate, and critical analysis of the current system and a vision of what math education should be. Central to math education is empowerment of the learner— and this consistent theme is present throughout Wolfram’s vision as he articulates the “fix” for math education.
Having not known much about Conrad Wolfram before reading this book (come to find out he is arguably one of the most important thinkers and innovators in mathematics), I was pleased to see how closely his reimagining of math education aligned with other critical thinkers in the field as well as research, evidence, and effective educational practices and theory. I found many similarities with Jo Boaler’s essential work in math education, as well as Alfie Kohn’s insights.
The fix that he proposes follows effective educational design (“backwards design”) where, after examining the purpose, he delves into outcomes or standards. Overall, the goals of transfer are apparent, as is the foundational belief that students need to be engaged in real-world math— this can happen through open-ended questioning and using real-world technology and not made-for-education technology. While only discussed briefly, it’s easy to see how this would result in much higher engagement from students— who in the current system question how math will help them in real life and rarely, if ever, find a satisfactory answer to that question as they stare down endless sets of decontextualized practice problems. He critically identifies, “This confusion between calculating as a means to a problem-solving end and as an end in itself is the central and fundamental misunderstanding at the heart of today’s math education crisis.”
Instead, Wolfram argues for a constructionist approach, even a project-based one, where there are “actual problems solved by real people in the real world with today’s technology”, and where computational literacy is not solely the purview of math teachers. However, he doesn't neglect the necessity of scaffolding, careful curation, and skill development that would give students the ability to do well in a problem-based setting. This is a critical point because many iterations of project-based learning fail students on this level.
Those looking to affect change in the way that Wolfram describes will find solidarity in his struggle to develop and refine his ideas. Because he and his team went through the process of designing a computational subject curriculum, they can sympathize with teachers and recognize the ins and outs of curriculum design and pedagogy. However, he makes several important points that should not go unnoticed— for example, that much of the uses of technology in the classroom at present are computer assisted and not computer based— a very important distinction that educators and curriculum developers need to examine closely.
Wolfram is particularly perceptive when it comes to assessment— the seemingly unavoidable determinant of modern education. “. . . [Yet] in the modern concept of exam legitimacy, questions set up for easy reproducibility of quantitative scoring trump questions that more accurately simulate real life, but are harder to mark . . . when in real life did you pick from 4 or 5 answers, one of which you knew “has to be” right?” Rather, Wolfram calls for more complex but better aligned assessment: “ . . . questions which need explanation and judgement calls can be much more representative and therefore legitimate and fairer tests of the student’s ability at the real-life subject, even if working out who did better and worse needs more complexity to achieve acceptable reproducibility.” This might make many in the education field uncomfortable with the task, but anyone who has suffered at the hands of standardized testing and recognizes the deleterious role that it plays will also recognize the validity of what he calls for.
I found Wolfram to be particularly insightful and even motivational in his discussion of the profound implications of a computational subject— or lack of one— for individuals and society. His powerful, passionate expression communicates the urgency of a computational subject in today’s “post-truth” society. In his view, “Those poorly educated in the rich computational thinking I talk about more easily succumb to that megaphone [of misinformation or mis-understanding]. They can be blinded by quantitative certainties or bamboozled by the aura of computational complexity. They can confuse abstract representation with the reality it was supposed to be representing, even when the two have diverged.” He even goes so far as to say that most people are “easily misled” and perhaps even “no longer believe any logic.” The critical implication of the failure of our calculation-based math education upon society is continuously, powerfully, and necessarily reiterated.
I do wish that Wolfram would have included a deeper discussion of how computation-based math improves equity for students, beyond just a selling point. He does point out that certain key aspects of math education, such as the qualitative experience of the concepts of cause versus correlation, usefulness and reliability of models and algorithms, or understanding bias, “cause a ‘computational divide’ between those who are empowered with computers and those who aren’t: having a computer and being able to work it doesn’t mean you can effectively apply computation or think computationally.” His comparison of the historical power of literacy to the power of computational literacy for the present and the future is important, however his discussion does not go much beyond these points. The bridge that computational thinking and education can provide for many students who are traditionally disadvantaged when it comes to calculation-based math is a critical— and one that Wolfram, while covering a great many other aspects— sort of skims over.
In the end, Wolfram’s carefully thought out arguments show incredible amounts of hard work and dedication. His rare vision and clarity for where math education needs to go in order to empower and engage students and prepare them for the kinds of logical and computational thinking that is so necessary, both now and in the future, is perceptive and compelling.
Note: the publisher provided an advanced copy for review but all opinions are my own.
February 8, 2023
Food for Thought.
Alleen jammer van het houthakkersproza.
Alleen jammer van het houthakkersproza.
November 3, 2020
This blueprint is provided in triplicate; a good thing for blueprints, but it can detract from readability. The author is quite right (if repetitive) and provides some excellent suggestions for reaching educators, students, testing agencies and especially those who need the results - effective math problem solvers.
Existing curricula focus on (and test) calculation ability - the one thing that is least informative. Wolfram's strategy is to educate a 4 step process - define the the question, abstract the provided information (to better choose which tools can be used to find the answer) calculate the result, then interpret (and validate) the calculated answer. Assuming the problem is defined properly and the answer is interpreted correctly, the calculation is the obvious step. One that can be taken over by a computer with no fear. This process is used in the real world, why not teach it in schools?
I've been reading this for more than a month, which is longer than any other book in the last two years. Sometimes that was because I was thinking about the text and ideas, but more often it was a lack of compelling text. I appreciated the chapters that examine the objections and look at implementation details. The author's plan for getting governments, colleges and hiring companies on board looks pretty good. Unfortunately, as glimpsed in the intro, the text is repetitive at times. The same anecdote of Latin is mentioned four times - it's a good fit, but even after adding a reference to Yes, Minister, Latin gets a bit overwhelming.
The author is right in conclusion - not enough people are talking about this topic. A great book or article could be written with reference to this text, and I hope one is soon. I suspect the testing companies will be the hardest to get on board. I am grateful that Wolfram Publishing provided me with a copy of The Math(s) Fix to review - overall rating, 3 of 5 stars.
Existing curricula focus on (and test) calculation ability - the one thing that is least informative. Wolfram's strategy is to educate a 4 step process - define the the question, abstract the provided information (to better choose which tools can be used to find the answer) calculate the result, then interpret (and validate) the calculated answer. Assuming the problem is defined properly and the answer is interpreted correctly, the calculation is the obvious step. One that can be taken over by a computer with no fear. This process is used in the real world, why not teach it in schools?
I've been reading this for more than a month, which is longer than any other book in the last two years. Sometimes that was because I was thinking about the text and ideas, but more often it was a lack of compelling text. I appreciated the chapters that examine the objections and look at implementation details. The author's plan for getting governments, colleges and hiring companies on board looks pretty good. Unfortunately, as glimpsed in the intro, the text is repetitive at times. The same anecdote of Latin is mentioned four times - it's a good fit, but even after adding a reference to Yes, Minister, Latin gets a bit overwhelming.
The author is right in conclusion - not enough people are talking about this topic. A great book or article could be written with reference to this text, and I hope one is soon. I suspect the testing companies will be the hardest to get on board. I am grateful that Wolfram Publishing provided me with a copy of The Math(s) Fix to review - overall rating, 3 of 5 stars.
July 18, 2020
Any parent of a school-age child -- indeed, anyone who's ever been to school -- will be familiar with the perennial refrain of a young person confronted with the need to do complex mathematical calculations by hand: "But I'm never going to use this in the real world!"
And they are right. But we've assumed that there is some virtue in forcing children to work out complex calculations and "show your workings" even though we have powerful computers to do this work for us. Most of us in our daily lives can confirm that we never have needed to resort to calculus to help us through the day or in our careers. But of course the work we do relies on these calculations more than ever -- to buy and sell shares, to determine a pricing model, to build an extension onto our home -- whatever it may be.
With decades of experience at Wolfram Research, few are as well-placed as Conrad Wolfram to understand the applications of mathematics in our world today and the potential for its future application. And he agrees with those who question the rote requirements of traditional maths education in this new age of computers.
The Maths Fix lays out an alternative vision -- one that focuses on gaining proficiency in using the tools of calculation rather than being human calculators ourselves. It articulates what we've all been saying -- let machines do the calculating faster and more efficiently than humans can, and then focus our creative human minds on applying the results.
