Scientific American Math Doc Defends Algebra Ed

Evelyn Lamb, math Ph.D., responds to poli-sci professor Andrew Hacker's argument that most students do not need an algebra class. Steve Mirsky reports

Illustration of a Bohr atom model spinning around the words Science Quickly with various science and medicine related icons around the text

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

“I disagree that algebra doesn’t do anything for our lives.”

Evelyn Lamb, math PhD and Scientific American writer, on the WNYC radio program the Takeaway. She’s responding to political science professor Andrew Hacker. In The New York Times, he suggests that, although all students should attain what he calls quantitative literacy, most do not need the rigors of an algebra class.

But “it’s in all sorts of fields, not just STEM fields (science, technology, engineering and math). But, also, real estate agents use algebra and geometry every day. Anyone in finance. Budgeting in your own home. Understanding loan terms and mortgages. All of these are applications of algebra.”


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


You can listen to the full interview with Lamb and a previous one with Hacker at thetakeaway.org. An article by Lamb about the need for algebra is at www.scientificamerican.com.

Lamb also noted that another mathematical discipline comes in handy when she sews: “There is topology—the number of holes in your garment matters, or else you can’t put on your pants.”

—Steve Mirsky

[The above text is a transcript of this podcast.]

[Interested in science and the Olympics? Check out the new Scientific American e-book, the Science of Sports: Winning at the Olympics. Available in most popular e-book formats including for the Kindle and the Nook. Just $3.99 wherever fine electrons flow or electromagnetic waves pass.]
 

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe