Hacker News Reader

Comment by bhouston | Hacker News Reader

This is for teachers.

I think it isn't a huge deal if an English or French or Social Studies teacher isn't great in math, but is otherwise a good candidate.

But should someone who fails the math proficiency test be a math teacher? Probably not.

Society should try to match everyone with jobs which they are capable of doing, teaching is a good job. We shouldn't unnecessarily exclude people from doing A just because they lack the skills for doing B.

Here is examples of what is on the test:

https://cpl.oise.utoronto.ca/course/mathematics-proficiency-...

Video discussion of the test questions: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T-7fnPD_c7w

View on HN

> I think it isn't a huge deal if an English or French or Social Studies teacher isn't great in math, but is otherwise a good candidate.

The test covers the grades 3-9 math curriculum. Not having that kind of basic math literacy is pretty big barrier to being able to evaluate, much less teach, Social Science materiak at the secondary level (the only level where you would likely have a dedicated Social Science teacher.)

And subjecting students to that kind of incompetence—as those from already-disadvantaged backgrounds will be the least likely to have a home environment that counterbalances it—is a far bigger force institutionalizing racial disadvantage than the test itself ever could be.

Agreed, particularly at a secondary level at least a basic understanding of math concepts is important both in general and in social studies - graphs and statistics are what first come to mind.

And if they're not at the secondary level, they're probably supposed to be teaching math.

Sure but the document explains the rationale as follows:

> The Divisional Court found that the Math Proficiency Test had an adverse impact on entry to the teaching profession for racialized teacher candidates

So the concern is that the tail is wagging the dog -- in the sense that trying to have a certain mix of teachers from various backgrounds drives the requirements instead of requirements being guided by what students need from their teachers

Yup, misunderstanding of basic math strikes again. I thought it's a joke when I first seen an argument like "X race does worse at Y therefore Y is racist". Then I thought it's some kind of running joke. Then I've noticed some people are serious about it so I assumed they got fooled by the running joke. Apparently it's no longer a joke and it's used to dictate policies.

Pretty scary situation. The dumb are winning with the dumbest of arguments and now you can't even test for it to prevent it :)

This is precisely Kendi's antiracist rationale.

1. Every policy either is racist, or antiracist. There are no neutral policies.

2. "Racialized" teachers are unable to pass a math test in order to be eligible for the job.

3. Because the policy does not produce an equal outcome, the policy is therefore racist.

Add on top of that, the Smithsonian's ridiculous publication, suggesting that things like objective truth and math/science are concepts of "Whiteness", and this is the outcome.

Harrison Bergeron would like a word.

I remember when it started appearing and the narrative was "it's just a fringe, no one sane thinks like that" but apparently suddenly it's accepted argument in the court of law. I mean, this is Idiocracy materializing. You can't have any kind of discussion if the other side doesn't get basic reasoning right. It's one thing to disagree about values but if we can't even use very basic reasonings it's completely hopeless.

> I think it isn't a huge deal if an English or French or Social Studies teacher isn't great in math

I think it is a big deal if any teacher isn't great in math, aside from perhaps PE instructors. Considering how much our whole society is supported by math nowadays and how much the average person sucks at math, perhaps teachers who suck at math are not very good role models for children?

It really does not matter. It does matter, whether math instruction is good.

PE instructors were the worst discriminators. They gave out grades based on physical performance. Looking at old class pictures, the lowest percentile could be easily identified (also corresponding to the last picked when building teams). I hope this has changed.

I thought you were joking at first, but looks like you are not? What else would PE grades be based on if not on physical performance?

Well though I somewhat agree, a lot of kids do not have parents who care or know better and may be on poor diets that cause obesity. Also some kids just don’t have the genetics. The grades should be based on effort applied at whatever skill level those kids are at. How do you grade effort? I don’t know but expecting a kid who comes in 100lbs heavier then other kids and expect him to run the same pace as some hyperactive kid really isn’t fair.

> The grades should be based on effort applied at whatever skill level those kids are at.

Are you suggesting that PE should have different grading procedures than other subjects (which reward measured results, or at least in my school did)? Or are you even suggesting in general that all subjects should be graded like this (and for example someone really bad at math but "trying really hard" should actually be getting A's and B's)?

You are mixing physical and mental checks. If I think really really hard about moving a 20lbs ball on 40m I doubt it will budge. If I repeatedly punch a sudoku puzzle it will not solve itself.

Actually, I'm not. We definitely had outcome-based (not effort-based) grading for both physical and mental disciplines in my school.

We had this too. It somewhat frustrated me to be able to understand the theory and apply it but not being "good" enough in the eyes of the PE teacher. Excellent grades in other subjects though, just didn't see the fun in running after a ball or the worth of investing time and effort at being faster or better at it. College change that. PE was stil mandatory in the cursus but was more oriented towards a healthy lifestyle. Benefits of physical activity, research on muscle development and training methods, what consists of a healthy diet, how to enjoy physical activities and include them in your schedule etc.