This is not a how-to book with advice that parents can apply immediately to their children's lives. But it is an important book that advances the conversations that educators and policy-makers need to have in order to design a maths curriculum that's relevant to the 21st century.
Education needs to change to prepare our society for a world that relies on computers and artificial intelligence to do ever-more-complex calculating. This book argues that we should prepare our children for that world, instead of the 20th-century world of pencil and paper.
(Note: I was provided with a free advance copy of this book in exchange for my unbiased review.)
And they are right. But we've assumed that there is some virtue in forcing children to work out complex calculations and "show your workings" even though we have powerful computers to do this work for us. Most of us in our daily lives can confirm that we never have needed to resort to calculus to help us through the day or in our careers. But of course the work we do relies on these calculations more than ever -- to buy and sell shares, to determine a pricing model, to build an extension onto our home -- whatever it may be.
With decades of experience at Wolfram Research, few are as well-placed as Conrad Wolfram to understand the applications of mathematics in our world today and the potential for its future application. And he agrees with those who question the rote requirements of traditional maths education in this new age of computers.
The Maths Fix lays out an alternative vision -- one that focuses on gaining proficiency in using the tools of calculation rather than being human calculators ourselves. It articulates what we've all been saying -- let machines do the calculating faster and more efficiently than humans can, and then focus our creative human minds on applying the results.
This is not a how-to book with advice that parents can apply immediately to their children's lives. But it is an important book that advances the conversations that educators and policy-makers need to have in order to design a maths curriculum that's relevant to the 21st century.
Education needs to change to prepare our society for a world that relies on computers and artificial intelligence to do ever-more-complex calculating. This book argues that we should prepare our children for that world, instead of the 20th-century world of pencil and paper.
(Note: I was provided with a free advance copy of this book in exchange for my unbiased review.)
December 16, 2021
Wolfram addresses an important question. I'm glad he wrote this book, and I'm glad I read it. However, it is deeply and irretrievably flawed. (I upped what would have been a rating of 2* to 3* solely because of the overwhelming importance of the topic under discussion.)
Disclaimer: I am not familiar enough with maths education in the UK to know for sure if my evaluation of the status quo is valid there. However, the book does claim that the Computation-Based Math (CBM) espoused would be applicable in the US. Therefore, this review is framed from a US point of view.
Despite the veneer of being framed for the "AI Age", there's actually very little in this book that is new. He speaks of emphasizing "understanding" over repetitive computation. That's the thinking that gave us "New Math" in the 1970s. If you replace all references to computers with references to calculators, you get the math curriculum reform of the 1980s. He speaks about the constructivist philosophy of learning and creating "real-world problems" for authentic learning. That's the thinking underlying what became known as "NCTM Math" in the 1990s.
Wolfram has a MS degree in mathematics and physics from Cambridge. His mother was a don at Oxford. His father was a CEO. His brother got a PhD in theoretical physics from CalTech at 20. His daughter was over-analyzing standardized test questions at age 5. None of this is intended to be an ad hominem attack, just to illustrate the point of view that he brings to the question. Wolfram has never discussed the ideas in this book with an average (let alone a *gasp* below-average) math student. He refers to the average Mathematica user various times throughout the book. The CBM curriculum he proposes would probably be an awesome idea for the student who is going to become a Mathematica user, but it would be an unmitigated disaster for everybody else, which we have to understand is 90%+ of the student population.
Wolfram waxes rhapsodic about how computing has made researchers much better at their jobs in a wide variety of fields beyond the traditional fields that use math. This is quite true, but it is the wrong model for illuminating the likely results of widespread adoption of his proposed curriculum. A better model is to consider what has happened to the average fast-food cashier, who can no longer make change without the cash register computing it.
I teach a mathematical modeling course which is almost exactly what this book espouses. It's a great course. The students get a lot out of it. I love teaching it. But this course is for students who are already top problem solvers. It makes no sense to teach this material to the general population. If students can't solve a simple problem involving a trivial application of quadratic functions, what sense does it make to expose them to complex “real-world problems" involving complex computation, statistics, programming and data science? The fact that the problem is interesting isn't going to turn them into competent problem solvers. At one point Wolfram asks why not teach integrals to 10-year olds. Because most 10-year olds would have no concept of what an integral would be used for. While it's not intrinsically a complicated concept, they would NOT be able to do any useful problem-solving with it simply because they'd been exposed to it. This is only one example of the impractical ideas argued for throughout the book.
Student exposure to CBM would of necessity be extremely superficial and therefore completely inapplicable. Transforming math education as Wolfram espouses is a sure-fire way to break up our population into educational haves and have-nots. I 100% support his underlying goal of using the math curriculum to make students effective math problem solvers, but his proposal will aggravate rather than improve the severe lack of math problem solving skills.
Disclaimer: I am not familiar enough with maths education in the UK to know for sure if my evaluation of the status quo is valid there. However, the book does claim that the Computation-Based Math (CBM) espoused would be applicable in the US. Therefore, this review is framed from a US point of view.
Despite the veneer of being framed for the "AI Age", there's actually very little in this book that is new. He speaks of emphasizing "understanding" over repetitive computation. That's the thinking that gave us "New Math" in the 1970s. If you replace all references to computers with references to calculators, you get the math curriculum reform of the 1980s. He speaks about the constructivist philosophy of learning and creating "real-world problems" for authentic learning. That's the thinking underlying what became known as "NCTM Math" in the 1990s.
Wolfram has a MS degree in mathematics and physics from Cambridge. His mother was a don at Oxford. His father was a CEO. His brother got a PhD in theoretical physics from CalTech at 20. His daughter was over-analyzing standardized test questions at age 5. None of this is intended to be an ad hominem attack, just to illustrate the point of view that he brings to the question. Wolfram has never discussed the ideas in this book with an average (let alone a *gasp* below-average) math student. He refers to the average Mathematica user various times throughout the book. The CBM curriculum he proposes would probably be an awesome idea for the student who is going to become a Mathematica user, but it would be an unmitigated disaster for everybody else, which we have to understand is 90%+ of the student population.
Wolfram waxes rhapsodic about how computing has made researchers much better at their jobs in a wide variety of fields beyond the traditional fields that use math. This is quite true, but it is the wrong model for illuminating the likely results of widespread adoption of his proposed curriculum. A better model is to consider what has happened to the average fast-food cashier, who can no longer make change without the cash register computing it.
I teach a mathematical modeling course which is almost exactly what this book espouses. It's a great course. The students get a lot out of it. I love teaching it. But this course is for students who are already top problem solvers. It makes no sense to teach this material to the general population. If students can't solve a simple problem involving a trivial application of quadratic functions, what sense does it make to expose them to complex “real-world problems" involving complex computation, statistics, programming and data science? The fact that the problem is interesting isn't going to turn them into competent problem solvers. At one point Wolfram asks why not teach integrals to 10-year olds. Because most 10-year olds would have no concept of what an integral would be used for. While it's not intrinsically a complicated concept, they would NOT be able to do any useful problem-solving with it simply because they'd been exposed to it. This is only one example of the impractical ideas argued for throughout the book.
Student exposure to CBM would of necessity be extremely superficial and therefore completely inapplicable. Transforming math education as Wolfram espouses is a sure-fire way to break up our population into educational haves and have-nots. I 100% support his underlying goal of using the math curriculum to make students effective math problem solvers, but his proposal will aggravate rather than improve the severe lack of math problem solving skills.
May 17, 2020
Instead of trying to put a positive spin on math this book goes on to explain the history of math and challenges many have it and bashing the subject. Basic math is a must for anyone to exist on their own as an adult. The idea of integrating math as subject on to computers for teaching isn't a horrible idea but it was a huge focus of the book. I do like the idea of people of all ages learning coding because you learn other things.
This book was not for me and definitely didn't put a positive spotlight on the subject of math. Just a turn off and might add to be people's anxiety over the subject. Yes, it's well written and you can tell the author has a passion for the subject; but for people that haven't taken advanced math, some of this was like reading Chinese.
Looking forward to reading "Math Without Numbers." Sounds more interesting than this; just my opinion.
Thanks to Netgalley, the author and Wolfram Media for an ARC in exchange for an honest review.
