Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Winnie Wrote a Math Book

Zonk posted more than 7 years ago | from the why-isn't-that-a-textbook dept.

Math 638

SoyChemist writes "Hollywood is not known for providing a wealth of positive female role models. Danica McKellar, the actress that played Winnie Cooper on The Wonder Years and Elsie Snuffin on The West Wing, has written a math book for teenage girls. 'Math Doesn't Suck' is done in the style of a teen magazine. It even includes a horoscope, cute doodles of shoes and jewelry, and testimonials from attractive young career women that use math at work. It focuses on fractions and pre-algebra and uses mnemonics like calling a reciprocal a 'refliprocal', because you just take the fraction and flip it upside down. Wired interviewed McKellar about the new book and her crusade to eliminate the achievement gap between boys and girls in math courses. McKellar graduated Summa Cum Laude from UCLA. While studying there, she co-authored a proof and presented it at a conference. After she and Mayim Bialik — star of Blossom and a PhD in neuroscience — appeared in a 20/20 episode about intellectual actresses, several literary agents came knocking on her door."

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

i'd love to cum on her tits (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#20103315)

mmmmmmmmm

Gay (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#20103593)

Such a stupid concept. I'm glad that I did not read the article.

Barbie disagrees (5, Funny)

NJVil (154697) | more than 7 years ago | (#20103331)

Back in 1994, Barbie thought differently.

Math is hard!

Re:Barbie disagrees (2, Insightful)

purpledinoz (573045) | more than 7 years ago | (#20103447)

I applaud this effort. I really really wish there were more women in tech. It would have made my university life more enjoyable. And work would be more fun too....

Re:Barbie disagrees (-1, Flamebait)

ShieldW0lf (601553) | more than 7 years ago | (#20103873)

I think they should be doing something useful... go pop out a couple of babies, ladies.

Re:Barbie disagrees (3, Funny)

hal2814 (725639) | more than 7 years ago | (#20104007)

You should've seen what he thought back in 1944 [wikipedia.org] .

Yeah, I'll knock on her door, too (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#20103333)

But the judge says I'm not allowed within 100 feet of her.

Re:Yeah, I'll knock on her door, too (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#20103647)

I remember that crappy show, Winnie was pretty much a slut.

Random bits from the book... (5, Funny)

grub (11606) | more than 7 years ago | (#20103339)


"If the man of the house gets home from work at 5:30 and dinner takes 1.25 hours to prepare, at what time should you start making it?"

"If your makeup costs $40 and you put it on once a day, how much does it cost per application if the makeup runs out after 70 days?"

"If the cake recipe calls for the oven to be at 400 degree fahrenheit but the oven only has celsius....

Re:Random bits from the book... (2, Funny)

Teifion (1022083) | more than 7 years ago | (#20103511)

Considering the target audience, those examples are just about right. I find that it's far easier to learn something when I can apply it to an everyday situation or at least something I am familiar with. If the rest of the examples are as good as those then the book seems very good. I find it odd that your post was modded Funny rather than Informative.

Re:Random bits from the book... (2, Insightful)

happyemoticon (543015) | more than 7 years ago | (#20103841)

I detect a bit of irony in GP's post. One example assumes that a woman is a homemaker who should be cooking dinner for her man; two assumes that a woman should be wearing makeup; three assumes that women should, again, be cooking. That this is framed in the context of something which supposes to emancipate women from underachieving in math, science and engineering is what creates the irony.

Myself, I wouldn't say that being feminine in this highly traditional sense is an innately bad thing, but that other role options should be presented and accepted by people at a young age so they can decide for themselves how to identify.

Re:Random bits from the book... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#20103959)

True, though I agree with the GP. I know a *LOT* of women who are math/physics majors or graduates.

They would have thrown up and/or been offended at page two of such a book as was described in TFS. The book looks like its designed to try to devapid the vapid.

I applaud the effort even if I think it is unlikely of success.

