By: PR Fueled
Dr Jonathan Kenigson, FRSA*
Working Group on Mathematics, Kirby Laing Centre, Cambridge, UK
College algebra has retained a central place in the US college general education curriculum since the 1950s. However, I believe that this long-standing convention warrants reconsideration: College algebra offers little practical application for the vast majority of students in non-technical fields and is also too basic for STEM majors to benefit from the limited suite of skills it imparts. The role of general education is not just to provide specialized knowledge but to cultivate well-rounded individuals who can think critically and deliberately about issues of global importance. For non-specialists, statistics achieves this goal far more effectively than algebra, and the high failure rates in university algebra courses are a symptom of an oft-heard lament leveled by students everywhere: That university algebra courses are of limited practical utility. It’s high time that professors and administrators admit that the students are correct, and that comprehensive universities should adjust their mathematics requirements accordingly. These institutions should focus on courses that provide tangible, transferable skills while simultaneously fostering demonstrable, sustainable intellectual growth.
Statistics, not algebra, is the mathematical foundation that students truly require. Professors everywhere are content to dream that their regional institutions are akin to Harvard or Oxford, even when the latter accept a vanishingly small proportion of superbly-qualified applicants who managed to complete copious quantities of AP or IB credits in specialist fields. The University of Northwest So-And-So, which admits a significant number of applicants, should openly recognize this and reconsider its efforts to occupy a niche that may not align with its strengths. Let students study what is actually of tangible benefit to them mathematically and intellectually.
Why is this plain truth so difficult for mathematicians to admit? College algebra is an artifact of an educational system that assumes all students need to master a baseline of mathematical procedures—linear equations, quadratic formulas, and abstract functions—regardless of their future trajectories in life and work. How many people outside of physics or engineering will ever solve a quadratic equation in their professional or personal lives? For the vast majority, the answer is “never.” Educators and administrators lie to themselves and their students when they suggest otherwise.
For the quarter of students who may find some occasion for the applicability of abstract algebraic skills, another problem arises: Nearly every serious STEM student has already passed college algebra or its equivalent in high-school or via independent study. Moreover, it is my opinion that most students who haven’t mastered high-school or college algebra should be dissuaded from entering a STEM field unless their competence can be demonstrated by rigorous, impartial examination. If a student has completed the appropriate algebraic curriculum, they would likely benefit more from a series of faculty-curated review experiences rather than a cookie-cutter remedial deadweight like a 3-unit algebra course. Ultimately, college algebra exists in a strange educational limbo—too basic for some, too inapplicable for others. It neither serves as an effective skill-building tool nor a valuable intellectual exercise for critical reasoning.
Perhaps unsurprisingly, there is a countervailing tendency advanced by some politicians and administrators to reduce university courses to a strict calculus of applicability. The college algebra vs statistics debate is one rare matter of common cause – or, rather, it should be such a matter. While universities should certainly strive to offer courses that are relevant and practical, they must not lose sight of their broader mission: fostering critical reasoning and intellectual growth.
Are there not better tools than college algebra for this task? Abstraction alone is not sufficient to produce an educated citizen if such abstraction – at its genesis – fails to improve students’ ability to think critically or even maintain their enrollment in higher education whatsoever. While some students may enjoy the challenge of algebraic puzzles, the content does little to engage the majority of people in meaningful ways, sparking predictably astronomical failure rates. Statistics, by contrast, offers both a high level of applicability and the potential to sharpen students’ analytical skills in virtually any chosen field.
In a historical moment where we are bombarded with tendentious information, from social media polls to scientific studies, the ability to distinguish among sound arguments, deliberately specious claims, and “alternative facts” is more critical than ever. Whether interpreting the results of a psychology experiment, analyzing demographic trends in history, or assessing risk in business decisions, a statistics background would be indispensable to all of us. Such a background teaches students how to interpret data, recognize patterns, and make informed decisions based on evidence. It is the unassailable essence of a modern scientific education for budding scholars of every persuasion.
Si veritas comprehendatur, platitudes obliviscenda est.
Published by: Martin De Juan