Oh and in primary school, teachers would go in the teachers lounge to smoke while they were given a break by us being in PE.

I didn't see the fun in many subjects either, and got appropriately poor grades that reflected my level of knowledge or skill.

For PE we had normatives we were supposed to meet -- so many pullups, etc (based on old soviet army normatives I think :)), and if you don't you got corresponding grade.

I would make sense to break PE course into two -- one about theory and one about skill and have two separate grades for them.

Other subjects generally have a well-defined “100% score” and time limit, and assume some basic range of ability (and people outside this ability range are treated differently). It’s not like math tests are usually graded on how fast you could complete the test.

Of course, you could establish a similar grading schemes for physical education, but that would essentially look like grading based on effort and participation.

In many areas, physical education and health education are combined. It is possible for an understanding of health to compensate for physical performance. The metrics for evaluation of physical performance can also be considered. Understanding and demonstrating technique may be a better metric in an educational setting where the rate of physical development is varied (especially in the middle grades). It may also be a better metric overall. Consider a coach: their goal is to help others to achieve their best, that does not imply that they are the best.

Like the above replies, effort and participation. Also set open objectives. Want the kids to do a 5k ? Give them an "inclusive" deadline. That way, if you already are a future champion you can get do it during class in be done in 15 mins or you have the option to split it into a few walks during lunch and after class.

Lots of comments going around that seem to be jokes to other people, apparently. Is it normal for people to expect physical education classes to literally just be various physical activities with grades handed out directly related to each student’s absolute performance in each activity? To me that sounds patently ridiculous.

> Considering how much our whole society is supported by math nowadays and how much the average person sucks at math,

I would have finished this sentence perhaps that’s significant evidence that the average person doesn’t need to be great at math.

No, this would be significant evidence that the average person doesn’t need to be great at math only if you knew for a fact that an alternative universe society with people being better at math had merely comparable societal outcome.

PE teachers in the UK also teach another academic subject as a sort of standby....so no

Just a note on the test you're pointing to:

> Learners wishing to enroll in the Mathematics - Intermediate Additional Basic Qualification course may take this test in lieu of official transcript(s) showing proof of successful completion of a minimum of two full university degree credit courses or the equivalent in the teaching subject.

Ontario teaching licenses have qualifications for various grade levels and subject areas. This qualification is intended for people who intend to teach mathematics in grades seven through nine, and the sample test questions reflect that. I very much doubt this test is the one referred to by the courts. If it is, the qualification would be irrelevant (assuming test results reflect the ability to teach a subject competently).

My wife kept failing math proficiency test. Despite having been a successful teacher for many years. Finally I started testing her myself and realized she knew nothing about math. Maybe 2nd grade level. She grew up in Canada and said math wasn’t really taught.

Spent months training her up to a middle school level. We moved states and she took test. No math questions on it…

She grew up in Canada and said math wasn’t really taught.

It think she's covering for a lack of paying attention.

Or maybe she's young, and standards have really slipped? Because otherwise no.

My son is in grade 2 math is definitely taught. At this point he’s already doing pre-algebra using perimeters of polygons. I think they will start angles by the end of the year. I was in Ontario middles school about 20 years ago and even the easiest math course you could take in grade 8 involved basic trigonometry.

I don't know about Ontario, but here People can skate by.

I used to tutor. Quite a lot of kids missed something simple somewhere in the beginning and then were skating by having passable but not good grades. Not understanding what is taught, but getting enough points.

The tutoring consisted of going beck few years and teaching them basics again. They improved, but school never did that "maybe this person now can learn the thing he/she missed 3 years ago".

This idea of missing something simple really speaks to me.

I remember “factorization” not clicking for me for the longest time in public school. My grades slowly got worse, until the right teacher came along and explained it in a way that clicked. I proceeded to have a successful math focused education in high school and university.

I wonder if part of it is that kids are at the mercy of what their teachers want to teach / the curriculum. I think kids often know which things they struggle with… they need help articulating it, and then someone to work with them through it.

Have kids in (edit) elementary school right now and it is pretty bad. There is no rigor and time for practice. Back in the day you would get homework but now that's pretty close to useless or teachers don't grade it. As a parent I have to supplement work after seeing what the schools are leaving students with. For now, it is working but it really should not be my job.

We had one elementary teacher in particular who stated that there was 1 study done in some Nordic country that proved homework does not help. (reference to said study was not provided). Interesting that if you look at high school there is tons of homework; same for university. If that 1 study had any merit it would have applied across all levels. The real truth is that practice makes perfect. But teacher unions do not want that burden on teachers and students suffer in the end. I do not get why elementary schools don't assign homework (I have no doubt private elementary schools do - they get better results).

If you have a parent who recognizes this short changing and is capable of supplementing the education there is a chance for recovery or at least mitigating a decline.

I think what was shown not to help is mandatory homework - and that's assuming a pretty high-quality education in class, as is standard in Nordic countries. But the teacher should absolutely be there to help the students with any extra work they might choose to do on their own.