Re:Random bits from the book... (2, Funny)

happyemoticon (543015) | more than 7 years ago | (#20103529)

1: Ideally, one should wait a half an hour to an hour after settling in to eat. Most people have rituals they go through upon getting home from work (petting the dog, sitting down and watching some television, having a martini), and after those are completed they will be amicable enough to properly enjoy dinner.

2: Surely this is an oversimplification of the problem. First, you need both day makeup and evening makeup (bolder colors to stand out more in lower light conditions), and you might only wear your evening makeup three or four times a week. Also, not all makeup goes with all outfits, or all occasions. But then again, I suppose it's like those spherical frictionless cows falling from the sky.

3: One must also account for the fact that some ovens have different characteristics than others. Oftentimes you need to adjust the actual temperature a bit to get the proper effect. I'm not sure of the physics behind it, but my oven needs to be turned down about 25 degrees from whatever the recipe says.

Re:Random bits from the book... (4, Funny)

Otter (3800) | more than 7 years ago | (#20103589)

I'm not sure of the physics behind it, but my oven needs to be turned down about 25 degrees from whatever the recipe says.

I'd guess that your thermostat is miscalibrated, Dr. Maxwell.

Re:Random bits from the book... (0)

Mr. Underbridge (666784) | more than 7 years ago | (#20103817)

I'd guess that your thermostat is miscalibrated, Dr. Maxwell.

That or he's living in some alternate reality where everything has a greater degree of internal energy, requiring less heat to cook. Has he finally harnessed that mysterious zero-point energy they had in The Incredibles? It's the only logical conclusion.

Re:Random bits from the book... (1)

R2.0 (532027) | more than 7 years ago | (#20103631)

"my oven needs to be turned down about 25 degrees from whatever the recipe says."

You are aware that the knob on your oven is adjustable, right? Get a thermometer, get a true reading, and adjust your temp knob.

Re:Random bits from the book... (2, Funny)

everphilski (877346) | more than 7 years ago | (#20103867)

My knobs are digital ...

Re:Random bits from the book... (1)

Ucklak (755284) | more than 7 years ago | (#20103875)

Air pressure and altitude also play a factor.

Re:Random bits from the book... (3, Interesting)

moderatorrater (1095745) | more than 7 years ago | (#20103693)

It's a funny post, but it also illustrates one of the core problems with recruiting girls into math and engineering: a lot of them aren't interested. My sisters don't care about getting into a really intensive job because they know that they're going to get married and become homemakers. It's not that there's a problem if they do differently, it's that they've chosen that path to happiness. How many girls like my sisters are skewing the results of math/engineering studies?

Re:Random bits from the book... (1, Funny)

everphilski (877346) | more than 7 years ago | (#20103835)

If the stove is white, what color shoes should you be wearing? :)

Re:Random bits from the book... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#20103915)

See, now that's a trick question!

Everybody knows a woman should not wear shoes when cooking! ;-)

Oh Boy... (4, Funny)

teknopurge (199509) | more than 7 years ago | (#20103353)

It even includes a horoscope, cute doodles of shoes and jewelry, and testimonials from attractive young career women that use math at work. It focuses on fractions and pre-algebra and uses mnemonics like calling a reciprocal a 'refliprocal'
Time to put the plastic back on the Slashdot couches...

fp (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#20103365)

yeah i heard she was a math wiz years ago. a geeky friend of mine had a huge crush on her. i, myself, was always partial to jane leeves, gillian anderson, winona ryder and alia shawkat. oh, and of course i cant forget mila kunis.

Re:fp (2, Insightful)

cayenne8 (626475) | more than 7 years ago | (#20103507)

"Hollywood is not known for providing a wealth of positive female role models"

What? Plenty of good models out there...

And if just talking about looks and all, showing fit and lean, non-obese women is a good thing. We've got a horrible obesity problem out there, so, some skinnier role models are a good thing IMHO.

So, we now have 'thinkers' to combine with the 'lookers'...and pretty soon, we'll have perfect women if they follow their role models.

