|
|
|
|
|
by yummyfajitas
6199 days ago
|
|
I disagree with you on trig. Trig is the study of straight lines and what you can do with them. The important part of calculus is the fact that you can approximate curves by straight lines [1]. A folk theorem in applied math is that 90% of the time, an approximation by straight lines is good enough (another 9% of the time, you'll need a parabola). You can drop some of the petty stuff (x,y,(180-x-y) triangles), but don't skip the basics. I'd also suggest skipping rings/fields since most of the algebra important to CS involves structures weaker than groups (semigroups and monoids). Also add graphs/combinatorics to your list. [1] This fundamental fact is briefly mentioned in a subsection called "differentials", and otherwise ignored by textbooks. |
|
When people argue about the math curriculum, they almost always argue the wrong question. The question is not, "Should we cover X?", because in isolation the answer is always yes! Should we cover trig? Yes! Should we cover set theory? Yes! Should we cover graph theory? Yes! etc. etc. The question is, "Given our limited time to allocate to math education, what are the best topics to focus on?", and once you consider the wealth of incredibly valuable topics neglected (elementary economics, elementary discrete math, actual algebra, game theory, computer programming, anything remotely resembling actual mathematical practices rather than memorized formulas stripped of all motivation and history), you'll find that spending umpteen weeks on trig is really shortchanging the students. The opportunity cost of trig is too high.