How to improve math class

I really enjoyed this TED lecture by full-time ninth grade math teacher Dan Meyer. His main point is that modern math textbooks do so much hand-holding that they fail to inspire students to think through the problems. Instead of teaching math, they teach students to "decode" the problems by all-too-apparent reference to the exemplars. As a result, many math texts cultivate impatience. Dan argues that we've got to stop thinking about math as merely computation skills. In support of this point, he quoted a man named Albert Einstein: "The formulation of a problem is often more essential than its solution, which may be merely a matter of mathematical or experimental skill." Dan is doing his best as a teacher and a blogger to change the way students look at math class. I should not be something students resist, but rather embrace. His approaches to teaching math are easy to understand, and he offers many creative applications along the way. Meyer's work brings to mind the writings of John Paulos, who bemoans rampant American innumeracy (and see here).

Continue ReadingHow to improve math class

The college version of the subprime mortage mess

Investor Steve Eisman whose huge wager against the subprime mortgage market was described by Michael Lewis The Big Short has launched an assault on fast growing for-profit college industry. Here's the link at Mother Jones. According to the Eisman, for-profit colleges "raked in almost one-quarter of the $89 billion in available Title IV loans and grants, despite having only 10 percent of the nation's post-secondary students." Here is the main parallel between for-profit educators and the sub-prime lenders:

Eisman attributes the industry's success to a Bush administration that stripped away regulations and increased the private sector's access to public funds. "The government, the students, and the taxpayer bear all the risk and the for-profit industry reaps all the rewards," Eisman said. "This is similar to the subprime mortgage sector in that the subprime originators bore far less risk than the investors in their mortgage paper."
Here's another similarity between subprime lending and for-profit education

Both push low-income Americans into something they can't afford—in the schools' case, pricey programs that leave the students heavily in debt; what's more, the degrees they get mean little in the real world: "With billboards lining the poorest neighborhoods in America and recruiters trolling casinos and homeless shelters—and I mean that literally—the for-profits have become increasingly adept at pitching the dream of a better life and higher earnings to the most vulnerable."

In the Mother Jones article, Eisman pointed to the self-reported (and thus potentially under-reported) 50-plus percent dropout rate at for profit colleges as further evidence that they offer poor-quality education. After reading the above article, I referred to Wikipedia's article one of the biggest for-profit colleges: Phoenix University, subsidiary of the publicly traded Apollo Group, Inc. It offers "open enrollment," meaning that it requires "proof of a high-school diploma, GED, or its equivalent." Phoenix graduates only 16% of its students, compared to the national average of 55%. On the topic of de-regulation and quality of education, consider this:

The school was the top recipient of student financial aid funds for the 2008 fiscal year, receiving nearly $2.48 billion for students enrolled. In 2006, due largely to the efforts attributed to the Apollo group, the 50-percent rule (requiring colleges and universities to conduct at least half of its instruction in person in order to receive federal aid or collect federal student loans) was modified. It no longer classifies students receiving instruction through telecommunications methods as correspondence students.

The Wikipedia article offers a lot more information to feed the fires of my suspicion. I don't claim to know any more about Phoenix University than what I have read in these two articles. What I do bring to the table is that I investigated diploma mills as part of my job while I worked as an Assistant Attorney General for the state of Missouri; I don't like the smell of what I'm reading about these for-profit colleges. Based on what Michael Eisman has stated, it would seem to be a good idea for the federal government to tighten its standards for the types of post-secondary schools eligible for federal loans, and to take a much closer look at the quality of education received by the typical Phoenix University student. Is it really worthy of a federal loan guarantee?

Continue ReadingThe college version of the subprime mortage mess

How to use and save electricity

Mr. Electricity has assembled a straight-forward website full of great ideas and useful links--everything you'll need to understand, use and save electricity. Here's what the site covers, in the words of "Mr. Electricity":

I explain exactly what a kilowatt hour is and how much you pay for one. And I show you how to calculate exactly how much electricity your household appliances use, so you know which items are guzzling the most juice (and which ones are the best targets for savings). You'll also learn exactly how to read your electric meter, if you like. . . . And I not only give you meaningful tips for slashing your electricity consumption, I give you the tools to figure out exactly how much you're saving as well. Finally, I've answered countless questions from readers about saving electricity. If you have a question, it's probably answered here already.
The site offers dozens of illustrations. Oh, and one more time, this is a site geared toward saving electricity. For example, check out this page on "vampire power" demonstrating that many appliances burn more electricity to "run the clock" than to provide the function for which you bought them (e.g., VCRs and microwave ovens). "Mr. Electricity's" real name is Michael Bluejay.