Re:fp (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#20103681)

We've got a horrible obesity problem out there, so, some skinnier role models are a good thing IMHO.

Good thing eating disorders aren't a big deal anymore. You know, pretty non-intrusive and easily curable. Low mortality rate, too.

Re:fp (2)

R2.0 (532027) | more than 7 years ago | (#20103743)

"And if just talking about looks and all, showing fit and lean, non-obese women is a good thing. We've got a horrible obesity problem out there, so, some skinnier role models are a good thing IMHO"

It's not a binary proposition. There is a huge range between obese (bad), and what actresses and models look like (also bad).

Re:fp (2, Interesting)

blackoutdustin (1002343) | more than 7 years ago | (#20103761)

stupid. showing overly skinny women is SO healthy for the psyche of young girls. let's make sure our math teachers have all posed for stuff [kadu.com.br] magazine first...

Re:fp (1)

strength_of_10_men (967050) | more than 7 years ago | (#20103811)

And if just talking about looks and all, showing fit and lean, non-obese women is a good thing. We've got a horrible obesity problem out there, so, some skinnier role models are a good thing IMHO.

because there are so many obese role models right now?

there is an obesity epidemic right now and while there are a multitude of reasons for it, lack of good role models isn't one of them, IMHO

Re:fp (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#20103961)

It's not that the obese population lacks "role models" of
slender or fit people. It that plump people lack role
models of slenderness or fitness that actually seems
reachable by them.

Oh christ she sounds like cunt with heavy flow (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#20103373)

Look how she defends her cookies, shoes and jewelry references in the book.

Nice try, but... (5, Insightful)

weak* (1137369) | more than 7 years ago | (#20103377)

I don't think one book, even if it looks like the rest of the teen girl trash rags, is going to overcome a decades of social pressure to avoid being seen as "nerdy." What we really need is to have high schools that don't go out of their way to reinforce the perception that going to state for ****ball is the pinnacle of achievement.

Re:Nice try, but... (4, Insightful)

GweeDo (127172) | more than 7 years ago | (#20103437)

Good point...they should just stop trying.

(btw, great attitude to take towards solid progressive thinking that will help women out)

Re:Nice try, but... (4, Insightful)

nuzak (959558) | more than 7 years ago | (#20103491)

Obviously then they should soldier on and continue doing the same lame ineffective thing, because to do otherwise would be "to stop trying". You sound like a certain president.

I suggest they give it a try, see how badly it flops, then try something else. Like not having to make everything "hip" and "edgy" and "way cool cowabunga dudes with jittery neon triangles". Yes, I'm showing my age -- but I bet the producers of this material are too.

Re:Nice try, but... (1)

lawpoop (604919) | more than 7 years ago | (#20103569)

I don't think one book, even if it looks like the rest of the teen girl trash rags, is going to overcome a decades of social pressure to avoid being seen as "nerdy."
Good point...they should just stop trying.

What we really need is to have high schools that don't go out of their way to reinforce the perception that going to state for ****ball is the pinnacle of achievement.
(btw, great attitude to take towards solid progressive thinking that will help women out)
Um, grandparent posted an actual solution and you chide their attitude? I'm starting to think you weren't being sarcastic...

Re:Nice try, but... (1)

Jeff DeMaagd (2015) | more than 7 years ago | (#20103819)

The "thinking" that the original book presents so far doesn't look very progressive.

Re:Nice try, but... (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#20103555)

Great point. Instead of writing a book, Winnie should have changed social norms in every high school in America.

Re:Nice try, but... (1)

masdog (794316) | more than 7 years ago | (#20103641)

You're right. One book won't overcome decades of social pressure. But you have to start somewhere, and putting basic math in the terms that the "Clueless" and "Bring It On" type crowds is one way to show that "math isn't...like...so totally hard and pointless."

Re:Nice try, but... (5, Funny)

Just Some Guy (3352) | more than 7 years ago | (#20103689)

What we really need is to have high schools that don't go out of their way to reinforce the perception that going to state for ****ball is the pinnacle of achievement.

