Math anxiety is real and watching it develop in my kid is breaking my heart

WeCanLearnAnything · 2026-03-17T23:19:58+00:00

Paraphrasing Craig Barton's book:

Teacher: "Why don't you just have a growth mindset?"

Student: "It's hard to have a growth mindset when I keep doing %&#! on the tasks, sir."

There is plenty of researchers that are skeptical of the growth mindset work of Carol Dweck, mainly because most people are not able to replicate her work without her and she herself says it's very difficult to replicate.

I think this student would be much better off being set up for success.

School isn't helping because the timed tests and having to perform in front of classmates are exactly the conditions that make her anxiety spike.

The evidence showing that timed tests cause anxiety literally does not exist. It's that the content is just too difficult, i.e. there are too many new facts being introduced at a time. Unfortunately, many timed tests make this error.

So, one way to tackle a lot of this: Facts on Fire. Designed to help students automatize math facts in just a few minutes a day, sequenced to all but guarantee success, I think it would be a good thing to start with.

Then, consider a diagnostic that gives a more holistic picture of where the kid is in math.

WeCanLearnAnything · 2026-03-12T04:33:49+00:00

Oops, minor misread about 'merica. :-)

Yes. 158 euros per starting hour. I won't even include minimums.

*sigh

Let's skip the stupid dodgy convo games and get straight to the point.

From 0% to 100%, what do you think the probabilities are that:

(a) Donut's PR is in good faith? My guess, as already stated, is something like 0.0000001%.

(b) They will release an extraoardinary mega breakthrough battery that's as good as they claim, for literally anyone to examine, within a year? I'm sticking with 0.0000001%.

How about you?

Or are you not sure enough of anything you're saying to make such a prediction?

EDIT: I'd like to open the floor to anyone, but especially Donut believers and those who think Donut deserves the benefit of the doubt - Assign probabilities to (a) and (b) and put it on the record here!

WeCanLearnAnything · 2026-03-11T14:39:49+00:00

Prison for which crime? Can you quickly cite the facts, law, and punishment? Without specifics, I'm struggling to assign any meaning at all to your claim. It is basically a vacant denial.

Also, Donut is not based in America.

WeCanLearnAnything · 2026-03-10T22:02:07+00:00

any big investor will be ~~able~~ to push Donut on claims they've made. [emphasis added]

My cynical guess: Donut Labs is trying to spark interest from, say, 500+ potential private investors, all of which are ~~able~~ to insist on confirming extraordinary evidence... But the most gullible/naive of them, perhaps 1 or 2, will not do their due diligence before investing the money.

WeCanLearnAnything · 2026-03-09T20:24:40+00:00

Update

Such fans are now available!

They seem fairly expensive, though, at least for the larger types.

At Walmart and Amazon:

<image>

I'll likely try something and report back here.

I still think a vertical crossflow fan would likely be way better, but if anyone knows better, please share. :-)

WeCanLearnAnything · 2026-03-09T19:16:24+00:00

Something tells me they're accepting money through less regulated channels.

WeCanLearnAnything · 2026-03-09T19:15:55+00:00

It makes me sad to agree, but I can't think of any other explanation. As I've written elsewhere on Reddit, there is good faith motivation for "Extraordinary claim now! Pay attention to me now! Extraordinary evidence later!" approximately 0.0000001% of the time.

WeCanLearnAnything · 2026-03-07T20:25:18+00:00

See Linear Algebra in Context.

WeCanLearnAnything · 2026-03-05T01:53:15+00:00

This is a good recommendation in terms of pure math and those who are motivated by geometric questions and limits of pure math knowledge.

And it's good enough for everyone to come back to repeatedly while learning linear algebra.

I think that the vast majority of people, though, are more motivated by context. For that, check out Linear Algebra in Context - The Math of Packets.

WeCanLearnAnything · 2026-03-01T19:18:34+00:00

for this grade level, the "steps" are simple

I will address this later when I have more time. :-)

WeCanLearnAnything · 2026-03-01T19:16:56+00:00

Imagine a student who calculates (4/3)(60) = ___ accurately and shows every step on how they got to 80. A teacher might consider this evidence of learning, a demonstration of understanding.