Available: 6/10/20
This book was not for me and definitely didn't put a positive spotlight on the subject of math. Just a turn off and might add to be people's anxiety over the subject. Yes, it's well written and you can tell the author has a passion for the subject; but for people that haven't taken advanced math, some of this was like reading Chinese.
Looking forward to reading "Math Without Numbers." Sounds more interesting than this; just my opinion.
Thanks to Netgalley, the author and Wolfram Media for an ARC in exchange for an honest review.
Available: 6/10/20
January 2, 2021
Anyone involved in education needs to take a look at this book, but especially policymakers, state departments of education, and school district administration. I arrived at this book with a background of over 10 years teaching elementary public school. I am now a homeschool mom and a bit of an “educational philosophy” junkie. Recently, I read “What School Could Be” by Dintersmith (and viewed the wonderful related documentary - “Most Likely to Succeed”), which introduced the idea that math in its current state isn’t relevant to our lives and leaves students feeling bored, disengaged, and adults feeling glad to be done with it.
Conrad Wolfram’s book “The Maths Fix” elaborates on this dilemma and proposes solutions for immediate action so no more generations of children are taught “the history of calculating,” as he calls the current traditional math instruction. Wolfram states his case - no math is taught anywhere that assumes computers exist. Instead, children are taught hand calculations and algorithms (like solving long division) that are obsolete when computers can solve these problems in seconds. Instead, he argues, we need to teach a new math curriculum altogether - he calls it “computational based thinking” or a “renewed mainstream computational subject” (he argues calling it “maths” will confuse too many people since “maths” has too many preconceived associations and we need a brand new subject, really). Wolfram’s “computational subject” moves AWAY from hand calculating and TOWARD the important skills of 1) defining a problem, 2) abstracting a problem in order to enter it into the computer, 3) letting the computer run the calculations and 4) interpreting the results.
Practically, in the classroom, the subject looks LESS like tool-centric traditional maths (prime numbers, solving simultaneous equations) and MORE like problem-centric instruction (How fast can I cycle a race? How tall is the tallest person in my country? Should I insure my laptop?) that call upon math skills and computer calculations. He and his team have had a crack at designing math modules of instruction similar to the latter, which they are currently testing in Estonia. (See computerbasedmath.org)
He systematically and thoroughly debunks the arguments for traditional math instruction, and also indicates how slow change can be - even in conferences with his own colleagues, the conversation drifts back every 20 minutes or so to how to get computers to do better traditional multiple choice assessments or help children practice their hand calculations better. This is disheartening, and I saw this with my own eyes as an educator.
I completely agree with the author Conrad Wolfram’s assertions that the traditional math course of study needs a complete overhaul. My oldest son is now at the age (4th grade) where he is learning math (like long division by hand) that has little applicability in the real world. I wonder how much longer he’ll feel engaged by math - I hope that all-too-familiar-feeling of just “jumping through hoops” and “going through the motions to get to the next thing” does not overtake him. As a homeschooler, I am lucky I have a little bit of control and hope to get my hands on Wolfram’s “modules” if possible.
I gave the book 4 stars out of 5 because it was a bit long-winded and the arguments made were a bit repetitive, though effective. A few more looks by a good editor could have cut it down a little.
I was provided a copy of the book by the publisher in exchange for my honest review.
Conrad Wolfram’s book “The Maths Fix” elaborates on this dilemma and proposes solutions for immediate action so no more generations of children are taught “the history of calculating,” as he calls the current traditional math instruction. Wolfram states his case - no math is taught anywhere that assumes computers exist. Instead, children are taught hand calculations and algorithms (like solving long division) that are obsolete when computers can solve these problems in seconds. Instead, he argues, we need to teach a new math curriculum altogether - he calls it “computational based thinking” or a “renewed mainstream computational subject” (he argues calling it “maths” will confuse too many people since “maths” has too many preconceived associations and we need a brand new subject, really). Wolfram’s “computational subject” moves AWAY from hand calculating and TOWARD the important skills of 1) defining a problem, 2) abstracting a problem in order to enter it into the computer, 3) letting the computer run the calculations and 4) interpreting the results.
Practically, in the classroom, the subject looks LESS like tool-centric traditional maths (prime numbers, solving simultaneous equations) and MORE like problem-centric instruction (How fast can I cycle a race? How tall is the tallest person in my country? Should I insure my laptop?) that call upon math skills and computer calculations. He and his team have had a crack at designing math modules of instruction similar to the latter, which they are currently testing in Estonia. (See computerbasedmath.org)
He systematically and thoroughly debunks the arguments for traditional math instruction, and also indicates how slow change can be - even in conferences with his own colleagues, the conversation drifts back every 20 minutes or so to how to get computers to do better traditional multiple choice assessments or help children practice their hand calculations better. This is disheartening, and I saw this with my own eyes as an educator.
I completely agree with the author Conrad Wolfram’s assertions that the traditional math course of study needs a complete overhaul. My oldest son is now at the age (4th grade) where he is learning math (like long division by hand) that has little applicability in the real world. I wonder how much longer he’ll feel engaged by math - I hope that all-too-familiar-feeling of just “jumping through hoops” and “going through the motions to get to the next thing” does not overtake him. As a homeschooler, I am lucky I have a little bit of control and hope to get my hands on Wolfram’s “modules” if possible.
I gave the book 4 stars out of 5 because it was a bit long-winded and the arguments made were a bit repetitive, though effective. A few more looks by a good editor could have cut it down a little.
I was provided a copy of the book by the publisher in exchange for my honest review.
June 10, 2020
With the generosity of the author and Wolfram Institute, I was offered an advanced reading copy in return for an honest review. Below are my first impressions on the 10% I've managed to read so far as of its release date.
This topic is hugely important and, as I'm discovering, part of a larger movement to reform education worldwide; it found me as a result of my previously reading Ted Dintersmith's "What School Could Be." The book's main premise and raison d'etre is that school math has grown to be vastly different from real life math and the chasm accelerates exponentially due to a glaring factor obvious to everyone except (mostly tech illiterate) government officials: the presence and prevalence of computers. I'm paraphrasing. Conrad makes his arguments much more elegantly.
It is clear even from the introductory chapters that he will be quite meticulous. Although Wolfram implicitly makes some of the same arguments as Dintersmith, the books couldn't read more differently. Unlike Dintersmith's water hose of a book, it sits at the other extreme: particulate and focused. Also very unlike it, the British phrasology and the author's admitted lack of appreciation for the beauty of writing in general made it clunky reading for me. I had to re-read sentences and paragraphs and fill in my own commas and comments to fully digest it. That said, I wouldn't discourage people from reading it. With enough time and concentration - admittedly, not light weekend reading for the layperson - it builds its arguments thoroughly and carefully. For instance, enduring through an entire chapter results in defining the correct question of "why" we need to study math universally. But it's a worthwhile enterprise, because getting the "why" wrong is what got us into a pickle to begin with and also part of the reason Latin has gone extinct as a subject.
This topic, in my opinion, should interest everybody. Aside from the rare math enthusiast or math professional, honestly, who liked math? Who wants math to stay as it is, stuck in the 19th century?
We've all studied math(s). Even if you are not in education (the folks this book should interest the most, though even many amongst them oppose reform), the computational subject will touch you. As Wolfram scarily spells out for those not already aware, people not competent in computational literacy will become increasingly disenfranchised, much the same as illiterate people in the centuries prior to the industrial revolution. You don't have to be a teacher, or even a parent (I'm neither) to care about this. It affects your career. Jobs are disappearing as AI makes us obsolete in many areas. Wolfram makes it clear: our math education shouldn't prepare us to compete with AI in low-level skills where we'll lose. It should be completely overhauled to prepare us to think more broadly, analytically and logically - in other words, to leverage AI rather than wait for it to oust and outthink us.
I'm both apprehensive and excited to finish this book. Non-fiction isn't my thing - I struggle somewhat - but the real world applicability has me seduced! People like Wolfram are changing the world. The research is powerful, the debate is hot, the need to change urgent. If we aren't interested in education reform and a better way to math by now, we're already late.
