|
It might be possible to see if there is a
correlation between part metrication and standards of adult numeracy if we had
the data for Australia. According to Pat the data tends to be for literacy
rather than maths so can't really tell.
That's why I was careful not to claim the link
categorically. In any case there are so many factors it would be difficult
to pin it down with any confidence. I only maintain that it doesn't help, it
can't do. But if the UK were to sort the mess out then there would be more scope
to encourage people to apply thier knowledge and develop their skills without
the obstacle of having to cope with non-decimal units of measure.
Phil Hall
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Wednesday, June 08, 2005 11:06
PM
Subject: [USMA:33143] Re: Use of
millimetres
This problem is found in the US too. Periodically
attention is brought to the subject, then it gets ignored again. Does
the same situation happen in advanced metric countries, or is this a problem
of the US and UK alone? If it is just a US/UK problem then possibly the
connection is with a difficult set of units. If citizens of first world
metric countries also can't do basic math, then there is no correlation
between measurements and the ability to do simple math.
As for the DIY shops why would they care if people waste
money as long as they waste it on their products? If they were losing
money on people's ignorance, then they would be the first to raise the
issue. If the consumers are the ones losing their money it is up to the
consumers to complain and for some reason they are not.
It also might be as was referenced in an earlier posting
that much of the waste may have to do with trying to measure supply needs in
imperial when the house dimensions and supplies are metric.
Dan
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Wednesday, 2005-06-08 05:04
Subject: [USMA:33141] Re: Use of
millimetres
Pat,
A couple of years ago a group in the UK (I
can't remember which) reported the results of similar research with the UK
population. The results showed that 1 in 3 couldn't calculate area in either
metric or imperial. This was highlighted on a BBC report about people
wasting their money on DIY because they couldn't calculate material
requirements.
The UK gov has launched an adult literacy and
numeracy program to combat poor standards, so it is officially
recognised.
It's a sad indictment of developed countrys
with mature education systems that so many people are falling by the way
side. There are I'm sure many reasons for this but as far as mathematics is
concerned a big factor in my view, (which is supported by education
professionals) is that not enough is done to encourage its application to
the outside world, or even to other subject areas. It tends to be learned in
an academic vacuum.
This situation can only be exacerbated by a
society where kids are taught to calculate using metric but encounter
non-metric or more significantly non-decimal units of measurment in everyday
life.
Phil Hall
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Monday, June 06, 2005 4:37
AM
Subject: [USMA:33119] Re: Use of
millimetres
on 2005-06-06 09.56, Bill Hooper at [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Surely if there were a big problem with the use
of 3-digit numbers, someone in the US would have proposed we add the
stone to our "system" of measures so that we could "more easily weigh
ourselves". :-)
Regards,
Bill Hooper
Dear Bill and All,
One of the
issues here is that so much of our population have few numeracy skills and
the use of millimetres (only) on a building site reduces all measures to
simple numbers � granted they may be large numbers � but they are simple,
and able to be successfully handled by a large range of workers.
I
was reminded of this yesterday when I heard a radio report from Canada
that reported on a study of some 23 000 adult Canadians. This report
found that about 42 % of their test subjects were functionally
illiterate and innumerate. I tried to find references to this on the net
but could only find these old quotes:
Quote 1
See: http://canadaonline.about.com/b/a/024678.htm
September
08, 2003
Literacy in Canada
On International Literacy Day, it's important to realize
that approximately 20 percent of adult Canadians do not have basic
literacy skills in reading, writing, counting and computing to meet the
demands of the workplace. Another 20 percent have
difficulty.
Quote 2
See: http://www.nald.ca/fulltext/abc/impabc/p5.htm
Reading
skills of Canada's adult population
Reading level
Definition
Percent of
Canadian population
Level 1
Non-readers
Have difficulty
dealing with printed materials. Most likely identify themselves as
people who cannot read.
7%
Level 2
Poor
readers
Can use printed materials for limited purposes
only, such as finding a familiar word in a simple text. Recognize
themselves as having difficulties with common reading
materials.
9%
Level 3
Reluctant readers
Can use
reading materials in a variety of situations, provided the material
is simple, clearly laid out/ and the tasks involved are not too
complicated. Generally do not see themselves as having significant reading
difficulties, but tend to avoid situations requiring
reading.
22%
Level 4
Readers
Can meet most
everyday reading demands. Are a diverse group and exhibit a wide
range of skills.
62%
Source: Adult Literacy in Canada:
Results of a National Study
Although this
confirmed the 42 % figure (previously reported as 40 % and as
38 %) it did not give any more details.
>From data that I
have seen in Australia the local figures are about the same in Canada as
in Australia. But again the literacy figures are only sometimes reported
and the numeracy figures almost never. I know nothing about literacy and
numeracy rates in the USA.
The reason that I am reporting these
figures here is that I believe that to manage a successful metrication
program you needs to consider the literacy, and more especially the
numeracy, of your target audience. If your intended audience is the whole
population of a nation then you need to know about literacy and numeracy
rates -- and, as I said, these can be very hard to find and literacy
figures are more often quoted than numeracy figures.
Anti-metric
forces have often pointed out how silly it is to name large, imprecisely
measured objects in hundreds or even thousands of tiny millimetres with
long rows of zeroes. In isolation this is not a bad argument, but it
ignores the enormous practical benefits of the complete removal of
fractions, both vulgar and decimal from all measuring work. Measurement
and calculations are much easier because there are so few costly errors
produced by calculations that involve any sort of
fractions.
Experience in Architecture and Engineering, and in the
Bricklaying, Butchery, Carpentry, Electrical Trades, Fitting and
Machining, Gas-fitting, Joinery, Metal Fabrication, Plumbing, and Saddlery
trades has shown the benefits of using millimetres both in the initial
learning of measurement skills and in the use of them on a daily
basis.
This 'difficulty' is put into context when we consider that
builder's labourers, in Australia, New Zealand, and South Africa, often
with little secondary education, have no trouble with tens of thousands of
millimetres, but rocket scientists at NASA in the USA have trouble landing
a Mars Probe using a combination of metric decimals and customary feet and
inches with fractions.
Cheers,
Pat Naughtin ASM (NSAA),
LCAMS (USMA)*
PO Box 305, Belmont, Geelong, Australia
Phone 61 3
5241 2008
Pat Naughtin is the editor of the free online monthly
newsletter, 'Metrication matters'. You can subscribe by going to http://www.metricationmatters.com
and clicking on 'Newsletter'.
* Pat is the editor of the
'Numbers and measurement' chapter of the Australian Government Publishing
Service 'Style manual � for writers, editors and printers', he is an
Accredited Speaking Member (ASM) with the National Speakers Association of
Australia, and a Lifetime Certified Advanced Metrication Specialist
(LCAMS) with the United States Metric Association.
This email and
its attachments are for the sole use of the addressee and may contain
information that is confidential and/or legally privileged. This email and
its attachments are subject to copyright and should not be partly or
wholly reproduced without the consent of the copyright owner. Any
unauthorised use of disclosure of this email or its attachments is
prohibited. If you receive this email in error, please immediately delete
it from your system and notify the sender by return
email.
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG
Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.323 / Virus Database: 267.6.5 - Release Date:
2005-06-07
|
