18

It is claimed on Cracked.com:

There's also some evidence that our jalopy measurement system [imperial, ndr] is part of what's making U.S. students bad at math. In Malcolm Gladwell's Outliers, he suggests that Asian students may have a built-in advantage in the subject because Eastern languages are structured in a way that makes numbers intuitive. Conversely, having a language -- or a measurement system -- that makes numbers clunkier and difficult to convert would have an adverse effect on young children picking them up from the world around them. Foundation and early confidence are everything in math.

Combined, of course, with proper punishment for not learning. For this to be true, of course, U.S. students would have to be worse internationally at math than they are at other subjects ... and in fact, they are. Two recent studies show U.S. students to be right around average (12th and 15th) of 30-some industrialized nations in reading scores but among the worst (25th and 30th) in math. There are no doubt other factors involved, but a nonintuitive measurement system can't be helping.

The article links one study and one website, however none of them seem to be about Imperial units at all!

Are there any studies on the effect the choice of units has on mathematical skills? Is the Metric system advantageous, from the point of view of cognition?

Community
  • 1
Sklivvz
  • 78,578
  • 29
  • 321
  • 428
  • 2
    How dare you slander Cracked! You fiend! Just kidding. I know it's libel. Seriously though, Cracked is possibly the most successful skeptical website there is, even if they don't get every single thing right. They always seem to be trying at least. – John Rhoades Feb 16 '12 at 14:39
  • did you find any counterargument? – isJustMe Feb 16 '12 at 14:45
  • @Rafael.IT No, but you can make exactly the same argument about metric units by using the same references. Thus, while it *may* be true, and while it's certainly *plausible*, I would like to know more. It is my hope that some cognitive/learning institution in the US has studied this. – Sklivvz Feb 16 '12 at 14:58
  • How many Hail Marys does it take to travel furlong on horseback? :-P – vartec Feb 16 '12 at 16:05
  • 1
    There is argument, that US overall scores (15th of 30) are in line with other countries of similar poverty and development level. Also, I think if imperial measures would be the problem, it would affect science scores. Meanwhile US science scores are at same level as reading comprehension scores (around 12th of 30). – vartec Feb 16 '12 at 21:02
  • 6
    Why would a choice of unit have a significant impact on ability? Time to have a closer look at the studies comparing math ability by country... – Sonny Ordell Feb 16 '12 at 23:22
  • 2
    @Sonny: On thing I can think of, is that given a science problem using US units, you won't even try to calculate that in memory, you basically have to use calculator. – vartec Feb 17 '12 at 15:10
  • 2
    @vartec: Does the ability to do calculations mentally have anything to do with being able to figure out solutions to mathematical problems? (Have we sunk this low to internationally compare each others knowledge of the multiplication table?) – UncleBens Feb 17 '12 at 18:41
  • 2
    @Vartec I'm not sure I understand your point. I'm familiar with both metric and imperial units and find it easy to convert between the two. I can't see the choice of units having a significant impact on ability, not when more plausible explanations like the quality of education in general are a better fit. – Sonny Ordell Feb 17 '12 at 22:40
  • 1
    @Sonny: consider a problem to resolve: you have millage of car, distance you need to travel, and question is weight of the fuel you need. With metric system it's in memory, 2 simple multiplications. – vartec Feb 18 '12 at 11:36
  • @Uncle: resolving problems in memory is mental exercise, which does improve mental capabilities. Anyway, I do agree that imperial units aren't the most important, or perhaps even significant influence over math scores. – vartec Feb 18 '12 at 11:36
  • @UncleBens When I was taught physics at "A-level" using SI units, we were often told to calculate something "in our heads": especially to get at least the right order of magnitude in our answer, preferably one significant digit as well: "eight times ten to the seventeen" or whatever. It's not for "mathematical" problems at all: it's for physics. – ChrisW Jul 17 '13 at 01:23
  • I think using the word "maths" might. Saying "maths" sounds dumb to Americans. –  Apr 28 '17 at 20:22
  • 1
    @vartec I don't see how your mileage problem is any different using imperial measures. – Reinstate Monica -- notmaynard Apr 28 '17 at 21:33
  • @iamnotmaynard you need to travel 250km, millage is 4.5L/100km, all you need to do is multiply 4.5*2.5, which is fairly simple. You need to travel 200mi, your car does 35mpg. You need to do 200/35, which is significantly harder to calculate. – vartec Apr 28 '17 at 21:43
  • 1
    You can graduate with a degree in pure mathematics without using units. Appling maths to other fields is where units come into the picture. – daniel Apr 28 '17 at 23:29
  • 2
    @vartec that's because division is harder than multiplication, which is independent of the base units used. If the US were to switch to gallons per hundred miles, your objection would vanish, but we'd still be using non-metric units (not "imperial" because we don't use the imperial system for liquid volumes). – phoog May 01 '17 at 18:15
  • I'd think having to perform arcane conversions and translations would hone math skills. – PoloHoleSet May 02 '17 at 15:25

1 Answers1

7

Well, international tests like this aren't useful for gauging whether metric is better for math or not due to two main issues when assessing education quality on an international scale:

  • Who gets tested
  • Method of testing

In terms of who gets tested, this is important as some of these international tests do not test similar samples of students. This was especially problematic for the US, as the US tests everyone and, as far as I'm aware, was the only country to do so.

On the other hand, Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) which this study is from, used a randomized sample (see question 4 here). Whether this sample is sufficiently randomized is debatable, however (EPI).

The second problem is the method of testing. The US education system also tends to be more application-based than memorization-based, which can be useful in the long run, but more difficult to assess progress empirically. I'm not saying that tests in the US are useless, it's just more difficult to measure progress. Even with that aside, there are differences in language and culture that need to be assessed in testing each country BBC article. There are also a number of academics who are concerned with how these tests are used (Guardian article).

The cited study is also 15 years old, so may be out of date. Here's a more recent data set (2012)

Basically, these tests cannot be used to gauge whether US standard units affect students math or not or if metric is superior. I am not aware of any tests that accurately compare students' math ability based on whether the students use metric or US standard.

(Disclosure: I prefer SI units myself; I am not defending US units.)

Adam
  • 1,089
  • 2
  • 7
  • 14
user40037
  • 71
  • 1
  • 2