This topic is hugely important and, as I'm discovering, part of a larger movement to reform education worldwide; it found me as a result of my previously reading Ted Dintersmith's "What School Could Be." The book's main premise and raison d'etre is that school math has grown to be vastly different from real life math and the chasm accelerates exponentially due to a glaring factor obvious to everyone except (mostly tech illiterate) government officials: the presence and prevalence of computers. I'm paraphrasing. Conrad makes his arguments much more elegantly.
It is clear even from the introductory chapters that he will be quite meticulous. Although Wolfram implicitly makes some of the same arguments as Dintersmith, the books couldn't read more differently. Unlike Dintersmith's water hose of a book, it sits at the other extreme: particulate and focused. Also very unlike it, the British phrasology and the author's admitted lack of appreciation for the beauty of writing in general made it clunky reading for me. I had to re-read sentences and paragraphs and fill in my own commas and comments to fully digest it. That said, I wouldn't discourage people from reading it. With enough time and concentration - admittedly, not light weekend reading for the layperson - it builds its arguments thoroughly and carefully. For instance, enduring through an entire chapter results in defining the correct question of "why" we need to study math universally. But it's a worthwhile enterprise, because getting the "why" wrong is what got us into a pickle to begin with and also part of the reason Latin has gone extinct as a subject.
This topic, in my opinion, should interest everybody. Aside from the rare math enthusiast or math professional, honestly, who liked math? Who wants math to stay as it is, stuck in the 19th century?
We've all studied math(s). Even if you are not in education (the folks this book should interest the most, though even many amongst them oppose reform), the computational subject will touch you. As Wolfram scarily spells out for those not already aware, people not competent in computational literacy will become increasingly disenfranchised, much the same as illiterate people in the centuries prior to the industrial revolution. You don't have to be a teacher, or even a parent (I'm neither) to care about this. It affects your career. Jobs are disappearing as AI makes us obsolete in many areas. Wolfram makes it clear: our math education shouldn't prepare us to compete with AI in low-level skills where we'll lose. It should be completely overhauled to prepare us to think more broadly, analytically and logically - in other words, to leverage AI rather than wait for it to oust and outthink us.
I'm both apprehensive and excited to finish this book. Non-fiction isn't my thing - I struggle somewhat - but the real world applicability has me seduced! People like Wolfram are changing the world. The research is powerful, the debate is hot, the need to change urgent. If we aren't interested in education reform and a better way to math by now, we're already late.
June 13, 2020
I was delighted to be offered to provide a review for this book. Thanks Wolfram and team for considering me.
The core of this book talks about a radical change towards teaching mathematics right from the lowest grade. I could relate to my way of learning math during my school days - the faster you could calculate, the better the math student you were. And the author argues against this throughout the book - learn the concepts first, leave the computation to a machine.
"Math in schools has become highly siloed and above basic primary level, largely unused across other subjects" - very true. The process employed was - definition, procedure and problems to solve. I also recall groaning about working purely mechanically on Fourier Analysis during my engineering course. Worfram asserts that missing the application part will only cause more trouble for us going forward and hence urges to restructure the curriculum.
Though there are other books on this topic, I compliment the author for the extensive research that has been performed to convey his ideas across. The Define-Abstract-Compute-Interpret guideline can very well be applied to any other field, not just to education, let apart mathematics. I found the example on being able to detect leukemia based on the imaging of blood to be explained very creatively.
The categorization of mathematics into 5 core areas was another innovative approach discussed in the book. The author presses upon introducing concepts like Data Science, Calculus much earlier in the curriculum and opines this curriculum promotes solving real-world problems. The analogy on how you can drive a car without having knowing the internals of the machinery is very apt and convincing.
Now for the "downs".
One of my main concerns of this approach is of children having to much 'screen-time'. The author does address them while breaking it into multiple categories, but failed convincing me on how the benefits would outweigh or even just break-even with the negative impact.
I found the language used in the book quite abstruse, forcing me to read those lengthy sentences multiple times to understand their intent. The missing/misplaced punctuation confused me of the author was trying to say. Though the "Math" of this book is excellent, I feel there's room for improvement on the "English" part. Having said that, the author acknowledges this was not his forte.
The above are definitely not the reasons for not picking up this book. The change being prescribed in this book is mammoth, but I'm strongly inclined towards the author's thought process that this is absolutely required for us. It takes time for us to change, but we sure have to start that now. "Good ideas need good luck" - or so I've heard. Wishing the best to that thought process.
The core of this book talks about a radical change towards teaching mathematics right from the lowest grade. I could relate to my way of learning math during my school days - the faster you could calculate, the better the math student you were. And the author argues against this throughout the book - learn the concepts first, leave the computation to a machine.
"Math in schools has become highly siloed and above basic primary level, largely unused across other subjects" - very true. The process employed was - definition, procedure and problems to solve. I also recall groaning about working purely mechanically on Fourier Analysis during my engineering course. Worfram asserts that missing the application part will only cause more trouble for us going forward and hence urges to restructure the curriculum.
Though there are other books on this topic, I compliment the author for the extensive research that has been performed to convey his ideas across. The Define-Abstract-Compute-Interpret guideline can very well be applied to any other field, not just to education, let apart mathematics. I found the example on being able to detect leukemia based on the imaging of blood to be explained very creatively.
The categorization of mathematics into 5 core areas was another innovative approach discussed in the book. The author presses upon introducing concepts like Data Science, Calculus much earlier in the curriculum and opines this curriculum promotes solving real-world problems. The analogy on how you can drive a car without having knowing the internals of the machinery is very apt and convincing.
Now for the "downs".
One of my main concerns of this approach is of children having to much 'screen-time'. The author does address them while breaking it into multiple categories, but failed convincing me on how the benefits would outweigh or even just break-even with the negative impact.
I found the language used in the book quite abstruse, forcing me to read those lengthy sentences multiple times to understand their intent. The missing/misplaced punctuation confused me of the author was trying to say. Though the "Math" of this book is excellent, I feel there's room for improvement on the "English" part. Having said that, the author acknowledges this was not his forte.
The above are definitely not the reasons for not picking up this book. The change being prescribed in this book is mammoth, but I'm strongly inclined towards the author's thought process that this is absolutely required for us. It takes time for us to change, but we sure have to start that now. "Good ideas need good luck" - or so I've heard. Wishing the best to that thought process.
June 19, 2020
Thanks to the advance in computers, nowadays Maths are everywhere, between data science, machine learning, engineering, ... On the other hand, Maths are still taught in an dry and old fashioned way with an emphasis on hand computation as if computers didn't exist, and the essence of maths is lost to useless stuff like manually solving quadratic equations. Maths should be: 1-defining a problem, 2- abstract it in a computable form, 3- compute it, 4- interpret results. Step 3 is in practice always automated nowadays, and so modern maths education should reflect this fact and focus on the 3 other steps. This is the core of the book.
The Math(s) fix does a good job at presenting the problem of modern (=outdated) maths education, placing it in the context of modern maths usage, and presenting a modernised, refreshed curriculum that would suit students and future workers better. The different modules of CBM (Computer Based Maths) defined by Wolfram and available on his website are very convincing and it seems that the methodology has been thought out carefully.
The book however suffers from a few flaws. While very interested in the content, being myself a "maths scientist", I found the writing style excessively hard to read, with an unnatural way of phrasing things as to make things more complicated.
The main problem of the book is its rambling. What would make a very interesting essay is developed or rather stretched into a full book. The progress seems logical (e.g three main parts, the problem - the fix - enacting change), but we're stuck in a fractal: each chapter contains the whole book again. Examples in case: Latin, mentioned 3 or 4 times in book. Yes it's a good example of an old-fashioned class that had no more reason to be yet was arbitrarily maintained in the curriculum until the 80s or so (in the UK); mentioning it once in part one, then again in part 2, then again in part 3, just shows that the book is not well organised or lacks editing. Some other examples like his daughter Sofia failing at a maths question because she thinks too broadly, so her teacher thinks she's bad at Maths, thankfully daddy Wolfram diagnosed the problem, again in part 1 and in part 3. These anecdotes can be interesting and funny if put in the right place, but here we feel like reading the same stuff over and over again.
Overall a good core idea, that I hope I won't forget when my son starts going to school, in a pretty bad packaging - ironically, for a book presenting a clear and well defined curriculum - a disorganised and repetitive assemblage of anecdotes and ramblings that made this reading a bit of a bore. I reckon that watching his TED talk would be a quicker and more pleasant way to get his idea (though I've not watched yet).
