High school math = Teh Good

How science is done
Pharyngula has a nice discussion of report looking at the impact of high school math and science classes on performance in university science courses. The short version? Definitely take math, as that improves performance in all the sciences in the study (biology, chemistry, and physics). Taking science in high school tends to help performance in that science in college, but doesn’t help much in the other sciences.

They don’t say anything about computing (but, sadly, most high schools don’t offer much in the way of meaningful computer science courses), but my experience suggests that much the same is true there: A solid math background is a definite win. Have some programming experience can help, but it can also get in the way if you end up needing to unlearn a lot. And any advantage one has from prior programming experience tends to wash out within the first yer (sometimes the first semester), while some solid math background continues to be an advantage all through the major.

The error bars are pretty huge, which isn’t entirely surprising given the variable quality of both instructor and student (both in high school and university). It would be interesting to better understand what role the quality of the high school instruction plays in the correlations. Does, for example, a bad science class actually have the potential to hurt you later on?

No tag for this post.

Related posts

But what about “Moon Unit”?

2007 Byte Bash - 41
WeatherGirl tipped me to an Observer article entitled “Names really do make a difference“, and I keep wavering between “Oh, surely not!” and “Well, duh, that was pretty obvious”. Apparently giving a girl a “girlie” name significantly reduces her likelihood of studying math and science:

Both subjects [math and physics], which are traditionally seen as predominantly male, are far more popular among girls with names such as Abigail, Lauren and Ashley, which have been judged as less feminine in a linguistic test. The effect is so strong that parents can set twin daughters off on completely different career paths simply by calling them Isabella and Alex, names at either end of the spectrum. A study of 1,000 pairs of sisters in the US found that Alex was twice as likely as her twin to take maths or science at a higher level.

The (highly speculative) causalities are the reasonably obvious ones: Seeing names like “Barbie” or “Breeze” on the class list or application form brings beaucoup baggage to the party. This is hardly a win, especially since the patriarchy already ensures that females already have plenty of baggage when it comes to science and math. It’s also telling, if not entirely shocking, that giving boys certain names can have similar effects. Seeing “Bubba” on the football roster might elicit a snicker, but likely no surprise; seeing “Bubba” at the math league finals, on the other hand…

So it would seem that some parents have a fair bit to answer for:

‘A name is part of an impression package,’ said Mehrabian. ‘Parents who make up bizarre names for their children are ignorant, arrogant or just foolish.’

In the case of the Zappa family, I’m voting for “arrogant”; Frank certainly wasn’t ignorant.

No tag for this post.

Related posts