# blueollie

Paul Krugman: reviews a book called Seven Bad Ideas by Jeff Madrick. The idea:

In “Seven Bad Ideas: How Mainstream Economists Have Damaged America and the World,” Jeff Madrick — a contributing editor at Harper’s Magazine and a frequent writer on matters economic — argues that the professional failures since 2008 didn’t come out of the blue but were rooted in decades of intellectual malfeasance.

As a practicing and, I’d claim, mainstream economist myself, I’m tempted to quibble. How “mainstream,” really, are the bad ideas he attacks? How much of the problem is bad economic ideas per se as opposed to economists who have proved all too ready to drop their own models — in effect, reject their own ideas — when their models conflict with their political leanings? And was it the ideas of economists or the prejudices of politicians that led to so much bad policy? [...]

Such quibbles aside, “Seven Bad Ideas” tells us an important and broadly accurate story about what went wrong. Economists presented as reality an idealized vision of free markets, dressed up in fancy math that gave it a false appearance of rigor. As a result, the world was unprepared when markets went bad. Economic ideas, declared John Maynard Keynes, are “dangerous for good or evil.” And in recent years, sad to say, evil has had the upper hand.

Speaking of ideas: are we becoming afraid to make our students uncomfortable? I know what I read in the media, but I am not sure as to how accurate it is.

Note: I am not saying that students should be taught “all points of view”; some ideas have been shown to be crackpot (e. g. creationism). They shouldn’t be taught as if they are viable ideas.

Now speaking of science and religion Biologist David Barash had an article in the New York Times about the talk he has with his classes at a public university:

And that’s where The Talk comes in. It’s irresponsible to teach biology without evolution, and yet many students worry about reconciling their beliefs with evolutionary science. Just as many Americans don’t grasp the fact that evolution is not merely a “theory,” but the underpinning of all biological science, a substantial minority of my students are troubled to discover that their beliefs conflict with the course material.

Until recently, I had pretty much ignored such discomfort, assuming that it was their problem, not mine. Teaching biology without evolution would be like teaching chemistry without molecules, or physics without mass and energy. But instead of students’ growing more comfortable with the tension between evolution and religion over time, the opposite seems to have happened. Thus, The Talk.

There are a few ways to talk about evolution and religion, I begin. [..]

I CONCLUDE The Talk by saying that, although they don’t have to discard their religion in order to inform themselves about biology (or even to pass my course), if they insist on retaining and respecting both, they will have to undertake some challenging mental gymnastic routines. And while I respect their beliefs, the entire point of The Talk is to make clear that, at least for this biologist, it is no longer acceptable for science to be the one doing those routines, as Professor Gould and noma have insisted we do.

I recommend reading the entire article. I especially like Biology Professor Jerry Coyne’s critique of it:

As I mentioned two posts ago, David Barash, a biologist at the University of Washington who works on animal behavior and evolution, has a post in today’s New York Times, “God, Darwin, and my college biology class.” It’s basically an argument for the incompatibility of science and religion, and I like it a lot, not the least because I agree with him 100%.

But there’s one thing about his piece that bothers me: Barash’s article is about how he tells his animal behavior class that science and religion are incompatible. In other words, he’s making theological arguments at a public university. [...]

But in fact, and this is my beef (a small one, like a filet mignon): Barash may not be accommodating science with religion, but he’s still discussing their relationship, and his view of their incompatibility—in a science class. I wouldn’t do that, especially in a public university. One could even make the argument that he’s skirting the First Amendment here, mixing government (a state university) and religion. After all, if Eric Hedin can’t tell his students in a Ball State University science class that biology and cosmology are compatible with belief in God, why is it okay to say that they’re incompatible with God?

I share Professor Coyne’s trepidation here.

September 30, 2014

## How to anger your professor

There is a good list here.

So, what about the professors? Well, I have a list for that too but I’ll put some effort into writing it down.

But for the professors, it boils down to:

1. Being responsible.
2. Working hard.
3. Being professional.

Sadly, I’ve seen professors fail to live up to at least one of these from time to time.

