For math/science majors?

Question

If you had to choose between BA in Mathematics with concentration in Secondary Mathematics Education (this means you can teach high school math with your BA degree) and BA in both Mathematics and Physics, which one would you pick and why?
Which one is a better choice if the person wants to get at least Masters degree afterwards?

And Masters degree would be in Mathematics, not in Education. Thanks for your answers!

Answer 1

If you really want to do a good master's in mathematics (as opposed to a master's in mathematics education), you would be better served with the BA in mathematics and physics option.

The reason is that a master's in pure mathematics will usually require that you have a fair degree of depth in advanced undergraduate math, including rigorous, proof oriented courses. This would generally include courses in advanced calculus/real analysis, abstract algebra, and topology. You are more likely to get that in the second program you mentioned.

Also, I am of the firm belief that a mathematically intense application, like physics, can make you a better pure mathematician.

The following book outlines the ideal preparation you should have at the undergraduate level for a good graduate program in (pure) mathematics (it is the ideal preparation, but many students enter graduate programs and succeed without all that):

All The Mathematics You Missed, Thomas A. Garrity.


A master's in applied mathematics will generally call upon you to learn something about some other applied field outside of mathematics (perhaps one of the sciences, or engineering). In this case, the physics knowledge may be of help, if not for the direct knowledge of physics, then for the knowledge of how to solve those types of problems.

In constrast, if you were going for a master's in mathematics education, you would most likely find that the math courses you take for the degree are very similar to undergraduate versions of the same courses. In this case, the BA with the secondary education focus would be fine.

If you go for a master's in math, make sure you understand why you want that degree. For secondary teaching, the master's in mathematics education is a far less strenuous way (than an MS in math) to be really well qualified. For university teaching, you would need to go beyond the master's for the Ph.D. To work in industry, the MS in applied math would be ideal.

I had to face a similar decision a few years ago, as to which would prepare me better for a Ph.d program in math -- an MS in math education or an MS in math with an engineering minor requirement. I opted for the second one.

Finally, it is worth noting that a major in mathematics and physics could lead you into the fascinating world of mathematical physics!

Answer 2

Do you want to teach if so get your BA in Math with concentration in Secondary Mathematics Education. Then you can work on a Masters in teaching. If you want to do something besides teaching and you think you can do it go for the double major in Math and Physics they seem to complement each other so each might help you in the other. Teaching might seem like a good back up plan, but if you want to do both Physics and Math you can always get certified after your BA.

Answer 3

Really, it depends on what YOU want to do. If you want to be a teacher, by all means, do the secondary math ed degree. If you want to go towards applied sciences (and potentially make more money later on in life), do the double major in physics and math. I have a great respect for teachers though.

Answer 4

I think the second one. It is more diverse and alot of students, myself included do not know primarily what job we would like to have at the end of our degree until nearer the end. At least with the second one, you can always do a PGCE (post graduate certification of education) after your 4 years and at the end of it you will be able to teach, and it is only a year. I think the second gives you more options but choose whatever you think is best.

Answer 5

that is no longer that they are extra smart, merely more durable. i imagine maximum human beings will agree that more suitable options contained in the sciences and maths are more durable than literary analysis and cultural study the position each little thing is subjective and the biggest project is to live to tell the tale suited of your interpreting record somewhat than to unravel difficult complications. Then there is the region of usefulness. issues that contain numbers are conveniently extra effective in our society. we want human beings that deal with money, make money, spend money and are expecting economic tendencies because it truly is what capitalism is all about. both, we want Engineers to construct issues, and docs to fix us when we are damaged, technological awareness researchers to develop drugs and different fields that earnings our lives, etc. regrettably, we do not *want* human beings that are properly-versed contained in the topics of Poe, or the artwork of the Han Dynasty. There are some niches for arts human beings, yet for the most section that variety of expertise isn't valued by our society. further: Social Sciences are variable. some are more durable and/or extra in call for than others. As ownpool stated, Economics is the hardest social technological awareness, and that i might want to challenge to say that it is also the most in-call for. There are different issues that, at the same time as no longer inevitably tremendous difficult, are significant. on the different hand, there are a range of social sciences that are not *required* by society interior a similar way that expertise of Poe isn't *required*. no one *desires* to develop our expertise of racism, gender fairness, human rights, and all different aspects of society. yet i imagine fairly some human beings might want to agree that those issues are nevertheless worth understanding because they could bring about a extra useful international.