OK, I'm dying to know: what sport at your high school is so unspeakably vulgar that you have to censor the name?

And are any videos online?

Re:Nice try, but... (1)

I am the blob (239590) | more than 7 years ago | (#20103839)

I'm pretty sure those are wildcards, not censorship bars.

Re:Nice try, but... (1)

teasea (11940) | more than 7 years ago | (#20103905)

All sports... or rather, s****ts

Re:Nice try, but... (5, Insightful)

iknownuttin (1099999) | more than 7 years ago | (#20103699)

I don't think one book, even if it looks like the rest of the teen girl trash rags, is going to overcome a decades of social pressure to avoid being seen as "nerdy."

I think it's more of society as a whole reducing to the lowest common denominator. It's no longer trying to strive to be educated and to better oneself, but it's now to act dumb, not try hard, talk like a moron, and become famous somehow and get the easy money. Paris Hilton is what kids strive to be: not Thomas Edison, Albert Einstein or Jack Kennedy (or whoever your favorite statesman is).

Do kids want to dress well? No, they dress like bums. They get piercings and tattoos like bikers, strippers, drug dealers and other lowlifes. Do they try to refine their communications skills? Hell no! They talk like some ghetto uneducated slob.

It was the same when I was growing up. The kids who dressed well and worked at school were called "preppies". Of course now, most of those "preppies" are MDs, JDs, engineers, etc.... The others, are waiting tables.

Re:Nice try, but... (1)

RockoTDF (1042780) | more than 7 years ago | (#20103947)

Really, because when I was in high school just over 2 years ago it was the preppy kids using and dealing the drugs and idolizing celebrities like paris hilton. How a kid dresses is totally irrelevant. Communication skills on the other hand were just as good/bad across all the different cliques in the school.

Re:Nice try, but... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#20103885)

Gah! People, if you are going to use regular expressions in your speech, please use them correctly! This goes for all **AA people as well, the "*" means 0, 1, or more matches, so *** is the same as ** is the same as *, so ****ball has 3 *s too many.

Re:Nice try, but... (1)

moderatorrater (1095745) | more than 7 years ago | (#20103963)

Only if your striving for performance. For readability, multiple stars can help.

Re:Nice try, but... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#20103975)

if they're the same, then STFU. why are you even complaining?

Re:Nice try, but... (1)

diwolf (537997) | more than 7 years ago | (#20104001)

Technically, it should be ????ball or *ball.. ****ball is redundant as * matches any number of characters already. The "?" matches a single character.

And what do horoscopes have to do with science? (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#20103379)

If one were to bring ten of the wisest men in the world together and ask them what was the most stupid thing in existence, they would not be able to discover anything so stupid as astrology.
- David Hilbert

Re:And what do horoscopes have to do with science? (1, Informative)

morgan_greywolf (835522) | more than 7 years ago | (#20103823)

There actually is some degree of astronomy science in astrology, and yes, it involves math and geometry. How many of you know that Halloween falls near 15-degrees Scorpio, and what that actually means, mathematically speaking?

If you don't, then stop talking about things you know nothing about.

Nah they should bring back the old Textbooks. (3, Insightful)

jellomizer (103300) | more than 7 years ago | (#20103397)

If it ain't 90% Greek then it isn't a math book.
Actually this is a good idea the problem is that today there are reports that boys are trailing girls academically. Part of the reason is if they make an All girls school or make programs that are designed to help girls they do so sometimes at the expense of the education of the boys. But if such programs or All boy public schools are made then there is a community cry. Boys and Girls think differently, they need to be taught differently.

Re:Nah they should bring back the old Textbooks. (4, Insightful)

DeepHurtn! (773713) | more than 7 years ago | (#20103739)

I'm not so sure I buy your "reverse-sexism" argument. In my time at secondary school, many of the guys were too caught up in drugs, booze, and trying to get laid than academic performance. From what I noticed, girl's peer groups were more accepting of high academic performance than were groups of boys, where the social line between jock and nerd were much more strongly defined and enforced.