The Math(s) fix does a good job at presenting the problem of modern (=outdated) maths education, placing it in the context of modern maths usage, and presenting a modernised, refreshed curriculum that would suit students and future workers better. The different modules of CBM (Computer Based Maths) defined by Wolfram and available on his website are very convincing and it seems that the methodology has been thought out carefully.
The book however suffers from a few flaws. While very interested in the content, being myself a "maths scientist", I found the writing style excessively hard to read, with an unnatural way of phrasing things as to make things more complicated.
The main problem of the book is its rambling. What would make a very interesting essay is developed or rather stretched into a full book. The progress seems logical (e.g three main parts, the problem - the fix - enacting change), but we're stuck in a fractal: each chapter contains the whole book again. Examples in case: Latin, mentioned 3 or 4 times in book. Yes it's a good example of an old-fashioned class that had no more reason to be yet was arbitrarily maintained in the curriculum until the 80s or so (in the UK); mentioning it once in part one, then again in part 2, then again in part 3, just shows that the book is not well organised or lacks editing. Some other examples like his daughter Sofia failing at a maths question because she thinks too broadly, so her teacher thinks she's bad at Maths, thankfully daddy Wolfram diagnosed the problem, again in part 1 and in part 3. These anecdotes can be interesting and funny if put in the right place, but here we feel like reading the same stuff over and over again.
Overall a good core idea, that I hope I won't forget when my son starts going to school, in a pretty bad packaging - ironically, for a book presenting a clear and well defined curriculum - a disorganised and repetitive assemblage of anecdotes and ramblings that made this reading a bit of a bore. I reckon that watching his TED talk would be a quicker and more pleasant way to get his idea (though I've not watched yet).
June 19, 2020
I received an ARC from the publisher.
I think that my personal circumstances are relevant to my reaction to this book. I've always been a "right brained" person, not especially good at math. I could muddle through just with my good student skills until trig, when I had a teacher who I never connected with. She presumably was an accomplished mathmatician, but a poor teacher. It was the first C of my academic career and the last math class I ever took. (Sort of. I took some math methodology classes in college.) Other students who were more math nerds (I say that lovingly, as my own brother also took her class and succeeded) easily learned the concepts she taught. Later as a teacher, I often thought I could have done a better job of teaching math than my trig teacher, not that I understood math better, but I understood how non-math people struggle and would teach from that perspective, rather than expect my passion for the subject to somehow rub off and instill math understanding into students' brains. For people like me, she might as well have been teaching in a foreign language, and an extra problem set wouldn't help me understand it any better.
Wolfram, the author of this book, is firmly entrenched as a left brained math nerd, no doubt about that. But he also recognizes that not everyone processes math or even cares about math like he does and is looking for a way to make it more accessible to everyone. He expands what people historically defined as math instruction as pretty much limited to calculating, to include a process of computational thinking and problem solving and by the way why not let computers do the calculating since that's how it is in real life anyway. His theory makes it possible for non-math right brained thinkers like me to consider the value of learning more math.
He included a lot of personal experiences and stories, which helped illustrate his ideas, but I still often felt like I didn't understand his explanations. He gets very detailed and technical and I would tend to lose the thread. But his conclusions definitely align with what I have seen with students in my own classroom, that too much emphasis is put on rote memorization and drill and kill, instead of deeper problem solving and creativity. (Us multiple subj cred teachers know this is not limited to just math.) We've turned math into a boring, hated subject when it has so much more potential and application.
Wolfram proposes redefining and possibly even renaming math curriculum to make it worthy of its place as a core required subject and applicable to the workforce expectations it is supposed to be preparing students for. The book still left me fuzzy on how that will happen, but confident it is in good hands.
I think that my personal circumstances are relevant to my reaction to this book. I've always been a "right brained" person, not especially good at math. I could muddle through just with my good student skills until trig, when I had a teacher who I never connected with. She presumably was an accomplished mathmatician, but a poor teacher. It was the first C of my academic career and the last math class I ever took. (Sort of. I took some math methodology classes in college.) Other students who were more math nerds (I say that lovingly, as my own brother also took her class and succeeded) easily learned the concepts she taught. Later as a teacher, I often thought I could have done a better job of teaching math than my trig teacher, not that I understood math better, but I understood how non-math people struggle and would teach from that perspective, rather than expect my passion for the subject to somehow rub off and instill math understanding into students' brains. For people like me, she might as well have been teaching in a foreign language, and an extra problem set wouldn't help me understand it any better.
Wolfram, the author of this book, is firmly entrenched as a left brained math nerd, no doubt about that. But he also recognizes that not everyone processes math or even cares about math like he does and is looking for a way to make it more accessible to everyone. He expands what people historically defined as math instruction as pretty much limited to calculating, to include a process of computational thinking and problem solving and by the way why not let computers do the calculating since that's how it is in real life anyway. His theory makes it possible for non-math right brained thinkers like me to consider the value of learning more math.
He included a lot of personal experiences and stories, which helped illustrate his ideas, but I still often felt like I didn't understand his explanations. He gets very detailed and technical and I would tend to lose the thread. But his conclusions definitely align with what I have seen with students in my own classroom, that too much emphasis is put on rote memorization and drill and kill, instead of deeper problem solving and creativity. (Us multiple subj cred teachers know this is not limited to just math.) We've turned math into a boring, hated subject when it has so much more potential and application.
Wolfram proposes redefining and possibly even renaming math curriculum to make it worthy of its place as a core required subject and applicable to the workforce expectations it is supposed to be preparing students for. The book still left me fuzzy on how that will happen, but confident it is in good hands.
September 12, 2020
As an armchair mathematician, I was intrigued by Mr. Wolfram's premise - students compute in school, computers compute in the real world, and this dissonance is creating a tremendous disconnect between what we're doing and what is needed. After laying the groundwork in the first few chapters, including taking a critical look at why we teach math as we do, what the shortcomings of this antiquated method of teaching are, and why we should care, he goes on to spell out in exquisite detail how to fix the problem.
I've always felt that there was something lacking in math education in general - with three teens having just completed high school, I am acutely aware of the frustrations they all felt at various levels of math instruction. What Mr. Wolfram does so beautifully in The Math(s) Fix: An Education Blueprint for the AI Age is to succinctly analyze each failing of the current math curricula, then propose common sense solutions to rectifying the situation.
The book itself is engrossing - Mr. Wolfram's organizational abilities really shines through his prose as he presents each argument and the accompanying solution. Even in some of the more technically written sections, I was able to easily follow his reasoning behind what the problems are as well as the solution(s) he proposes to fix them
Much to his credit, Mr. Wolfram peppers just the right amount of real-world examples to clarify his points, helping to make more sense of what the issues actually are while making his ideas that much more accessible to the layman. There were a number of "light bulb over the head" moments throughout the book, from the realization that we mandate the computational skills while all-but-ignoring the equally important interpretive skills required to actually make sense of the results, to using the example of literacy to drive home the point of how important these interpretive skills will become in the future as we advance farther and farther into this fourth industrial revolution (the computer age, or the AI age).
All in all, I highly recommended this book to anyone with any sort of vested interest in computational mathematics, which includes everyone on the planet.
I've always felt that there was something lacking in math education in general - with three teens having just completed high school, I am acutely aware of the frustrations they all felt at various levels of math instruction. What Mr. Wolfram does so beautifully in The Math(s) Fix: An Education Blueprint for the AI Age is to succinctly analyze each failing of the current math curricula, then propose common sense solutions to rectifying the situation.
The book itself is engrossing - Mr. Wolfram's organizational abilities really shines through his prose as he presents each argument and the accompanying solution. Even in some of the more technically written sections, I was able to easily follow his reasoning behind what the problems are as well as the solution(s) he proposes to fix them
Much to his credit, Mr. Wolfram peppers just the right amount of real-world examples to clarify his points, helping to make more sense of what the issues actually are while making his ideas that much more accessible to the layman. There were a number of "light bulb over the head" moments throughout the book, from the realization that we mandate the computational skills while all-but-ignoring the equally important interpretive skills required to actually make sense of the results, to using the example of literacy to drive home the point of how important these interpretive skills will become in the future as we advance farther and farther into this fourth industrial revolution (the computer age, or the AI age).
