What does Veeky Forums think?

Attached: 1520983868898.jpg (1177x860, 181K)

A lot of has to do with the fact that, despite all the posturing, campaigns, and initiatives, society discourages Women from going into STEM...no white/black/latina girls are getting yelled at by their parents when they get a B or a C on a Math test.

And women who do get into it are either...

>A) Fetishized
>B) Patronized
>C) Ostracized

At least, most of the time.

discarded this brainlets opinion because of her complete misuse of 40% of the words she uses, how does she hope to help people without even helping herself? oh that's right she's too ignorant to realize it

It is certainly true that you need strong mathematical skill to get anywhere in STEM. I think it is a mistake to call it a "barrier"; calculus is the essence of much of STEM, not just dependency to get past.

It is also true that stereotypically, math skill is seen as a boys thing, which I'm sure can form a substantial roadblock. As for the degree to which this stereotype still reflects societal attitudes, or statistical distributions of mathematical talent, I have no idea.

I love how people will state an observation all logical like and then subjectively generalize the problem and solution like they have seen it all but YOU CAN TELL THEY HAVENT.
>this is tied...
It's just such a bummer because these people are so incredibly conceited they will never be able to fully help somebody who's not like them.

It has nothing to do with cultural perception, gift, confidence, or other people. It is only about motovation and (You) get to decide what that is. On average the girls and boys who "felt discouraged" did not want STEM bad enough, that's literally it. Sure, some people have more aptitude and whatnot, but that's got very little bearing on getting a degree in stem.

Teaching girls to pursue an internal locus of control over relationships and the cock is all that needs to happen.

It fucking wont though

This is what I thought too. "barrier", fucking hell that pisses me off, if you don't actively ENJOY mathematics you have no business in any STEM field. Treating it like some obstacle when it's pretty much what you're job is means you will never be a first rate scientist.

I do think there is a point here. Math education has a tendency to be very fatalistic. You either are good at math, or you aren't. Its hard to say this problem is at all centered on gender though. In my experience, the top achievers in math class were usually girls, due to their natural ability to follow instructions and attention to detail. Although for every girl who diligently did her homework and studied, there was a guy who got straight As barely studying.

hmm yes despite literally everywhere you turn there being some sort of movement or advertisement about women going into STEM they are still held victim to something as vague and non-quantifiable as being"discouraged by society" whatever the hell that means

and yeah i personally knew a black girl who would cry whenever she got even a B in a subject during HS. maybe the more logical and simpler explanation is simply that females aren't as likely to be interested in STEM fields as males are.

This

As opposed to boys, who as we all know are never patronized or ostracized for having intellectual interests

That's because males tend to be more gifted at systematizing, due to their neurology.

Ah yes, let's affirmative action in the averages, just so they can feel smart and clog up research positions and the already limited funding... NOT!

Lol my dad never yelled at me for not doing well in school. I just learned to get that academic discipline into myself. It's really not that hard.

Fun fact, they already do this in Norway and the hard sciences are still predominantly male, and the soft sciences, like medicine, are still predominantly female. It's almost like people of differing gender, also have differing proclivites.

it's well established that men are better at mathematics. It's not cultural.

Math education needs to be reformed entirely. Calculus and general functional concepts should be introduced much earlier than they are.

Right now math education goes something like this:
> addition, subtraction, multiplication, division
> teaching kids how to compute by hand, spending 2-3 critical years of development on rote memorization alone.
> beginnings of algebra. functions introduced.
> geometry.
> calculus
> college begins:
> number theory
> graph theory

how it should actually go:
> graph theory,
> addition, multiplcation, subtraction, number theory. no memorization, have them completely rely on calculators, restrict them to integers, no "remainders", no reals, no decimals.
> introduce the concept of functions, introduce them to the concept of partial numbers, reals, countability, infinities. Associations between functions, beginnings of calculus here.
> algebra, division introduced here.
> more calculus, stay away from trigonometrics.
> geometry and the mere essentials of trigonometry, law of sines.
> college begins here:
> finish calculus with study of harmonics, laplaces and fouriers, introduce complicated trigonometrics
> more number theory
> more graph theory

But OP image isn't talking about reform. My reforms would keep struggling students even further away from mathematics; my approach would only make things worse by benefiting the very best while leading to a higher learning curve.

I shall instate this upon my children.

nobody gives a shit senpai , people are free to choose to study math or not.

Attached: 1512905084460.png (766x262, 236K)

>immediate feedback on whether a problem is correct
You don't need online coursework for that. Get a TI-89.

Devious

Lel you faggots love a quick answer. No doubt it fulfills your arrogance and makes it easy to dismiss the issue. Burn in figurative hell

This is like being taught organic reaction mechanisms before learning the full implications of valence. There's a reason why we're taught about non-integer numbers well before functions and graph theory. Some precocious kid will notice that there's an unlabeled portion of your - oh, wait I'm not supposed to talk about functions yet. What should we call them, then - just "graphs"? At this point all you're really teaching is that boring pictures of lines and numbers are called graphs.

And I'm sensing a strong bias against trigonometry, which makes me think you're writing all this as a roundabout way to excuse your shaky grasp of the subject. If anything, trig should be introduced with more emphasis and earlier - albeit only if it can be phased in slowly.

true. calculus isnt very hard even a woman can do it

Trigonometry is awesome, but its truly useful as it relates to its periodic properties. These are unfortunately not developed strongly outside of certain degree paths. Fourier transforms should be understood by everyone, and trigonometry should not be taught beyond this.