How were you at maths?

Post Reply New Topic

In terms of basic logical arithmetic I am pretty good. I'm even good at converting between different numbering base systems and adding, subtracting.... etc in those different base systems.

When it comes to other areas though, I struggle big time, end up getting bored and losing interest and generally just zone out altogether.

Interesting that you mention trigonometry as being more spatial. We had just got on to trigonometry before doing O levels and I really struggled to grasp it. Needless to say my spatial skills are poor ie from borderline (70 or so) to low average(90 or so) on various online tests.

Weird. Went from the lowest set to the highest when I was in primary school, and stayed in the highest from then on. Yet it took me forever to learn some things, other things I got less slowly but in odd ways sometimes. There are ways of doing things that are supposedly easy that I simply can't get no matter how hard I try, yet the supposedly hard way is much easier. I don't know, there's a lot of things about it that don't make sense (my learning, that is). Overall, good, but not the very top - in primary school I was the worst in the top set, and in secondary maybe the middle of the top set, and in A level the worst of the class.

Yes, anything relating to 3D objects and angles has always been a little harder here, too. I suspect it's because solving problems in this area doesn't rely on an entirely logistical approach, as it is with algebra and other 'pure' maths. It was difficult starting my geology course for this reason, as a large part of the syllabus involves examining various rock and mineral specimens to determine things like cleavage, (planes of atomic weakness) and whether these planes are in one direction or several. It was a nightmare, at first. Incidentally, couldn't help but notice we live in the same town, fellow Southender.

I struggled so much at maths all through school. In math lessons my mind would wonder off and I just could not get the hang of it. When I was little (aged 5-9), the teachers would get out equipment for maths, like plastic shapes, or pretend money, or cardboard clocks, or cubes you fit together, and while most of the class used those to learn maths, I saw them as playthings, and was amused by the bright colours, and used to just muck around with them with the other kids on the special ed table. They had things like ADD or dyslexia or dyspraxia, and they struggled at maths too.

I disliked the routine practice, and particularly memorizing the times table - I still count up by various increments to get those numbers mentally. I liked problems showing practical applications more, and have always had a keen sense about what can be determined with math from the available numbers. I rebelled at the notion of numbers being squared as a useful concept because it was not presented in a familiar way like estimating floor tiles. I did better at geometry, as I could visualize the problem as well as work it by rules. I had a math teacher who complained I was lazy, but if he'd just challenged me to find the new spring rates and gear ratios needed for the big engined cars doodled in my books, he'd have had me.

Eventually, I wanted to do some engineering, and enough algebra arose from memory to handle the formulas needed for flexible structures. For a while I could punch a hundred keys on a calculator as readily as constructing a grammatical sentence. That got boring, so I wrote a BASIC program to let me input just a few digits for each iteration. I only ever ran across one problem I couldn't do without calculus. I love being able to go to the store and buy something that isn't two sizes too big just in case I need the strength or stiffness.
I don't know what has happened to the schools. There seems to be an epidemic of "graduates" who can't figure out 10% tax even with a calculator, while we old farts have exact change ready by mental arithmetic. If you want to be ready use math when it is to your advantage, like when buying credit or insurance, you have to learn to play with it.

Until I got to calculus I aced all of it. Got tutored in calculus and made it through courses that needed it. Could even apply it to everyday life--figured out how to get elapsed time from counter readings and vice versa on a VCR for example.

I took special ed math, it was a special ed class. I took a regular math class when I was a senior in high school then I got a C or D

I was absolutely brilliant at it in primary school but pressure to keep up the good form as well as having a teacher I didn't like made me begin to resent it. By GCSE level I was taking intermediate rather than advanced but I still got the highest grade avaliable at that level. I moved on more to the arts in secondary school.

my cat was more adept at maths than I was.

British people of a certain age will understand this: I got a C.S.E. grade 5 in maths in 1984! That's the worst grade possible without failing! I did get a little better over the years and use boolean algebra daily in my job but I still really suck at arthmetic (I cannot divide and have never been able to remember my times-tables).

Give me words any day

When the other nerds were taking a supplemental course in slide rule, I was gambling that electronic calculators would arrive by the time I needed them. I remember when the price of a 4-function, pocket-size model was exciting news at $1k. I still have one that needs over 1 second to calculate sines. Unfortunately, teaching has not taken advantage of the change in relative ease between drudgery and structuring a problem. The purpose of Common Core seems to be to leave most people vulnerable to deceptive dealings.
"Lightning calculators" or math savants instantly recognize 343 as 7 cubed, and hundreds of other "individuals." The ability often arose in shepherd boys who found numbers to be their best playmates.

I think you have discovered the real intent.

Like you, I found rote memorization intolerable and was very slow to learn the times table. This naturally meant difficulty with fractions and division, so I did not enjoy arithmetic, once we moved to algebra, though, I really enjoyed it ans was good at it. Geometry was even better, though I sometime had difficulty memorizing postulates.

I really enjoyed using math in physics and chemistry.

I was average at best. Arithmetic was easy enough but I had a hard time with algebra largely because I didn't apply myself and do the practice work, and because I didn't see the practical use of it. Statistics interest me quite a bit though. I never made it past algebra I.

Not feeling too hot at it atm, just got caught out by a Rayleigh's quotient question in an exam, was way out of leftfield, like nothing in any of the past papers or lecture notes, I'm normally good at this but this one got me

I loved maths at school, college and university. For me maths was a more natural language than words - it made more sense to me. I still have a thing for numbers, especially primes. That said I'm not a savant - just in my element with maths.