All in all, I highly recommended this book to anyone with any sort of vested interest in computational mathematics, which includes everyone on the planet.
October 31, 2020
The premise of this nonfiction book, The Math(s) Fix, is a very good one. The big question is, are we teaching students the correct maths to prepare them for life? No other subject in school is held with such esteem as Mathematics. It is often perceived by students, parents, and some teachers alike that certain kids “get” math, therefore, they are smarter and best prepared for the best jobs. The STEM movement of the last decade or so is a result of this opinion.
But what if the way we teach math is outdated for tomorrow’s jobs? We have great tools, specifically computers, to do the complex computations, yet still assess students on state testing mandates on how well they can compute.
Conrad Wolfram, a strong believer in the use of AI in education, sets out to address this question, but he didn’t make the case for me. I believe he comes across as a prophet of sorts for math and feels he doesn’t need to provide supporting evidence that his ideas are solid and the current ways are no longer serving us. Nor did he address the selling of these beliefs to the public and legislators. If he had done those things the book would have had more merit for me.
I happen to love learning about curriculum and innovative ideas on how schools can and should evolve to best serve today’s learners, but I’m not sure who he was targeting for his audience. This book is too dense with information for those with a casual interest in math and lacking evidenced-based data for scholars of the subject.
I appreciate and really enjoy graphs and charts but they were too small to read with ease and not always titled. A good editor would be able to clean up the dense writing and the visuals.
Like all solid ideas they need to get out into the world and perhaps the author’s undeniable passion for change in the area of Math(s) will start a lively discussion and further this cause and get the necessary changes off and running.
Note: Maths is a term used in England
But what if the way we teach math is outdated for tomorrow’s jobs? We have great tools, specifically computers, to do the complex computations, yet still assess students on state testing mandates on how well they can compute.
Conrad Wolfram, a strong believer in the use of AI in education, sets out to address this question, but he didn’t make the case for me. I believe he comes across as a prophet of sorts for math and feels he doesn’t need to provide supporting evidence that his ideas are solid and the current ways are no longer serving us. Nor did he address the selling of these beliefs to the public and legislators. If he had done those things the book would have had more merit for me.
I happen to love learning about curriculum and innovative ideas on how schools can and should evolve to best serve today’s learners, but I’m not sure who he was targeting for his audience. This book is too dense with information for those with a casual interest in math and lacking evidenced-based data for scholars of the subject.
I appreciate and really enjoy graphs and charts but they were too small to read with ease and not always titled. A good editor would be able to clean up the dense writing and the visuals.
Like all solid ideas they need to get out into the world and perhaps the author’s undeniable passion for change in the area of Math(s) will start a lively discussion and further this cause and get the necessary changes off and running.
Note: Maths is a term used in England
June 18, 2020
I think that this is an important book for anyone involved in math(s) education to read. I have been thinking that the traditional math sequence can use some shaking up, and Wolfram really got my wheels turning. I am afraid that we are not leveraging technology as well as we can, and this book definitely supports that idea. Another key idea is that we are not supplying our students with skills that they can use in the 21st century, and I have heard many students complain that they cannot transfer the skills they learn in our classes into real-world use.
Wolfram prescribes, in detail, what he feels belongs in the new computation course. I’m not sure that I am on board with the entire list, but it is a great starting point. I think that data analysis and modeling are key skills for our students to possess. Some coding makes a lot of sense as well. The focus is on real-world, open-ended problems.
The question for me, which Wolfram addresses at great length, is why are we asking students to perform tasks that a computer can perform? Shouldn’t we be focused on generating our own problems? Shouldn’t we be focused on coming up with functions to model real data? Isn’t it more important that our students can identify problems that they want to solve and come up with efficient ways to solve them? I think this is what math(s) must transform itself to in order to be valuable to our students in the 21st century?
I give this book my strongest possible recommendation, and I encourage you to read it. And start discussions about what we want our ideal math(s) courses to look like.
Thank you to Wolfram Publishing and NetGalley for providing the advance review copy of this book to me for my honest opinion. (Fun fact: I had already pre ordered this book when I was approached to Wolfram for an advance copy. I liked the book so much that I did not cancel my print copy!)
Wolfram prescribes, in detail, what he feels belongs in the new computation course. I’m not sure that I am on board with the entire list, but it is a great starting point. I think that data analysis and modeling are key skills for our students to possess. Some coding makes a lot of sense as well. The focus is on real-world, open-ended problems.
The question for me, which Wolfram addresses at great length, is why are we asking students to perform tasks that a computer can perform? Shouldn’t we be focused on generating our own problems? Shouldn’t we be focused on coming up with functions to model real data? Isn’t it more important that our students can identify problems that they want to solve and come up with efficient ways to solve them? I think this is what math(s) must transform itself to in order to be valuable to our students in the 21st century?
I give this book my strongest possible recommendation, and I encourage you to read it. And start discussions about what we want our ideal math(s) courses to look like.
Thank you to Wolfram Publishing and NetGalley for providing the advance review copy of this book to me for my honest opinion. (Fun fact: I had already pre ordered this book when I was approached to Wolfram for an advance copy. I liked the book so much that I did not cancel my print copy!)
December 9, 2021
The author has an interesting and very valid case to make for a new way of teaching Mathematics which centres around powerful computer algebra systems that take the drudge out of routine calculation and allow students to explore the subject more deeply than is currently possible. I've myself used the Wolfram technology stack to enrich and enliven my A level teaching with some success and I would relish the possibility of joining the author's campaign. Thus I can vouch for the soundness of Conrad Wolfram's proposal. He makes the case soundly for reworking our entire system of Mathematics teaching and explains in detail the high-level structure that might entail. However, the elevated and abstract nature of the discussion makes for rather dry reading. I would have liked to see more examples of already developed teaching materials together with discussion of how to introduce them in an informal way into the classroom, given that a complete revolution in Maths teaching is unlikely to happen any time soon in the UK (there are too many competing and conservative interests and Universities do not appear to be very interested in such a deep change to their ways of working). There is much of value in complementing existing, static mathematics texts with dynamic content, whether via Wolfram technology or by other means (indeed, Geogebra is an interactive tool very widely used in Mathematics teaching in the UK - the only educational setting I've worked in - whereas Wolfram technologies are barely used at all). The Math(s) fix concentrates almost exclusively on Wolfram materials and technology - quite understandably - but I'd like to see the debate widened by including educators who are not (yet?) Wolfram enthusiasts.
December 11, 2020
In summary, the author feels like we could engage and teach students math more effectively using computers.
I watched one of his TED Talks (“Teaching Kids Real Math With Computers”), and it was a decent explanation of his book (although obviously quite simplified).
I agree that math needs to be taught differently. I agree (based on his TED Talk more than his book) that computers can give students a new and more realistic perspective of how math fits into everyday life and many occupations. Technology is obviously a huge part of our life today, and I’d be very interested in seeing what impact this mode of teaching could have on future tech development.
My main problem with the book is that it felt overly complicated and wordy. I very often found myself confused and/or bored. I think another harsh round of editing could’ve streamlined the text (drop the random commentary in the middle of sentences), and made it more understandable. It’s possible I am not his target audience- I really couldn’t tell. I am a homeschooling mom whose kids struggle to grasp math concepts, and was hoping to find some helpful ideas, but this feels more like a book for someone making a math curriculum.
Note: I received a free copy to review.
I watched one of his TED Talks (“Teaching Kids Real Math With Computers”), and it was a decent explanation of his book (although obviously quite simplified).
I agree that math needs to be taught differently. I agree (based on his TED Talk more than his book) that computers can give students a new and more realistic perspective of how math fits into everyday life and many occupations. Technology is obviously a huge part of our life today, and I’d be very interested in seeing what impact this mode of teaching could have on future tech development.
My main problem with the book is that it felt overly complicated and wordy. I very often found myself confused and/or bored. I think another harsh round of editing could’ve streamlined the text (drop the random commentary in the middle of sentences), and made it more understandable. It’s possible I am not his target audience- I really couldn’t tell. I am a homeschooling mom whose kids struggle to grasp math concepts, and was hoping to find some helpful ideas, but this feels more like a book for someone making a math curriculum.
Note: I received a free copy to review.
June 7, 2020
Outstanding!
