The Missing Curriculum: Our Children Need Math Intuition

• “Math language is incredibly important. Without it, unmoored uncertainty may cause people to check out and become increasingly disconnected.”

• “This math dance requires 2 partners; math mechanics grooving with math intuition.”

• “Today, math jobs are found in industries where “neuro-manipulation” has become the norm, such as social media or sports betting.”

• “Most people need math more as a consumer shield.”

• “The math mechanics dance partner needs to slow its role and let the math intuition partner catch up.”

The Mismatch of Modern Math

There is concern with math education in America. A significant voice comes from college academics calling for a return to traditional standards. This faction emphasizes two core priorities.

First, these educators defend the traditional high school sequence, historically known as the geometry sandwich, which prioritizes algebra and geometry over newer alternative pathways like data science.

Second, they demand the reinstatement of standardized admissions testing to reinforce this foundational framework.

For example, thousands of STEM faculty members within the University of California system recently signed an open letter urging the return of SAT math requirements. Reporting severe preparation gaps among incoming students, these professors argue standardized metrics provide essential data to verify basic mathematical fluency before enrollment.

However, blaming student preparation misses a deeper structural flaw. Standardized tests generally have 2 challenges: 1) They focus on that which is measurable, not necessarily that which is important to measure. 2) Today, they measure student compliance with an outdated curriculum, rather than testing the math intuition required for the modern world. Instead of requiring students to conform to the system, we should question the system itself.

Analyzing this traditionalist view requires addressing a fundamental question: What is the problem with the geometry sandwich? Certainly, it used to work. It was great when we were trying to put a man on the moon, and humans were doing the work of computers. 

The challenge today? Our century-old math curriculum yields outcomes simultaneously beneficial and adversarial to society. While research in medicine continues to extend human life, the premier math careers of the last two decades have aggressively shifted toward neuro-manipulation fields like social media and sports betting. Instead of optimizing for human progress, most consumer-focused organizations now deploy sophisticated sludge, which consists of highly engineered algorithmic friction and behavioral traps designed explicitly to erode consumer autonomy and protect platform profitability.

How College Students Spend Their Time

An irony underlies the collegiate math challenge just described. It begins with the primary financial supporters and beneficiaries of these institutions: the students. Consider data I collected from seminars and classes provided to thousands of students over five years. On average, students spend between 35 and 42 hours a week on their smartphones. Most users burn this time inside social media platforms or sports betting applications.

This localized data reflects national trends. A major NCAA study reports 60% to 67% of college students actively engage in sports betting. Peer-reviewed research confirms this level of digital immersion directly reduces attention spans. Modern psychological research also links prolonged screen use to a growing sense of existential disconnection among young adults.

However, most critical is the substitution challenge. Students substitute addictive, low-value digital interactions for the essential work of building intentional, high-impact lives. This zero-sum trade-off creates a transfer of value: platform market capitalization rises while student human capital declines. Next is the foundational feedback loop:

But this is where the long-term, systemic impact gets strange, because there is no one to blame. No single organization is intentionally trying to harm others. Yet, the system itself enables neuro-manipulation in a way leading to harmful outcomes. Consider the mechanics:

1. Students spend the equivalent of a full-time job donating their attention to the shareholders of neuro-manipulation platforms.

2. The cognitive scientists, engineers, and math-oriented employees enabling this environment are mostly graduates of STEM programs from American universities.

3. Broadly, neuro-manipulation is only increasing. For example, since 2018, when the Supreme Court cleared the path for legalized sports betting, state-sponsored wagering has increased dramatically.

According to data from Epic Research, clinical diagnoses of gambling disorders rose by more than 60% in states hosting legalized sportsbooks. In particular, this trend impacts young adults aged 18 to 29 most severely, as clinical diagnosis rates within this collegiate demographic have more than doubled since the expansion of mobile betting platforms. Even more concerning, Epic noted in the study that their data 'represents a floor on diagnosed gambling' and 'likely understate[s] true population prevalence.'  

In practice, two groups divide the broader landscape.  The first group is the 'vast majority' with low-to-average math skills and the second group is the 'vast minority' with advanced math skills.  It is not a stretch to classify a) increased screen time on neuro-manipulating platforms, b) decreased attention, and c) increased addiction rates as a social bad. Therefore, the vast majority group requires a consumer shield.  This includes practical decision and reasoning abilities, as needed to overcome the neuro-manipulation accelerating over the last couple of decades. 