Boys will never do well as a group academically as long as academic performance is seen as a social stigma.

Re:Nah they should bring back the old Textbooks. (1)

Turn-X Alphonse (789240) | more than 7 years ago | (#20103745)

But then we have the issue with making men and women seem like different creatures (GASP we are), which is anti-PC and will trigger those lovely women to scream sexist at you.

Lets face it, modern society wants to make a mouse and an elephant equal, sooner or later it's going to have to wake up and see it's not going to happen, but until then we all suffer for it.

Re:Nah they should bring back the old Textbooks. (1)

kerohazel (913211) | more than 7 years ago | (#20103889)

Actually this is a good idea the problem is that today there are reports that boys are trailing girls academically.
You know, I've heard this, but I haven't yet seen any of these reports. Care to provide some concrete examples?

Part of the reason is if they make an All girls school or make programs that are designed to help girls they do so sometimes at the expense of the education of the boys.
I fail to see how having all-girl schools harms boys' educations. Social lives, yes. ;) But I really don't think they'd be suffering academically.

Boys and Girls think differently, they need to be taught differently.
It's not just boys vs. girls, everybody thinks differently. Although this can be taken to an extreme at times, and then you get into the touchy-feely kind of "education" where there aren't even right or wrong answers anymore. But your standard public school education is very rigid and designed to fit everyone into the same mold so they can pass those standardized tests. I imagine private schools, magnet schools, or anything outside of the norm are probably a lot better at catering to individual students' needs, and that includes gender-based learning differences. Come to think of it, most every female I know who appreciates math or science spent at least some of their youth outside of the public education system.

More importantly (2, Informative)

proverbialcow (177020) | more than 7 years ago | (#20103411)

There's a hot female geek [danicamckellar.com]

Rock-paper-scissors will have to decide this, guys.

Mayim Bialik (0, Troll)

bkedersha (669510) | more than 7 years ago | (#20103425)

She still needs a nose job!

Outliers ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#20103433)

Most people cannot distinguish an outlier from the the average.

Am I the only one peeved... (5, Insightful)

gargletheape (894880) | more than 7 years ago | (#20103439)

...that a book aimed at increasing numeracy has horoscopes? What next? Feng Shui in geography texts?

Re:Am I the only one peeved... (2, Interesting)

Spy der Mann (805235) | more than 7 years ago | (#20103721)

Perhaps the horoscopes give some advice on studying - we all know horoscopes give random good advices based on random data.

Or perhaps it was just a stupid decision.

Re:Am I the only one peeved... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#20103723)

What next? Feng Shui in geography texts?

I'm pretty sure that most geography texts don't mention China at all.

Re:Am I the only one peeved... (1)

Planesdragon (210349) | more than 7 years ago | (#20103891)

Yes.

Not everyone who learns math has apples, flagpoles, or even handles physical money.

Feng Shuei could be a good hook to geometry, if you're willing to break the rules and just make it conform to the lesson.

Re:Am I the only one peeved... (1)

Its_My_Hair (703796) | more than 7 years ago | (#20103901)

Come to think of it, my son's first grade math text is filled with pictures of wizards, animals driving cars and other absurd teaching tools. Crazy!

Horoscopes can be used as a teaching tool, doesn't mean it lends anything to its validity.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horoscopes [wikipedia.org]

what the.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#20103469)

It even includes ... and testimonials from attractive young career women that use math at work

Or as geeks call it, PORN!

Cyberchase (1)

mikeee (137160) | more than 7 years ago | (#20103489)

My six-year-old daughter is currently enthralled with Cyberchase [pbskids.org] , a PBS cartoon that actually does a pretty respectable job teaching basic math concepts. Her singing of its repetitive and insanely peppy themesong is driving my out of my mind, though.

Re:Cyberchase (2, Funny)

MollyB (162595) | more than 7 years ago | (#20103675)

> Her singing of its repetitive and insanely peppy themesong is driving my out of my mind, though.

