[FreqSep]

I feel like you glossed over a lot here though.

Reading? Yes, the intricacies of clause structure? No, no one uses that besides a few people.

Science? Almost no one I know uses chemistry or biology. I don’t even remember how to balance a chemical equation.

The same arguments against mathematics education can be used for almost anything.

If “Reading” is the example for English education, then “addition, subtraction, multiplication, and division” are the analogs in math, and they’re used by pretty much everyone in day to day life and in other classes. Hell, they’re even used when reading.

[corrral]

Yes, lots of the memorization-heavy math from 6th grade and earlier is often useful to most people. Nowhere near as constantly in use as reading, but at least a little is used by most people almost every day. Basic arithmetic, trivial calculations involving percentages or fractions, and (far less) simple variable substitution do see actual use by people not in fields that are extremely math-heavy. Maybe the very occasional area/volume formula or pythagorean theorem, if they're DIYers.

The next 6 years? Not so much. Meanwhile, at least the english classes have stories in them, and the kids might not hate all of them.

> Reading? Yes, the intricacies of clause structure? No, no one uses that besides a few people.

Formal grammar is barely taught at all, now. For better or worse. Drilling spelling words has also fallen out of favor.

> The same arguments against mathematics education can be used for almost anything.

They really can't, nowhere near the same degree. If we ignore that and assume more than a tiny minority of kids will give a shit about math if we just present it to them harder or more mathily, then it's not gonna get better.