Conrad Wolfram plunges into the world of math education with passion and exciting ideas. He is the brother of Stephen Wolfram, behind Mathematica and Wolfram Alpha search engine. His knowledge of the subject and how technology can radically change it produced a book that is heavy on justification and rationale, but rich in creative ideas. Potential readers should sample the power of free sites such as Wolfram Alpha (https://www.wolframalpha.com/) and the book organization's own website (https://www.computerbasedmath.org/). You will see a glimpse of what this book is suggesting is possible, and why.
Don't let the long rationale keep you from the "Fix" sections. They establish the immense commitment Conrad has on the subject, so one can appreciate, and trust, the solutions even more. I vote for a Cliff Notes version for policy makers who won't read the details.
Conrad Wolfram plunges into the world of math education with passion and exciting ideas. He is the brother of Stephen Wolfram, behind Mathematica and Wolfram Alpha search engine. His knowledge of the subject and how technology can radically change it produced a book that is heavy on justification and rationale, but rich in creative ideas. Potential readers should sample the power of free sites such as Wolfram Alpha (https://www.wolframalpha.com/) and the book organization's own website (https://www.computerbasedmath.org/). You will see a glimpse of what this book is suggesting is possible, and why.
Don't let the long rationale keep you from the "Fix" sections. They establish the immense commitment Conrad has on the subject, so one can appreciate, and trust, the solutions even more. I vote for a Cliff Notes version for policy makers who won't read the details.
November 19, 2020
In "Surely You're Joking, Mr. Feynmann" the Nobel prize laureate is upset about how STEM textbooks pose problems that have no use in science. At Feynmann's times changing that was unthinkable. But today there is great advocacy for problem-based learning. This book outlines how to implement this approach in math. It makes me very hopeful. I can see how students that for now are "zoomed" during math lessons, become curious and enthusiastic based on Wolfram's creative problem-solving approach. Kids today are so bright. Implement this kind of teaching, and you will be amazed by the students' brightness, make teaching rewarding, and be content in knowing you are actually preparing students for their future lives. It's time to raise creative thinkers in Math.
Read
January 30, 2022Mathematics is a very interesting subject, but unfortunately many people dislike it because it seems too complicated to them. But I found a thing that can convince you and teach you mathematics in a very short time. This is a cool service - first grade math standards . They help children and students to learn mathematics better in a very simple and accessible way. I advise you to use it.
February 10, 2022
Sometimes a bit clunky in prose or repetitive in message, I guess I can highlight my overall thoughts on the book by saying that I signed the petition at the end before I closed the cover.
Now read this book then look at the draft Alberta math curriculum.
Now read this book then look at the draft Alberta math curriculum.
July 14, 2023
An idea whose time has definitely come
The book starts off excellent, but then loses steam around the midpoint, and somewhat becomes a semi-veiled ad for Mathematica and the Wolfram language.
The book starts off excellent, but then loses steam around the midpoint, and somewhat becomes a semi-veiled ad for Mathematica and the Wolfram language.
December 24, 2020
Excellent view of a new way to teach and learn math.
September 8, 2020
I am grateful that Wolfram Publishing provided me with an advance copy of The Math(s) Fix to review for it's release. I am a parent of 2 children in middle and high school, and have been following with interested the calls for change presented by Jo Boaler, Carol Dweck and, now, Conrad Wolfram.
He makes a strong case for the clear need for a shift in our global math curriculum, highlighting the urgent need to embrace the power of modern computing and it's disruption to the human relationship to math. No longer based on computation, but rather skillful use of the much faster and comprehensive results now afforded by computers, Wolfram makes a case to elevate math curriculum to one that empowers people to make use of these tools rather than compete with them.
While his case is a powerful one, that also acknowledges the challenges presented by a variety of deeply entrenched institutional and societal forces, I was hoping for a clearer prescription on how to implement the necessary changes. Overall, great vision but one that gets lost in needlessly wordy text.
He makes a strong case for the clear need for a shift in our global math curriculum, highlighting the urgent need to embrace the power of modern computing and it's disruption to the human relationship to math. No longer based on computation, but rather skillful use of the much faster and comprehensive results now afforded by computers, Wolfram makes a case to elevate math curriculum to one that empowers people to make use of these tools rather than compete with them.
While his case is a powerful one, that also acknowledges the challenges presented by a variety of deeply entrenched institutional and societal forces, I was hoping for a clearer prescription on how to implement the necessary changes. Overall, great vision but one that gets lost in needlessly wordy text.
June 9, 2020
Originally published on my blog: Nonstop Reader.
The Math(s) Fix is a comprehensive densely informational book on the reformation and updating of mathematics education and teaching methods. Due out 10th June 2020 from Wolfram, it's 320 pages and will be available in hardcover, paperback, and ebook formats. It's worth noting that the ebook format has a handy interactive table of contents as well as interactive links and references throughout. I've really become enamored of ebooks with interactive formats lately. For Kindle Unlimited subscribers, this book is currently included in the KU subscription library to borrow and read for free.
Many educational teaching methods haven't changed a whole lot in hundreds of years. Outdated methods are slowly being replaced but change has been slow and often ineffective. Currently mathematics classes are being stripped to the bare minimum due to funding cuts as well as a lack of qualified and engaged teachers. The author makes the statement that without intervention, it wil become: "a backwater for a few afficianados, and drop out of the mainstream - a bit like the demise of Latin in UK or European schools".
Mathematics and logical reasoning skills are absolutely critical to our continued survival as a species. A basic understanding of math concepts is necessary for most other academic pursuits as well as teaching thinking patterns which provide tools for problem solving. As with most pursuits, having the proper tools available can mean the difference between success and failure.
Our past modality for teaching mathematics has proven inadequate for our current educational needs. The author makes a very good point for utilizing the tools available, including powerful computer assisted processing power, to structure mathematics education to reach more students and actually *teach* them, helping them build and own the problem solving tools instead of just using cookie-cutter tests to "cram - test - forget".
This is an intellectually dense textbook, written by an academic from an academic family. It's full of formal academic language and isn't an "easy" (read lazy) book to read. It's rigorous and demanding. He follows the premise in the introduction: define - abstract - compute - interpret, as a formula for the rest of the book.
At the end of the day, though it's somewhat oversimplified (and much more elegantly said in the 320 pages of the book: no teaching reform (however well meaning) has really taken into account the fact that computers exist. This book changes that.
For American readers, much of the spelling and language utilize the British standard spellings, so things like "maths", "utilise", "specialise", etc are chosen consequently. It shouldn't prove any difficulty in context.
We need a better way to teach mathematics. We need more people who understand mathematics to become engineers, physicists, scientist, and problem solvers. Wolfram has a lot of interesting ideas on that subject.
Five stars (readers should keep in mind that the subject requires some effort). I would enthusiastically recommend people in education or policy to expend the necessary effort.
Disclosure: I received an ARC at no cost from the author/publisher for review purposes.
The Math(s) Fix is a comprehensive densely informational book on the reformation and updating of mathematics education and teaching methods. Due out 10th June 2020 from Wolfram, it's 320 pages and will be available in hardcover, paperback, and ebook formats. It's worth noting that the ebook format has a handy interactive table of contents as well as interactive links and references throughout. I've really become enamored of ebooks with interactive formats lately. For Kindle Unlimited subscribers, this book is currently included in the KU subscription library to borrow and read for free.
Many educational teaching methods haven't changed a whole lot in hundreds of years. Outdated methods are slowly being replaced but change has been slow and often ineffective. Currently mathematics classes are being stripped to the bare minimum due to funding cuts as well as a lack of qualified and engaged teachers. The author makes the statement that without intervention, it wil become: "a backwater for a few afficianados, and drop out of the mainstream - a bit like the demise of Latin in UK or European schools".
Mathematics and logical reasoning skills are absolutely critical to our continued survival as a species. A basic understanding of math concepts is necessary for most other academic pursuits as well as teaching thinking patterns which provide tools for problem solving. As with most pursuits, having the proper tools available can mean the difference between success and failure.
Our past modality for teaching mathematics has proven inadequate for our current educational needs. The author makes a very good point for utilizing the tools available, including powerful computer assisted processing power, to structure mathematics education to reach more students and actually *teach* them, helping them build and own the problem solving tools instead of just using cookie-cutter tests to "cram - test - forget".
This is an intellectually dense textbook, written by an academic from an academic family. It's full of formal academic language and isn't an "easy" (read lazy) book to read. It's rigorous and demanding. He follows the premise in the introduction: define - abstract - compute - interpret, as a formula for the rest of the book.
At the end of the day, though it's somewhat oversimplified (and much more elegantly said in the 320 pages of the book: no teaching reform (however well meaning) has really taken into account the fact that computers exist. This book changes that.
For American readers, much of the spelling and language utilize the British standard spellings, so things like "maths", "utilise", "specialise", etc are chosen consequently. It shouldn't prove any difficulty in context.
We need a better way to teach mathematics. We need more people who understand mathematics to become engineers, physicists, scientist, and problem solvers. Wolfram has a lot of interesting ideas on that subject.
Five stars (readers should keep in mind that the subject requires some effort). I would enthusiastically recommend people in education or policy to expend the necessary effort.
Disclosure: I received an ARC at no cost from the author/publisher for review purposes.
June 8, 2020
The Math(s) Fix is a remarkable analysis by Conrad Wolfram on what is happening in the field of math as it pertains to worldwide educational systems. Better yet, it offers a solution.
The book reflects an enormous amount of thought and active planning for a proposed change in the way math is taught and used. His brother, Stephen Wolfram, is the founder and CEO of Wolfram Research, home to the software Mathematica and the Wolfram Alpha answer engine. Both are powerful software packages that represent some of the best of what computer technology can now offer. The Math(s) Fix offers a peek at an amazing approach proposed for future math instruction.
Conrad’s experience in advancing computational technology led him to a realization that the way math is taught today does not reflect what is technologically available, nor what is needed for today’s occupations. His dedication to the subject is clear. Much of the book builds a framework for why math education should change. I was convinced early in the reading and found the layers of rationale a little tedious before I made it to the “Fix.” For those who already see a need for math education change, the initial text might be frustrating. For those who don’t believe change is needed, it could become a barrier. But it did cement my respect for an effort that is heart-driven and thorough, and it was exciting to make it to the proposals.
Having Internet access to the website established for implementing these changes is a big plus. (https://www.computerbasedmath.org/). The book example of how the new approach would work was ambitious, but it demonstrates the power of technology and the ability of software to interpret questions. Everyone should try the Wolfram Alpha program (free) to appreciate the power this “answer engine.”
Summary: I loved the book and support the broad proposals. I love math, so am a little nervous about how far we let computational technology do the work for us. But the solution proposed would seem to offer a whole new world of innovation and progress.
Bob Spillman
The book reflects an enormous amount of thought and active planning for a proposed change in the way math is taught and used. His brother, Stephen Wolfram, is the founder and CEO of Wolfram Research, home to the software Mathematica and the Wolfram Alpha answer engine. Both are powerful software packages that represent some of the best of what computer technology can now offer. The Math(s) Fix offers a peek at an amazing approach proposed for future math instruction.
Conrad’s experience in advancing computational technology led him to a realization that the way math is taught today does not reflect what is technologically available, nor what is needed for today’s occupations. His dedication to the subject is clear. Much of the book builds a framework for why math education should change. I was convinced early in the reading and found the layers of rationale a little tedious before I made it to the “Fix.” For those who already see a need for math education change, the initial text might be frustrating. For those who don’t believe change is needed, it could become a barrier. But it did cement my respect for an effort that is heart-driven and thorough, and it was exciting to make it to the proposals.
Having Internet access to the website established for implementing these changes is a big plus. (https://www.computerbasedmath.org/). The book example of how the new approach would work was ambitious, but it demonstrates the power of technology and the ability of software to interpret questions. Everyone should try the Wolfram Alpha program (free) to appreciate the power this “answer engine.”
Summary: I loved the book and support the broad proposals. I love math, so am a little nervous about how far we let computational technology do the work for us. But the solution proposed would seem to offer a whole new world of innovation and progress.
Bob Spillman
April 7, 2024
The review for this book is complicated.
This book offers a really valuable set of thoughts about why mathematics, the subject we teach at schools, isn't working for us as a society. It's ambitious, relevant, and fascinating. The author has clearly thought deeply about the problem, and there's a chunk of design within the book that is very exciting.
Sadly, the the largest flawin the book is the crossover between the product the author co-founded and the subject matter. I found myself constantly wondering if Woflram was the only way to teach Computer Based Mathematics (CBM). If I could take that away, I could happily give the book five stars.
I also felt that the book speaks to mathematics as it is taught in premium environments. Could you do this with children in poorer parts of the UK or remote Australia? I don't know, and though I loved the way knowledge is built in CBM, I couldn't see many of the people I went to school with having a better relationship with mathematics through CBM. I think that can be disproved, and I need to acknowledge I am not a professional educator. But I wanted that kind of case study in the book to give me confidence in CBM's applicability.
Nonetheless, it is an important piece of thinking about modern mathematics education. And it is a fascinating read.
This book offers a really valuable set of thoughts about why mathematics, the subject we teach at schools, isn't working for us as a society. It's ambitious, relevant, and fascinating. The author has clearly thought deeply about the problem, and there's a chunk of design within the book that is very exciting.
Sadly, the the largest flawin the book is the crossover between the product the author co-founded and the subject matter. I found myself constantly wondering if Woflram was the only way to teach Computer Based Mathematics (CBM). If I could take that away, I could happily give the book five stars.
I also felt that the book speaks to mathematics as it is taught in premium environments. Could you do this with children in poorer parts of the UK or remote Australia? I don't know, and though I loved the way knowledge is built in CBM, I couldn't see many of the people I went to school with having a better relationship with mathematics through CBM. I think that can be disproved, and I need to acknowledge I am not a professional educator. But I wanted that kind of case study in the book to give me confidence in CBM's applicability.
Nonetheless, it is an important piece of thinking about modern mathematics education. And it is a fascinating read.
June 10, 2020
I was thrilled to be offered a copy of The Math(s) Fix for an honest review, and an invitation to the book launch webinar.
The book is great for anyone involved in education (parents, teachers, support staff, carers etc), but would highly recommend to those who dictate our curriculum. The whole concept is spot on, and voiced many of the reasons I decided my children would be educated otherwise. The Math(s) Fix also sets out a plan for how the subject should be; by teaching skills actually required of the real world, and "acknowledging computers exist". How long do you pressure a child to learn the violin, unless they desire a career as a performer? Why do certain job roles (usually the higher paying ones) require A's in outdated/irrelevant information? Definitely a conversation piece.
I do have one negative; this is painfully verbose. The subject itself involves complex terminology, for me, there was unnecessary padding.
The webinar was enjoyable, and seeing/hearing Conrad speak about and quote the book was great motivation.
The book is great for anyone involved in education (parents, teachers, support staff, carers etc), but would highly recommend to those who dictate our curriculum. The whole concept is spot on, and voiced many of the reasons I decided my children would be educated otherwise. The Math(s) Fix also sets out a plan for how the subject should be; by teaching skills actually required of the real world, and "acknowledging computers exist". How long do you pressure a child to learn the violin, unless they desire a career as a performer? Why do certain job roles (usually the higher paying ones) require A's in outdated/irrelevant information? Definitely a conversation piece.
I do have one negative; this is painfully verbose. The subject itself involves complex terminology, for me, there was unnecessary padding.
The webinar was enjoyable, and seeing/hearing Conrad speak about and quote the book was great motivation.
February 28, 2021
This was a really well researched and reasoned treatise on changing our fundamental educational approach to mathematics. The author's thesis is that teaching children a "historical approach to calculating" does not equip them with knowledge or ability for modern applications of maths. To a certain extent, this could apply to many subjects taught in school--why are the same old ideas taught while students, unless they've had hands-on parents, often lack basic life and career skills by the time they graduate? Anyway, this book is a great addition to a philosophy of education collection.
Thanks to the publishers and NetGalley for the opportunity to review a digital ARC in exchange for an unbiased review.
Thanks to the publishers and NetGalley for the opportunity to review a digital ARC in exchange for an unbiased review.
November 3, 2024
The ideas in this book are amazing (i.e. I finally learned, after 30 years, what math is for!).
The delivery, unfortunately, is not the best. It could have been more concise and engaging.
The delivery, unfortunately, is not the best. It could have been more concise and engaging.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 30 reviews