Clearly so, but it could be worse: "99 Bottles of Beer on the Wall" is illustrative of subtraction, but somewhat tedious if one is not an actual red-eyed participant.

TTIWWP (3, Funny)

El_Smack (267329) | more than 7 years ago | (#20103521)

This tread is worthless without pics... of hot, math using girls. /whaddaya mean, wrong website?

Re:TTIWWP (1)

pla (258480) | more than 7 years ago | (#20103789)

And what happened to the "-1, no boobies" mod?

Let me be the first to say: (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#20103527)

OMG!!! Math!!!

I loved UCLA... (1)

Otter (3800) | more than 7 years ago | (#20103531)

There'd be Olympic medalists and ex-porn actresses in your sections, retired musicians joining your lab, grad students selling their screenplays and quitting the lab...

Re:I loved UCLA... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#20103601)

And we're all so happy for you.

"OMG Ponies" is not just cute ... (2, Insightful)

Gopal.V (532678) | more than 7 years ago | (#20103533)

My first impression of the book review was - "Oh gawd, a math book went 'OMG Ponies !!111'".

But I've sort of realized that form follows emotion and in a world where Math is not consider cool (not in India though), something like this which stands away from the boring beige world of mathematics would get more eyeballs into the basic subject. Not that I'd consider some of it boring [xkcd.com] , by any stretch of imagination. And who hasn't rewritten math problems into "real" problems [xkcd.com] ? (xkcd has become lame of late - I suspect after his visit to MIT).

But such wedges into the insular cracks of things could be nice - to let people burn through the "Thou Suckest" [dotgnu.info] phase of learning anything new. Especially when the field is full of elitist fifty year olds ("elite" is good, "elitist" is bad).

So if it makes a bunch of girls pick up math, good - just the same way Asterix&Obelix makes me want to learn French ... we all just need a reason, to make whatever we're doing cool (ah, the tyranny of cool).

"Attractive young women" (2, Insightful)

siwelwerd (869956) | more than 7 years ago | (#20103537)

It even includes a horoscope, cute doodles of shoes and jewelry, and testimonials from attractive young career women that use math at work.

So what, the ugly ones don't use math?

I'D PUMP MY BABY BATTER INTO HER SQUISH BISCUIT (0, Troll)

Subject Line Troll (581198) | more than 7 years ago | (#20103581)


 

Re:"Attractive young women" (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#20103663)

"positive female role models?" I did a google image search and posing in a bra and panties in Stuff magazine doesn't a role model make.

Re:"Attractive young women" (1, Funny)

Cervantes (612861) | more than 7 years ago | (#20103709)

It even includes a horoscope, cute doodles of shoes and jewelry, and testimonials from attractive young career women that use math at work.

So what, the ugly ones don't use math?

Probably not as much, it's not like they need to worry about memorizing and reciting 7-digit numbers...

Re:"Attractive young women" (1)

hax0r_this (1073148) | more than 7 years ago | (#20103919)

Someone please mod that hilarious

Re:"Attractive young women" (2, Insightful)

lawpoop (604919) | more than 7 years ago | (#20103729)

Do you *ever* see ugly people in any kind of media or presentation? Or, do you ever see ugliness in any kind of presentation that is successful?

Who would want to identify with that photo as the target audience, anyway? "Oh, I'm ugly, just like the woman in that photo. I should study harder in math!"

Re:"Attractive young women" (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#20103995)

You've never watched RMS give a speech, have you?

(or, s/"RMS give a speech"/"Ron Jeremy in a porno")

Re:"Attractive young women" (4, Insightful)

Just Some Guy (3352) | more than 7 years ago | (#20103767)

So what, the ugly ones don't use math?

You're looking at this backward. Girls are told they're supposed to aspire to beauty above all else. The idea here is to show them that you can have that without giving up intelligence.

A single voice isn't going to tell girls that they shouldn't want to be pretty. One well-spoken voice might convince a few that they can be pretty and smart.