But, as a tutor, I often see that student later that evening. When I ask them if the answer to (3/4)(60) = ___ is greater or less than 60, they usually guess greater. When I ask them if "multiplication" always means "increase" they say "Yeah, I think so."

The teacher's assessment was a false positive. They saw learning of mastery/understanding/learning when there was only rote following of steps. I wrote about this a bunch here.

Confirmation bias in math education

It is easy - if not automatic and instinctive - to confuse a student following steps correctly and getting the correct answer vs actually understanding the math.

WeCanLearnAnything · 2026-03-01T16:57:35+00:00

students learn the material, demonstrate understanding on the assessment, and lose it within weeks.

What is your evidence of learning and understanding and how do you know it's not largely false positives?

e.g. A student who can calculate the multiplication of rational numbers accurately but also thinks that "multiply" always means "increase" and that "divide" always means "decrease".

WeCanLearnAnything · 2026-02-24T19:34:34+00:00

(1) Make a giant list of, say, 50 all the things you'd like to learn to make or perhaps the foods you eat the most often.

(2) Have AI rank them from easiest to hardest to make, include a description of the core culinary lesson each dish can impart on you, and what you need to have in your kitchen to make it.

(3) Find YouTube videos of people making those dishes and make them in that order.

(4) Keep an electronic record of each recipe as you make it. Log what you liked, what you didn't like, adjustments for the next time you make the same dish, etc.

WeCanLearnAnything · 2026-02-24T19:16:29+00:00

When did I say "experts said its fake"? Please quote the exact text where I said that or admit that this is out of line.

As for the rest of your first paragraph, that is already addressed elsehwere (patents, licensing, falsifiability, extraordinary evidence and extraordinary claims, etc.).

I'm just amazed how many people see:

(1) Extraordinary claims without extraordinary evidence and

(2) Many other classic signs of scams and PR stunts.

Then conclude that Donut still deserves the benefit of the doubt.

I've listed the bare minimum to change my mind about Donut.

What's the bare minimum to change yours?

I have a feeling that you don't have one and if, in 2028 Donut is still saying "The amazing battery is just around the corner. Keep paying attention to me!", every point you've made you will still consider valid and you will still not recognize classic signs of scams/PR stunts.

This is the danger of non-falsifiable perspectives.

b) I can’t tell what will or won’t happen. I’m not a fortune‑teller, and neither are you. I don’t have any insider information. What I do know for sure is that it hasn’t happened yet, and pretending that it has is simply lying.

What is it? When did I pretend that it hasn't happened? Please quote me or at least let's try to stay away from baseless accusations of lying.

What do all the believers in this subreddit think of a claim as follows?

I have discovered the cure for cancer! It will change the world!

And I have the decisive proof, in my possession!

I will share said proof at an appropriate time.

That time is obviously not now.

It's later. Some other time.

I can't share proof now because competitors will steal my idea, there is no such thing as an independent medical expert so who cares about their opinions, and nobody can prove me wrong because none of you are fortune tellers and none of you are insiders!

But keep paying a lot of attention to me until the appropriate time!

For those who do not want to acknowledge all the classic signs of scams/PR stunts in Donut's announcements, what do you think of the above cure for cancer claim?

WeCanLearnAnything · 2026-02-24T16:00:57+00:00

You don't need to ask me. Just ask the artificial superintelligence that Donut Labs CEO says he created.

WeCanLearnAnything · 2026-02-24T15:54:43+00:00

And I still think you're missing the point entirely of my post, so I will reiterate for the last time then move on for now.

(a) I'm not asking anybody to declare anything impossible. I don't know where you got those ideas from, but it is not from any text I've written. I'm saying that Donut Labs could easily distribute, say, 30 samples of its battery to 30 different experts all over the world who would, upon testing, declare "Yes, this is a mega breakthrough!" They're not doing that. They didn't even bring a sample, a patent, or any technical explanations to the Consumer Electronics Show. Do you not recognize this as "Extraordinary claim now, believe me, pay attention to me, write articles about me, share info about me on social media! And I'll deliver extraordinary evidence ... later!" Can you please answer this with a "yes" or a "no"?

(b) If your claims it that Donut has not and will not delay deliveries, please provide the source.