Then, the underlying question becomes: "Who is math education for and which group should math education serve?  The vast majority or vast minority?"

The Math Curriculum Needs To Bend To The Vast Majority

"To me, the biggest change in the world over the last fifty years has been the emergence of data and computing, and it strikes me that the math curriculum hasn't kept up with that at all." 

Dr. Steven Levitt, William B. Ogden Distinguished Service Professor of Economics at the University of Chicago

As a rule, math is incredibly important. Mathematician David Bessis describes it as the language of that which can’t be easily seen or touched. That is, math is the language of our imagination.  Dr. Bessis makes a great point. In the modern age, this sort of “seeing the unseen” math language is incredibly important. Without it, unmoored uncertainty may cause people to check out and become increasingly disconnected.  

But the math curriculum requires a fundamental shift. This math question is NOT a ‘whether’ question, it is a ‘which’ determination.  In other words, if math education is not working for the majority, how should it be adapted to achieve the wonderful benefits suggested by Dr. Bessis and many others? 

The ‘which’ curriculum question is understood via the familiar complaint echoed by countless math students after they take high school math:  “Why do I even need math? I’ll never use it!” 

Educators historically dismissed this student pushback as youthful inexperience. Today, this friction signals a clear opportunity to reassess curriculum priorities. Shifting focus away from rigid notation mechanics geared toward standardized testing allows room for practical quantitative intuition. The student struggle to find relevance serves as a direct signal to adapt instructional design. Continuing to double down on traditional, abstract mechanics fails to prepare consumers for highly optimized digital environments. Instead of replicating outdated frameworks, a modernized curriculum builds the baseline intuition necessary to navigate contemporary marketplace incentives.

For example, differential calculus is very important.

What do you intuitively see in this equation?

This is what I see and how I build math intuition with my students: Traditional textbooks describe this equation as compound interest. To start, it is helpful for students to understand the basic math mechanics, such as algebraic notation and functions, Euclidean geometry, and the first and second derivatives, to consider speed and acceleration over time.

But the real gift comes in the intuition. This equation represents the choice architecture for personal sovereignty.

Future wealth and autonomy (W) depend on savings (S) and rate of return (r), but the true engine sits in the power position. Time (t) is the exponent, making it a double-edged sword.

Surrendering attention to digital distractions drops t to zero. Because any value raised to the power of zero equals one, the compounding engine stalls, collapsing the equation to W = S. Future wealth never exceeds baseline savings, flatlining personal potential. Reclaiming time triggers the exponential curve, converting the exponent into a consumer shield for financial liberty.

The so what? Save often and consistently. Even small amounts invested over time grow to significant wealth! It is difficult for students to "time travel" to a future when they are rich. That is why we practice getting rich together. That is the power of math intuition.

The Necessary Math Dance 

Think of an effective mathematical education as a dance. This dance requires two partners: mathematical mechanics on one side grooving with mathematical intuition on the other. Today, mathematical mechanics mostly dances alone to the music of standardized testing. This mechanics partner needs to slow its role and allow mathematical intuition to catch up.

Personal Finance Reimagined (PFR) provides an intuitive mathematical curriculum built around the practical, student-friendly domains of personal finance and behavioral economics. While wealth accumulation serves as a powerful hook, reshaping mathematical education requires widespread systemic effort. This framework offers a blueprint for a larger pedagogical movement.

PFR provides for financial wellness. It provides a way of thinking and practical tools to overcome the attention-shortening impact of neuro-manipulating applications.

The complete high school behavioral financial education curriculum demonstrates how to cultivate this essential math intuition: https://www.financerevamp.com/high-school

About the author: Jeff Hulett leads Personal Finance Reimagined, a decision-making and financial education organization. He teaches personal finance at James Madison University and provides entrepreneurial services. Check out his book -- Making Choices, Making Money: Your Guide to Making Confident Financial Decisions.

Jeff is a career banker, data scientist, behavioral economist, and choice architect. Jeff has held banking and consulting leadership roles at Wells Fargo, Citibank, KPMG, and IBM.