> My strong opinion as someone who majored in math is that, at least within the US, the standard calculus requirement should be replaced with statistics. So much more useful and so much more important as an adult.
I'm questioning your math pedagogy.
Calculus is the single most important math anyone, of any field, can learn as it's the first "practical math" you actually learn. Life behaves like calculus and in order to think about real life you need the concept of limits, derivatives, integrals, differentials, etc. It's patently absurd to say this should be replaced by statistics, which done to any rigor requires up to 2 years worth of calculus (through diff eq.) to even appreciate.
I'm shocked that you're a math major and didn't take away the biggest thing from learning analysis - the ability to think clearly through a problem and prove it correctly. While you may not be asked to vomit cantor's diagonalization onto paper for an interview the ability to think about problems you learned from doing these proofs translates to so many different fields, jobs, and life skills that I take the complete opposite view. If you want to understand anything you need to learn how to proof. I don't care if you're a nurse or an accountant. A rigorous proof based math course will change your life.
If by "learn statistics instead of calculus" you mean being able to mindlessly vomit today's new machine learning paradigm without understanding a thing then I think I can understand where you are coming from. Otherwise, I think this is some absurd parody of someone who studied math.
Unless you are dealing with subjects that would actually use calculus, people in their day to day lives would do much better to understand probabilities, statistics and experiment design. Most of our lives are dealing with the results of empirical studies, in business, science and policy and humanity could use a big reminder that life is not a binary black or white, but a huge pot of maybes.
Otherwise it just gets absorbed and forgotten like another 'useless information' class. Ask how many CS majors post college use or remember calculus vs understanding stats for the seven millionth badly designed A/B test they ran at work today.
> Unless you are dealing with subjects that would actually use calculus, people in their day to day lives would do much better to understand probabilities, statistics and experiment design.
Probability theory is applied analysis. For example a measure density is a derivation of a measure with respect to another measure (Radon–Nikodym derivative). Or how do you often assign probabilities to measurable set: Lebesgue-Stieltjes integral.
So you better have a very good understanding of calculus before starting with probability and statistics.
> the biggest thing from learning analysis - the ability to think clearly through a problem and prove it correctly
I was a math major and this is not exclusive to calculus or analysis. If anything, algebra classes in things like group theory were much more instructive on this point. Everything from my third and fourth years (when I specialized into combinatorial optimization) was built on a cornerstone of proofs and theorems.
I think calculus and trigonometry shouldn't be taught to non-math majors. You have the perspective of someone who is passionate about calculus, which is great, but considering many people aren't as passionate, what you're suggesting (status quo) doesn't work. Or maybe you have ideas on teaching calculus better than how it's currently done? Calculus is obviously extremely important, but I don't think it's useful to drill a few things that most people will quickly forget after the test.
I do think logic is important, and teaching that instead of focusing on math proofs might be a good alternative.
No, most of STEM should learn calculus at some point. In engineering and physics they are useful; in CS, chemistry and biology they are reasonable foundational knowledge and used in some specializations. Trigonometry is used even in some of the trades.
For science-oriented high school curriculums, calculus is necessary, and should only be optional in a few cases where the student already really knows what they want to do.
By the time a student wants to specialize at say 20, they should have already had some foundational ability for that specialty, otherwise they wouldn't be able to compete internationally. For people who don't end up using calculus, it's a waste, but there is a trade-off. As a result, much of the high school curriculum is to build a broad foundation to prepare for multiple possible specializations.
Most people rarely seem to encounter anything well defined enough to use math or any kind of formal reasoning on, except stuff that has an app or a professional service for.
Maybe it would help them not get scammed by keto diets and unsafe drugs and such though.
I'm questioning your math pedagogy.
Calculus is the single most important math anyone, of any field, can learn as it's the first "practical math" you actually learn. Life behaves like calculus and in order to think about real life you need the concept of limits, derivatives, integrals, differentials, etc. It's patently absurd to say this should be replaced by statistics, which done to any rigor requires up to 2 years worth of calculus (through diff eq.) to even appreciate.
I'm shocked that you're a math major and didn't take away the biggest thing from learning analysis - the ability to think clearly through a problem and prove it correctly. While you may not be asked to vomit cantor's diagonalization onto paper for an interview the ability to think about problems you learned from doing these proofs translates to so many different fields, jobs, and life skills that I take the complete opposite view. If you want to understand anything you need to learn how to proof. I don't care if you're a nurse or an accountant. A rigorous proof based math course will change your life.
If by "learn statistics instead of calculus" you mean being able to mindlessly vomit today's new machine learning paradigm without understanding a thing then I think I can understand where you are coming from. Otherwise, I think this is some absurd parody of someone who studied math.