On 25/02/2018 09:21, Jim Lesurf wrote:
In article , RJH
wrote:
From a quick look, I'd have hoped so. I think (even) I can follow most
of the calculations, even if I don't understand the 'why' - say, the
basis of assumptions.

Incidentally, did many of your students enrol on non-honours degrees?

I lectured at St Andrews and Scotland runs a different educational system
to England. So I need to upack things a little to answer that.

Here we run a *four year* first degree course. This is because the
established arrangement in Scotland has been for school students to do a
*one year* 'highers' not a two-year 'A level'. So they come in a year
younger.

Again, conventionally here they take rather more than 3 or 4 subjects for
their 'highers' so have a broader base, with less depth.

To accomodate that the entry to 1st year is quite wide. And for those who
have done 'A levels' or equivalent there is the option to enter direct into
'second year'.


I didn't realise that - I know some students from England who've studied
in Scotland. Pretty sure they did 4 years - I'd guess especially good A
levels might have got them a pass to year 2. Dread to think how the
loans system operates for English students.

So the first two years (nominally) are not 'honours', but a wider class.
This then narrows down to two 'honours' years for the students who chose to
do physical sciences. They then can pick what courses they do.

My own honours courses would be given once every *two* years. So some
students did them in their 1st Hons year, others in 2nd Hons. This meant
more courses could be offerred overall.

Only a tiny number took a 'pass' degree. Most went though and got an
Honours degree of some type.


In my experience, English students don't have any say when they start -
it's honours or nothing. But like the Scottish system they can decide to
drop the honours - usually by not taking the dissertation. I've known
that happen once - over a few thousand students. Most of the time a
non-honours is a result of some under-performance along the line, and is
awarded at the end once the credit tally is known.

I think the bulk of the maths in what I taught would be easy enough for
most of them. But the key is in what you said. Understanding the 'why and
how' can be harder because this is where people need to twig the concepts
from which the maths can flow and give concrete answers to specific
questions.


Yep. Must say I find mathematical (and a lot of natural science) theory
very difficult to reconcile. I worked with a quantitative economist for
a while, and was ground down by the liberal use of 'nominal' and
'equals'. Things like trigonometry squares/triangles itself in my little
brain, but much more than that and I'm at sea :-)

--
Cheers, Rob