Re:"Attractive young women" (1)

hax0r_this (1073148) | more than 7 years ago | (#20103979)

One well-spoken voice might convince a few that they can be pretty and smart.

The real problem is the messed up standards of attractiveness in American high schools (and I'm sure it trickles down to younger grades too). What smart girl would want to walk around looking like some sort of scantily clad makeup covered blowup doll?

Re:"Attractive young women" (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#20103851)

So what, the ugly ones don't use math?

The ugly girls like looking at attractive women, just like the attractive girls (and, for that matter, boys) do.

Now, where's the Psych 101 textbook for Slashdot-age boys so that they can learn this stuff?

Re:"Attractive young women" (1)

edunbar93 (141167) | more than 7 years ago | (#20103887)

No, the point is that the perception is that women who use math in their careers are nerdy types that are ugly. And no girl wants to be ugly. Actually, the way girls are socialized (typically by their peers during high school) is that being pretty and attracting boys is pretty much all there is to life. Some girls resist that and have better aspirations, but they're basically the nerdy outcasts.

But you wouldn't know anything about that, would you?

Horoscopes? (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#20103603)

Aren't logic and rationality integral to math? I would think that horoscopes contradict that basic reasoning.

Correct. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#20104005)

Such a stupid concept. I'm glad that I did not read the article.
You cannot, I repeat--cannot--perform integrals without logic and rationality.

I'd let her extend MY superfactorial! (3, Funny)

cthellis (733202) | more than 7 years ago | (#20103613)

I'd also generalize HER polylogarithm!

Danica McKellar (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#20103643)

Who else thinks she is hot?

Gap? What gap? (5, Interesting)

Myrkridian42 (840659) | more than 7 years ago | (#20103673)

When I graduated high school, the top ten students that year were girls. That was true at 3 other high school graduations I went to that year. When I graduated college, the valedictorian and salutatorian were female. I don't believe these were rare cases. So what's this "gap" they talk about? Seems to me the guys are falling behind.

Re:Gap? What gap? (1)

ohearn (969704) | more than 7 years ago | (#20103865)

I remember seeing the results of a study a year or two ago (sorry, I can't remember the source) that showed that the mean intelligence for men and women was about the same, but the standard deviation was a good bit larger for men. Basically, average intelligence is the same for both groups, but real genius (as well as drooling idiots-> gee that explains so much) are much more likely to be men than women.

what's the point (1)

7macaw (933316) | more than 7 years ago | (#20103711)

What is the point of forcing (or "encouraging") people to learn mathematics at all? Those who want to learn it, can use regular textbooks because the subject is interesting by itself, without horoscopic bastardizations. And those who don't want to learn -- well, there are some 3 billion people in Asia whose children do learn ;)

Re:what's the point (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#20103833)

I'm included to agree. My mom was a math major, and obviously didn't need any extra encouragement. If they don't want to learn, fine. It leaves more room for those who actually like mathematics.

Um... (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#20103713)

'refliprocal'
...okay, that just made me dumber

Naming theorems (1)

gustgr (695173) | more than 7 years ago | (#20103737)

Just a few days ago there as brief thread on alt.tv.wonder-years about the math stuff that Danica McKellar did, and then someone came up with a link about the process of naming theorems, where the author cites the "Chayes-McKellar-Winn theorem".

Here is the link to the article: http://www.maa.org/devlin/devlin_09_05.html [maa.org]

Awesome (1)

the_tsi (19767) | more than 7 years ago | (#20103799)

Now that Winnie wrote a math textbook with doodles and other silliness, does that mean Madeline will write a french textbook dripping with seduction?

Re:Awesome (1)

hb253 (764272) | more than 7 years ago | (#20103903)

The only seduction I'm interested in would involve me, Danica, and Phoebe Cates. Hubba hubba

There's still a gap among the powerful (1)

FieroEtnl (773481) | more than 7 years ago | (#20103859)

It's clear that many people don't think there's an educational gap between men and women anymore, or if there is, that it's the men that have to catch up. I'd posit that while more women succeed in school today than men, a woman's educational status and intelligence can be a hindrance in some arenas while the opposite isn't true for men. Education and money-earning potential are typically masculine traits and are highly associated with power.