September 27, 2014 Posted by | education | , | 2 Comments

## e-mailing professors and “students of today”

Workout notes
Weights plus 5 mile treadmill run (protecting the foot) Foot: oh so slightly sore after.
weights:
pull ups: 5 sets of 10 (ok) with rotator cuff and McKenzie
bench: 10 x 135, 3 x 180 (weak), 9 x 160 (rotator cuff)
incline: 10 x 135
military/pull down/row super set:
military: 3 sets of 10 x 40 dumbbell (standing)
pull down: 3 sets of 7 traditional, 7 low (160/100)
row: 3 sets of 10 x 65 dumbbell (single arm)
Hip hikes, achilles.

I was a sweaty mess (45 minutes) and then I ran.
started with 5.6-5.7…increased every 2 minutes until I got to 7…started to die. 20:15 at 2, then I did some 6/6.7 every .25 miles.
Total: 47:55 for 5; this was more work than I had anticipated.

This is a good guide on how to NOT e-mail your professor (fictional student; e-mail is a collage of actual e-mails)

The professor says something interesting:

And before you go thinking that Anderson is publicly shaming the student: ‘cartmanrulez99′ a fictional creation, based on “two or three poor emails put together,” explains Anderson on YouTube. “I would never post an email of a student to the Internet nor would I suggest anyone else ever doing that.”

Yep. But this is interesting too (emphasis mine):

Moreover, he adds, he’s not youth-bashing. “In my opinion, each and every generation is smarter than the previous generation,” he writes. “I have seen that first-hand in my twenty years of teaching. If you think that there were no dumb people in the past, think again.”

The emphasis is ABSOLUTELY NOT TRUE FOR ME; that is, the current students don’t appear to be smarter to me. BUT….there are mitigating factors at play here:

1. I went to a very selective undergraduate institution. Then I served in the Nuclear Navy; my fellow officers were taken from the upper 20 percent of graduating classes in engineering and science programs. Then I got my Ph. D. at a division I research place.

Therefore, the average student I see at my “median ACT of 25, median calculus ACT of 29-30″ isn’t as talented as the people that I went to college and beyond with.

2. We teach service courses including mathematics for non-technical majors. See point 1.

BUT: it is true that today’s A student is pretty good, at least the A students in mathematics and science are.

And yes, we had presumptuous idiots in my day too…though we didn’t have e-mail until I was almost done with graduate school. :-)

3. Concerning the 20 plus years I’ve been here: we’ve had ebbs and flows in student quality. The current class appears to be an “up” class. This ebb and flow probably wouldn’t be seen by a professor who teaches at an elite university or at a larger state university.

September 18, 2014

## Good advice to students from President Obama

Note: the increase in the cost of education comes mostly from increased administrative costs. Drivers: student services, learning assistance centers and technology!

But students have some responsibility for their own educations as President Obama makes clear from 3:00 to 3:40:

August 17, 2014

## It isn’t “j” it is “i”!

If you get the comment/joke at 30:30 to 31:05, you are probably my kind of person. :-)

August 6, 2014

## Republicans: overly wedded to what they want to believe

This first thing from Bill Maher caught my eye. He was interviewing Neil Degrasse Tyson and mentioned that there was a National Review article about him. There were the usual “they don’t like you because you are a smart black guy” comments (strictly speaking, not true; Ben Carson and Professor Thomas Sowell are smart, black and are popular with conservatives). But later he gets to the real issue of what disturbs them about Dr. Tyson (about 1:10 to 2:00): fundamentally, they can’t stomach that humans aren’t “special” in a way that the rest of the universe isn’t; the idea that this universe was NOT created with US in mind (or FOR us) just disturbs the hell out of them.

This is an old clip, but this would make many a Bible Believer’s head explode:

Conservatives aren’t above just making stuff up either. The Republican supply side experiment in Kansas just blew up in their faces. So, the Republicans point to Texas and try to compare it to California…and the latter has rebounded quite nicely. That is too much for Republicans to bear, so their economists just make stuff up. This time, they got caught.

They also love to grab a headline which maybe misrepresents a program and then claim: “we KNEW what those liberals were up to!”

This is from an article about higher education in The Daily Caller. The Daily Caller references a right wing blog which references a concern from a professor at the University of Wisconsin. Here is what is going on: the Board of Regents signed off on a plan that has a goal of equalizing minority representation in the more desirable majors as well as grade distribution: one could read that as “we want minority students to do as well as anyone else.” A professor expressed a concern that professors would be under pressure to inflate the grades of minority students in these fields.

I can understand the concern that the professor has; stuff like this has happened in grade schools.

But that is only a concern; there is nothing in this plan that tells people to give any student a grade that they didn’t earn.

Think of it this way: suppose one was concerned with the physical fitness of, say, urban students. So one comes up with a plan that says, say, that male urban 9’th grade students be brought up to the same standards met by, say, male 9’th grade suburban students. Suppose the metrics used is, say, the 2 mile run and the number of pull ups that can be done in 1 minute.

The goal would be clear, right? No one would expect the urban students to get a 1 minute handicap or, say, a 2 pull up handicap. The idea would be, say to introduce physical fitness activities that are more physically demanding and the like.

Yes, I know, there have been times, at SOME schools, where professors were required to weight, say, participation to a certain percentage so as to encourage student effort. And no, I don’t approve of that type of program.

July 26, 2014

## Poverty, statistics, sexual harassment and weight loss surgery

Weight loss surgery
That is one of the things that strikes me as “icky”; it sure looks like mutilation to me. But it can help and, surprisingly bring changes to gut bacteria and improves diabetic conditions. Yes, there are several kinds (e. g. bypass, lap band, etc.) and these are discussed in this article.

Poverty
This is an interesting video story about a 52 year old guy who delivers pizzas for a living…via a bicycle. He has done this for 30 years; it is not an easy life.

I remember being more clueless in the mid 1980’s. One of my lifting buddies at the Austin YMCA used to throw shot for Texas State (then Southwest Texas); I played football with his brothers.

He then had a job with the Austin Park District; he worked outdoors keeping the parks in shape. I said “how cool is that; you get to be outside all day!”. He reminded me: “you know, that job doesn’t pay very much.” That helped me keep some perspective.

The effects of poverty are felt in education as well. This is a long story in the New Yorker about a middle school mathematics teacher who helped his students cheat on a standardized exam; the idea is that schools would be closed and teachers fired if students didn’t meet a certain score on a standardized exam.

Yeah, I know; we all love the movies where some firebrand comes in and “believes in” the poor students and gets them to meet some standard that everyone else said “couldn’t be met”.

But student performance is a product of many factors including the environment in which they are raised, the health care and nutrition that they got while growing up and individual genetic factors.

Administrators who bellow about “meet these standards; no excuses” don’t do any good, especially if the standards to be met aren’t set in a realistic manner.

Sexual harassment in science
This is a survey about sexual harassment and sexual assault “in the field” among scientists.

The questions were:

1) ‘‘Have you ever personally experienced inappropriate or sexual remarks, comments about physical beauty, cognitive sex differences, or other jokes, at a field site? (If you have had more than one experience, the most notable to you).’’

2) ‘‘Have you ever experienced physical sexual harassment, unwanted sexual contact, or sexual contact in which you could not or did not give consent or felt it would be unsafe to fight back or not give your consent at a field site? (If you have had more than one experience, the most notable to you).’’

Note: sexual assault could include something as benign as getting your butt slapped.

The results:

Of the women who responded to the survey, 71 percent reported having experienced inappropriate sexual comments while doing scientific fieldwork and 26 percent said they had experienced sexual assault.

Of the men who responded, 41 percent reported inappropriate sexual comments and 6 percent reported sexual assault.

The wording is interesting. I suppose that if I were to answer the question honestly, I could say that *I* was sexually assaulted at a running race; one time I was trying to kick it in at a small town 10K as the clock was almost at 50 minutes. I sprinted (or what passed for a sprint), stumbled across the finish line and got a hearty butt slap from one of the women at the finish line.

No, she wasn’t a friend; this was at a small race in rural Wisconsin.
No, I didn’t care; in fact I was almost comatose at the time…when I walked away I turned around, looked at her and thought “oh, she is cute; pity I wasn’t more aware at the time” and chuckled.

But I had not given consent….but I tend to answer questions very literally.

July 17, 2014

## Two points about that George Will Column

It appears to me that George Will loves to stir things up.

He recently wrote a column with the following title:

Colleges become the victims of progressivism

Ok, I wonder how much he actually KNOWS about what goes on at a university. He does make a couple of valid points about the discussion of sexual assault on campus:

Consider the supposed campus epidemic of rape, a.k.a. “sexual assault.” Herewith, a Philadelphia magazine report about Swarthmore College, where in 2013 a student “was in her room with a guy with whom she’d been hooking up for three months”:

He goes on to describe a murky situation; this type of thing indeed happens. Ask a student services professional.

He also takes issue with some of the reported numbers and percentages:

Simple arithmetic demonstrates that if the 12 percent reporting rate is correct, the 20 percent assault rate is preposterous. Mark Perry of the American Enterprise Institute notes, for example, that in the four years 2009 to 2012 there were 98 reported sexual assaults at Ohio State. That would be 12 percent of 817 total out of a female student population of approximately 28,000, for a sexual assault rate of approximately 2.9 percent — too high but nowhere near 20 percent.

So far, so good. I haven’t checked his work, but there is nothing really to be outraged about. These are reasonable things to discuss. But, prior to making these points, he had gone completely off of the rails:

they make victimhood a coveted status that confers privileges, victims proliferate.

Saying things like this is a great way to make someone disregard the rest of what you have to say.

As far as the rest of the column: sure, there are attempts made to get people to understand that not everyone is like you; that some people are recovering from a tough time (e. g. think about returning combat veterans who have lived the horrors of war).

And sometimes, attempts to be sensitive go a bit too far; it isn’t as if many (most?) people have an ability to recover.

This leads me to my second point When conservative pundits describe a college campus and college life, they describe, well, something I haven’t really seen in the 28 years I’ve been teaching college courses (professor, lecturer, teaching assistant).

The bulk of my time has been trying to get students to understand facts like $\int sin(2x) dx = -\frac{1}{2}cos(2x) + C$.

I remember a couple of times when conservatives found out that I was a college professor. They accused me of “teaching kids liberal ideas and how to hate our country”; I replied that “I didn’t know that there was an un-American way to solve a differential equation or to compute a p-value.”

They got their feelings hurt! :-)

Sometimes conservatives create some fantasy world to attack.

I am not saying that there aren’t whack-job professors; there certainly are. But they tend to be the rare exception.

June 10, 2014

## Whining, politics and science

Gee, when people dismiss crackpot ideas (e. g. engage in global warming denialism) it gives Charles Krauthammer the sadz. No, Mr. Krauthammer: ideas have no inherent right to respect, including…well, some academic ideas like this one (forbidding “triggers”).

Speaking of dumbness: a few of the “in the future predictions” made by the film “Idiocracy” have come true. But…I should point out that some of these predictions were already commonplace prior to the movie. Remember how humans in “civilized” countries used to amuse themselves: public executions, burning animals alive, making people fight to the death, etc.

Politics
Yes, keeping control of the Senate will be an uphill fight for the Democrats, even if some of the “head to head” polls look ok now. There is the problem of the “drag” on the ticket due to the unpopularity of the President in the states in question, many of which are “red” to begin with.

But there is time, and the recent news for Obamacare has been good.

And maybe, just maybe, there is some attention being paid to inequality. Ok, that book by Piketty is rather highbrow.

Science
It is interesting, but being slightly underweight and undereating seems to help with longevity. Is there an evolutionary reason why this is so? There is a new conjecture about this, but the conjecture has detractors:

Why did creatures evolve such a mechanism in the first place? Researchers have declared the most popular theory doesn’t make evolutionary sense, and they’ve proposed a new explanation in its place.

The most prominent theory involves what happens physiologically during times of food scarcity. When the living is good, natural selection favors organisms that invest energy in reproduction. In times of hardship, however, animals have fewer offspring, diverting precious nutrients to cell repair and recycling so they can survive until the famine ends, when reproduction begins anew. Cell repair and recycling appear to be substantial antiaging and anticancer processes, which may explain why underfed lab animals live longer and rarely develop old-age pathologies like cancer and heart disease.

Margo Adler agrees with the basic cellular pathways, but she’s not so sure about the evolutionary logic. Adler, an evolutionary biologist at the University of New South Wales in Australia, says this popular idea relies on a big assumption: that natural selection favors this energy switch from reproduction to survival because animals will have more young in the long run—so long as they actually survive and reproduce. “This idea is repeated over and over again in the literature as if it’s true, but it just doesn’t make that much sense for evolutionary reasons,” she says.

The problem, Adler says, is that wild animals don’t have the long, secure lives of their laboratory cousins. Instead, they’re not only endangered by famine but by predators and pathogens, random accidents and rogue weather as well. They also face physiological threats from a restricted diet, including a suppressed immune system, difficulty with healing and greater cold sensitivity. For these reasons, delaying reproduction until food supplies are more plentiful is a huge risk for wild animals. Death could be waiting just around the corner.

Better to reproduce now, Adler says. The new hypothesis she proposes holds that during a famine animals escalate cellular repair and recycling, but they do so for the purpose of having as many progeny as possible during a famine, not afterward. They “make the best of a bad situation” to maximize their fitness in the present. “It’s an efficiency mode that the animal goes into,” she says. Adler and colleague Russell Bonduriansky published their reasoning in the March BioEssays.[...]

Mathematics
This Scientific American article discusses “modular forms” and notes that a current mathematician appears to have solved a riddle proposed by a famous mathematician from yesteryear. As articles about mathematics go, this one is pretty readable.

April 18, 2014

## “Viral” math common core meme

(cross posted on my math blog)

This is making the rounds on social media:

Now a good explanation as to what is going on can be found here; it is written by an experienced high school math teacher.

I’ll give my take on this; I am NOT writing this for other math professors; they would likely be bored by what I am about to say.

My take
First of all, I am NOT defending the mathematics standards of Common Core. For one: I haven’t read them. Another: I have no experience teaching below the college level. What works in my classroom would probably not work in most high school and grade school classrooms.

But I think that I can give some insight as to what is going on with this example (in the photo).

When one teaches mathematics, one often teaches BOTH how to calculate and the concepts behind the calculation techniques. Of course, one has to learn the calculation technique; no one (that I know) disputes that.

What is going on in the photo
The second “calculation” is an exercise designed to help students learn the concept of subtraction and NOT “this is how you do the calculation”.

Suppose one wants to show the students that subtracting two numbers yields “the distance on the number line between those numbers”. So, “how far away from 12 is 32? Well, one moves 3 units to get to 15, then 5 to get to 20. Now that we are at 20 (a multiple of 10), it is easy to move one unit of 10 to get to 30, then 2 more units to get to 32. So we’ve moved 20 units total.

Think of it this way: in the days prior to google maps and gps systems, imagine you are taking a trip from, say, Morton, IL to Chicago and you wanted to take interstate highways all of the way. You wanted to figure the mileage.

You notice (I am making these numbers up) that the “distance between big cities” map lists 45 miles from Peoria to Bloomington and 150 miles from Bloomington to Chicago. Then you look at the little numbers on the map to see that Morton is between Peoria and Bloomington: 10 miles away from Peoria.

So, to find the distance, you calculate (45-10) + 150 = 185 miles; you used the “known mileages” as guide posts and used the little map numbers as a guide to get from the small town (Morton) to the nearest city for which the “table mileage” was calculated.

That is what is going on in the photo.

Why the concept is important

There are many reasons. The “distance between nodes” concept is heavily used in graph theory and in operations research. But I’ll give a demonstration in numerical methods:

Suppose one needs a numerical approximation of $\int^{48}_0 \sqrt{1 + cos^2(x)} dx$. Now if one just approaches with by a Newton-Coats method (say, Simpson’s rule) or by Romberg, or even by a quadrature method, one runs into problems. The reason: the integrand is oscillatory and the range of integration is very long.

But one notices that the integrand is periodic; there is no need to integrate along the entire range.

Note that there are 7 complete periods of $2 \pi$ between 0 and 48. So one merely needs to calculate $7 \int^{2 \pi}_0 \sqrt{1+cos^2(x)} dx + \int^{48 - 14 \pi}_0 \sqrt{1+ cos^2(x)} dx$ and these two integrals are much more readily approximated.

In fact, why not approximate $30 \int^{\frac{\pi}{2}}_0 \sqrt{1+cos^2(x)} dx + \int^{48 - 15 \pi}_0 \sqrt{1 + cos^2(x)}dx$ which is even better?

The concept of calculating distance in terms of set segment lengths comes in handy.

Or, one can think of it this way
When we teach derivatives, we certainly teach how to calculate using the standard differentiation rules. BUT we also teach the limit definition as well, though one wouldn’t use that definition in the middle of, say, “find the maximum and minimum of $f(x) = x-\frac{1}{x}$ on the interval $[\frac{1}{4}, 3]$” Of course, one uses the rules.

But if you saw some kid’s homework and saw $f'(x)$ being calculated by the limit definition, would you assume that the professor was some idiot who wanted to turn a simple calculation into something more complicated?

March 30, 2014