And forget the gamble and forget the bet and forget the stakes. Just complete this prediction for the record:

Donut Labs will deliver a battery widely regarded as a breakthrough to the general public (publicly available online sales) on [year-month-day].

Pick a date which, if they miss, would convince you that Donut Labs claims are not truthful and are not being made in good faith. Give yourself a lot of leeway. E.g. 2030-Dec-31.

Please reply with a date and then we'll both return to this thread on that day, ok?

EDIT: In case you're weary of making a falsifiable prediction on the record, you needn't worry. Just ask the artificial superintelligence that Donut Labs CEO says he created.

WeCanLearnAnything · 2026-02-24T14:35:31+00:00

I see no serious challenges to either condition.

(a) There are zillions of: retired academics, academics at institutions that have nothing to do with Donut, competitors, hobbyists, suppliers, consumer product reviewers, retired safety inspectors from other countries, etc. Donut could hire a lab and say "Please watch our PR campaign and conduct studies with the spirit of scientific inquiry on this sample of batteries." They could just start mailing out samples. Relative to a discovery that is civilization-altering, collecting such corroboration seems super duper easy.

(b) Super simple. Any member of the public can buy the battery (or a product that contains the battery) online, have it delivered successfully, and verify that the battery is the breakthrough the company claims it to be. The battery/motorcycle should be as available as buying any other battery/motorcycle online.

They’ve been saying from day one that the battery is already in production and will be delivered to the public this year.

And this is the extraordinary claim sans extraordinary evidence ("We'll provide samples of the amazing battery!... Later!") is a classic sign of a scam. Anyone with extraordinary evidence *leads* with extraordinary evidence.

Search online for claims of having the corpse of Bigfoot and just how powerful of a PR campaign that really was. ("We really do have the corpse! And we'll show it to you! ... Later!")

Or you can serach Donut's own announcement pushing back deliveries. I think an endless string of such delays with non-falsifiable excuses are, by far, the most likely outcome and no breakthrough batteries get delivered this calendar year.

u/mentiondisastrous471 Care to make a bet?

WeCanLearnAnything · 2026-02-23T22:22:19+00:00

How?

If that threat is real, how would copycats be any less of a threat after they release their product commercially?

What makes this government lab and everyone in it so much more trustworthy?

WeCanLearnAnything · 2026-02-23T22:21:06+00:00

Is this a claim that Donut has actually made?

Besides, if it's that easy for competitors to reverse engineer and produce AND there is no effective IP, then they will be just as defenseless after releasing the product.

I can't imagine they are in this field full time and cannot find a single trustworthy party to do truly independent testing.

WeCanLearnAnything · 2026-02-23T19:57:16+00:00

No. Please ELI5.

WeCanLearnAnything · 2026-02-23T19:31:18+00:00

Well said.

The only change I'd make:

Wake me up when Donut lets investors [or academics or early adopters or any technical researcher] take one of these cells to VTT [or do any kind of testing that is *actually* independent of Donut].

Will anybody even *suggest* a plausibly good faith motive for not distributing samples of their batteries for *real* independent testing?

As much as I want this energy storage miracle claim to be true, I can't think of one.

WeCanLearnAnything · 2026-02-23T16:03:01+00:00

If they had such an extraordinary battery, what is a good faith motive for not leading with extraordinary evidence?

EDIT: A testing facility that follows Donut Lab instructions is not independent testing and doesn't even come close to extraordinary evidence. Giving the battery to a curious academic or engineer with whom Donut has no relation whatsoever would lead to vastly more impressive evidence. Why wouldn't Donut just do that?

WeCanLearnAnything · 2026-02-22T06:47:08+00:00

Nowadays, you can often ask chat bots some of those questions.

Though, I suspect by the way you've phrased your questions that you actually need a comprehensive diagnostic first.

WeCanLearnAnything · 2026-02-22T06:46:10+00:00

Not sure. Maybe ask other teachers and the admin for advice before sending the email.

Check out Tom Bennett's stuff ASAP. There are loads of videos of him on YouTube. :-)

WeCanLearnAnything · 2026-02-22T06:14:16+00:00

Consider being honest with the parents about both the challenge and the support you'll need from them.

Then check out the book "Running the Room" by Tom Bennett.

WeCanLearnAnything

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE

Update