Think about the powerful men of the world. How many of them have a powerful woman beside them? How many have an educated woman for a spouse/significant other? How many powerful men simply have somebody to act as a piece of eye candy attached to their arm? I'd bet that the number of men with eye candy is much bigger than the number who have somebody who is an intellectual equal or is actually smarter than them.

Natalie Portman's neuroscience paper (4, Interesting)

FleaPlus (6935) | more than 7 years ago | (#20103907)

Some of you might already know this, but slashdot-favorite Natalie Portman (birth name Natalie Hershlag) in 2002 was apparently co-author on a paper in the research journal NeuroImage, stemming from some research she did when she was an undergrad at Harvard. The paper is titled Frontal Lobe Activation during Object Permanence: Data from Near-Infrared Spectroscopy [harvard.edu] . Here's the abstract:

The ability to create and hold a mental schema of an object is one of the milestones in cognitive development.
Developmental scientists have named the behavioral manifestation of this competence object permanence.
Convergent evidence indicates that frontal lobe maturation plays a critical role in the display of
object permanence, but methodological and ethical constrains have made it difficult to collect neurophysiological
evidence from awake, behaving infants. Near-infrared spectroscopy provides a noninvasive assessment
of changes in oxy- and deoxyhemoglobin and total hemoglobin concentration within a prescribed
region. The evidence described in this report reveals that the emergence of object permanence is related to
an increase in hemoglobin concentration in frontal cortex.
Also, a few choice Natalie Portman quotes:

* "I loved school so much that most of my classmates considered me a dork."

* "Smart women love smart men more than smart men love smart women."

* "I'm going to college. I don't care if it ruins my career. I'd rather be smart than a movie star. "

It even includes a horoscope (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#20103927)

Your slashdot horoscope - Astrology for nerds, stuff that doesn't matter

The moon is in Saturn's fifth house (or rather, Saturn's fifth moon's picture is in your house) and Venus is never around. Capricorn is not in Virgo, and Alpha Centauri is four light years away, sucker!

AR1E5
You will get pissed off and throw your soldering iron across the room. You will not get laid tonight.

T4URU5
You will work overtime trying to clean up that code. You will not get laid tonight.

G3MINI
You will think you're getting laid tonight, but you won't.

C4NCER
You should stop smoking. Also, you will not get laid tonight.

L3O
You will sit around wondering WTF this "getting laid" thing is

V1RGO
Um.... yeah well...

LI6RA
You will either read a book or write one. I will not be about getting laid.

SCORPI0
You will bitch at a strange woman in a bar and wonder why you can't get laid. At least you'll get outside for a while!

SAGATARIU5
As are a homosexual you won't get laid. If you think you're hetero, you're wrong. Why do you think you haven't got laid?

AQU4RIUS
You will have fish for dinner. She won't go to bed with you.

P1SCES
You will masturbate to porn

The Gender Gap is a Myth (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#20103981)

There is no huge gender gap between males and females in education. Infact on average females do slightly better overall in schooling(they are more obedient). This gap is a myth created by marginal feminist groups that through lobbying, media campaigns, funding their own research and then hiding the results They have created this false public perception that females are shortchanged and victimized. There is a small male advantage in math and science achievement but boys trail more behind in all other areas.

In the USA the true underpriveleged group which has a huge achievement gap in education is young African American males. If you want real facts read the paper Taking the Boy Crisis in Education Seriously... [iwf.org] by Krista Kafer.

Great job Winnie Cooper, you wrote a book to address a pretend gender gap that is a myth created by manipulated research findings like that of a debunked study entitled "How Schools Shortchange Girls". Mrs. Cooper propagating this myth only helps to make it harder to deal with the real problem of underachieving males that belong to minority groups, who really need attention.

No matter how much math book is used... (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#20104003)

...will not help. State scientists say womans have brain size of squirrel.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?