How is she able to shop a bag of groceries? I am wondering how someone can live a normal life with not knowing almost any math at all. My grandmother, born in 1910 and skipping most school because of WW1, was a housewife in a time when even not knowing to read and write was not a problem, but in 2021 this is no longer possible.

What would geometry had to do with shopping or really anything in what she does? Or finding root square.

Geometry is not second level math. I asked because I had 2 such cases in the family, but at times when it was not such a big deal, you seem to be trolling by talking about root square.

I took my examples from test in question - someone linked it.

Budgeting has been a major problem for her. Her mentality has been. Buy on sale. No regard for the actual price. If I state we shouldn’t eat out as an effort to save money, she will go to the store and spend 80-200 on ingredients for 1-2 meals.

The samples look like grade 9ish math. It's about understanding rules and how those rules can be applied to solve a problem. When starting a teaching career you don't always get a full-time, one subject schedule; it's more like covering sick leaves or temp contracts depending on schools needs. Having this test is useful since the College certifies that its members , even if they are specialized in a given subject, can understand the basics of other high school subjects. Imagine how it would suck if you come across the "not my job, not my problem" when asking a school teacher for help.

Humm looking at the sample test, the questions are easy, but the presentation and wording is awful

"She has 100m of plastic edging to encloses a circular garden." Hard to believe they let this slip through.

The question was written by another teacher, one that failed English?

These are poorly worded questions. Half the issue with “word problem” test questions is that they assume a cultural context or knowledge. The questions should explain themselves more (what is edging?) or choose a better context.

Well Google gave me the answer to "what is edging" and I doubt this has to do anything with math.

You typically don’t have access to Google when you’re taking a test. The onus should be on the test writer to ensure that what is tested is math knowledge and not math knowledge + some random facts about gardening.

Reminds me of calculus, all I seem to remember from college is that growth rate of a wolf population. And the hearing LIMIT from a high pitched voice.

Yeah, apart from the terrible typography, which seems to be mandatory for these kinds of test, there are plenty of terribly phrased questions as well:

> 7. A number cube is labeled 1 to 6. [...]

What's wrong with the word 'die'?

> 12. There is a linear relationship [...] What type of variation is this relationship and what is its initial value?

What on earth does 'variation' mean here? As far as the answer key is concerned the answer should be 'A partial variation with an initial value of $50.'. Which makes no sense to me whatsoever.

> 13. A rectangle has an area of 5^𝑥2 + 15𝑥 square units. Determine expressions for the length and the width of the rectangle.

Surely that depends on your aspect ratio? It could be sqrt(5x^2 + 15x) for both.

Also their answer key lists the area in question 4 in cm for some reason, if you're going to use units at least use the right one. And you just know someone is going to be anal about question 8, since the answer key doesn't list the exact value '100m/pi' but the approximate 31.8 m.

Also I hope they got a calculator otherwise the answer to question 15 which involves trigonometry is downright unfair.

> > 7. A number cube is labeled 1 to 6. [...]

> What's wrong with the word 'die'?

One usual excuse is to make it clear that it's a d6, rather than a d20 or something, but that's already clear here. The other reasons are that dice still have a connotation of being related to gambling in some people's eyes, which makes it politically incorrect to use the term, and that "die" being a homonym for life ending means that it's also politically incorrect to say.

I've noticed someone posted a different set of example questions, which seem to be more reasonable, though with a very odd 'pedagogy' section (which doesn't test mathematics knowledge and smells rather political for some reason).

Based on the tests examples it's not about being great at math. Being able of divide one number by another or find area of a parallelogram is just a sign that that person is reasonably smart and functional in modern world.

The test is so basic, it's shame that teachers pushed it up to court.

Just a random pick from samples:

> Nada is landscaping her front yard. She has 100m of plastic edging to encloses a circular garden. What is the diameter of the garden?

We seriously expect teachers to not know about the Pi number?

I would expect an eighth grader to ace a test of this variety.

We expect too little of people. The bar is too low.

An 8th Grader might pass it. But I would probably fail without serious preparation because I haven't solved an algebra equation, used trig, or done any real math by hand in 20 years.

Disuse is not incompetence.

Now, they could make every history/language/music teacher try to relearn all these things in order to pass the test and forget it all again, but it's hard to believe it's not a big waste of everyone's time and energy.

Perhaps we expect too little of people, but there's nothing wrong with specialization.

PEs, architects and lawyers all need to pass standardized tests in order to enter their professions. You have to study for these. Expecting preparation is not the end of the world.

I would expect a professor of mathematics to get at least a few wrong because of awful phrasing and gotchas.

The first section of the exam does not cover specialized, esoteric knowledge. Deficiencies in basic reasoning extend to other areas of knowledge as well, and it seems unconscionable to allow those who suffer from these to teach.

But in social studies there is math that gets discussed. We had percentages for sure when discussing politics for example. My social studies is ever old but we definitely had some portions that had some math involved.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com