<p>
[quote]
Mathematicians set Chinese test
Maths enthusiasts are being challenged to answer a sample question from Chinese university entrance tests.</p>
<p>The tests are set for prospective science undergraduates.</p>
<p>The UK's Royal Society of Chemistry is offering a £500 prize to one lucky but bright person who answers the question below correctly.</p>
<p>It has also published a test used in a "well known and respected" English university - the society is not naming it - to assess the strength of incoming science undergraduates' maths skills. </p>
<p>Try the two tests</p>
<p>A glance at the two questions reveals how much more advanced is the maths teaching in China, where children learn the subject up to the age of 18, the society says.
<p>It seems to me, though, like the chinese test question is made overly complicated and that's why it's hard, not really because it's conceptually hard.</p>
<p>I mean, I'm a science/engineering major and I know a lot of really advanced math...and while I'm sure I could solve it if I invested 10-15 minutes into it, I'm not sure what it would prove. </p>
<p>Which is not to say the simpler question shows anything more. It's clear what it's testing for: basic exposure to the material, i.e., the minimum standard for all students. Obviously students who go on to study sci/math/engineering need to know a lot more.</p>
<p>The Chinese question tests solid geometry, a topic which was not even covered in my high school geometry class. (It wasn't even in the textbook. Actual solid geometry is a lot more than just calculating volumes.)</p>
<p>I wonder what the critics of Chinese education (the "it's not creative enough!" crowd) think regarding these two questions. I don't think they appreciate the amount of creativity necessary to solve the first question.</p>
<p>The second question is far more representative of what mere memorization, a common criticism of Chinese education, does.</p>
<p>Seven years back, in our top engineering school, a mechanical engineering professor realized that only 23% of his student in a mechanism class knows how to draw a circle pass three points. This is a basic geometry problem relevant to machine design. But most of our student never was taught proof-based geometry and have no way of doing it. When I tried the same question to my engineering class, 0% of them knew it. It is actually quite simple. Once you explain to student, they knew it. </p>
<p>Three year ago, I joint a group tour in China. I ask a tour guide the same question. He is a Japanese Study major. He answered immediately. I try another one, tourism major student. Again she answered immediately.</p>
<p>Geometry proof is important as it teach logical thinking. Its importance goes beyond math, science and engineering.</p>