Continue ReadingHow to use and save electricity

The problem with buffeting and choppy fans

Manufacturers and retailers are great at solving problems we didn’t know that we had. Sometimes, our "problem" is lack of social prestige. Check out this high tech “Air Multiplier” I recently spotted at Target. Here’s what it offers. No blades. No “buffeting.” No “choppy air.” Silly me. I thought that fans were supposed to buffet the air and make it choppy. Now I know, however, that the fans I already own are defective and that I need to fix this problem by purchasing several of these $300 Dyson “Air Multipliers.” Image by Erich Vieth Why would someone buy such an expensive contraption when you can easily buy a decent fan for $15 and a great fan for $75? Geoffrey Miller explains this phenomenon in an incredibly well-written and well-researched book titled Spent: Sex, Evolution and Consumer Behavior. I could write 100 posts commenting on the various sections of Spent; Miller's book is that good. I’m well on my way. See here, for example, and here. Out of curiosity, I visited the Dyson website to see whether this “Air Multiplier” is more energy efficient that a traditional fan. Information about energy usage is conspicuous by its absence on Dyson's site, however. I know enough about marketing that if the Air Multiplier were more energy efficient than traditional fans, this information would be prominently displayed on Dyson's packaging. Along the same lines, note that the Dyson Air Multiplier is "safe," even though all modern fans come with grill designed to keep fingers away from the blades. I they are going spin their product's qualities wildly (no pun intended), they would certainly make sure that we were informed about the Air Multiplier's ability to save energy--if only that were true. [For comparison, I have inserted a few old-fashioned "fans" that you can buy at Target, a few feet down from the throne of the Air Multiplier. As you can see, these fans are considerably cheaper. In fact, for the price of one Air Multiplier, you could buy eighteen $16 fans. ]img_0006 Chapter 7 of Spent is titled “Conspicuous Waste, Precision, and Reputation. In this chapter, Miller convincingly argues that we don’t buy to merely have; rather, many of our purchases are for the purpose of displaying qualities to others. We are very much like peacocks, it turns out. We like to conspicuously waste resources (this is an expensive and thus reliable signal that we have enough resources to waste). We also engage in conspicuous precision, spending lots of money to display that we have not only resources, but also an appreciation of technology that goes far beyond the mental capabilities of those people are willing to settle for those damned buffeting fans.

Continue ReadingThe problem with buffeting and choppy fans

Finish the job, Mr. Obama.

At the NYT, Paul Krugman is making it clear that even Obama rhetoric and mixed-signals are enraging the financial sector. Check out these numbers:

Look, for example, at the campaign contributions of commercial banks — traditionally Republican-leaning, but only mildly so. So far this year, according to The Washington Post, 63 percent of spending by banks’ corporate PACs has gone to Republicans, up from 53 percent last year. Securities and investment firms, traditionally Democratic-leaning, are now giving more money to Republicans. And oil and gas companies, always Republican-leaning, have gone all out, bestowing 76 percent of their largess on the G.O.P. These are extraordinary numbers given the normal tendency of corporate money to flow to the party in power. Corporate America, however, really, truly hates the current administration. Wall Street, for example, is in “a state of bitter, seething, hysterical fury” toward the president, writes John Heilemann of New York magazine.
Therefore, Mr. Obama, finish the job. Your attempts to straddle a middle position has lost most of your financial sector money. Give it up, because it is political crack cocaine. Quickly get behind meaningful financial reform. Use that bully pulpit to show that you really mean it when you speak for regular folks and for main street. Get passionate and loud, if you really mean want to reform Wall Street. I should tell you that I voted for you, but I'm just about to write you off on financial reform. Why aren't you outlawing banks that are too big to fail? Why aren't you pushing furiously for re-enactment for Glass-Steagall?

Continue ReadingFinish the job, Mr. Obama.