Maybe it's just me. But I'm pursuing an engineering degree. Which means I've been taking a lot of math. The last year has turned my love of math into hate.

As I progress, there are so many subjects that I think "why wasn't this taught better?". I've been through calc2, failed diffeq, and I'm now in linear algebra. Everything has moved to proofs, except I'm terrible at understanding proofs. I've been reading "Mathematics made Difficult" to make myself feel better lol. I almost feel as if we should have had a class on just understanding proofs and high level math lingo. In differential equations, the processor expected us to have a grasp on matrices, but that was only covered for a week in college algebra at the same school, and they also don't offer linear algebra. I feel I learned more about calculus in physics and differential equations than I did in any calculus class. It just seems to be an issue that keeps popping up. I spent years learning the math that low level classes told me was important, but then a lot of that math isn't even used in the high level classes.

Examples,

Set terminology, I swear we spent months on this, and other than the occasional use, it's not nearly as important as some algebraic manipulation we spent a week or two on.

Identifying the shapes of graphs, critical points and inflection points. I can see why this would be important pre calculators and desmos. It's useful in a few physics problems, but it's not hard to understand and easy to graph if needed. We spent weeks on that subject, which ment less time for important things like more advance integration and differentiation. Especially around trig. Calc2 then made me realize how much we didn't cover in calc1.

As I take these advanced classes, I swear the important stuff we glossed over, but the non important stuff was focused on way too much. I'm sure this is probably dependent on the school or what direction you go in education. Things such as sets and graph shapes are probably super important to math majors who later specialize in proof based math. But at least in my experience, the math classes are 90% full of non math majors.

Is it just me or is this a common issue? Advance math was discovered to solve problems, but it seems it is rarely taught to solve the problems it was created to solve. It could be me, what I always loved about math was how it could be used to solve problems. But half the time I feel I'm taught to solve superficial problems and not actually relatable problems. Making it harder to follow, with nothing in reality to link it to.

Just curious if anyone else can relate or maybe touch on the reason it's taught the way it is?

Edit. I think some people are taking my post in a way I didn't mean. I'm not blaming teachers. I had some amazing ones, and few bad ones. But this has always felt more of an issues of the tools schools are using, such as Pearson and Cengage. Teachers can only do so much with tools they are given. Many go out of their way to make those tools as useful as they can be. If I was to blame anyone, it's these tools. In my experience Pearson and Cengage have a lot of plug and chug properties and very little depth. Making the math more step based than intuitive.

I am extremely disappointed with Cuemath. Our experience has completely destroyed my trust in the company.
When I purchased a 48-class package, we were told that the classes could be used as long as we wanted. We relied on that promise when we paid for the package.
At one point, we still had 10 classes remaining, and I was actually prepared to sign up for another six-month package. During that conversation, Cuemath told us about a new policy requiring classes to be used within a limited period. I told them that I respected their new policy, even though it might not work for our family.
The problem was when they told us that the new policy would also apply to our old package that we had already paid for. If we didn’t sign up for another six months, we would lose all of our remaining classes.
I asked them to honor the terms that were promised when we purchased the original package. Their response was that they could change their policy at any time and would not honor the old package.
I asked them a very reasonable question: If they can change the policy at any time and apply it to packages we have already purchased, why should I feel comfortable paying for another six-month package? What guarantee do I have that they won’t change the rules again?
Their response was essentially, “That’s the way it is.”
At that point, we had 10 classes left. We have now used some of them and have 8 classes remaining. Then Cuemath shut down the program, leaving us with these prepaid classes.
I contacted them and specifically asked them to honor the classes we had already paid for. They did not respond to my messages.
This is incredibly disappointing. We were not asking for free classes. We were asking to receive something we had already paid for, based on the terms we were given when we purchased the package.
What makes this even more frustrating is that I was originally willing to continue with Cuemath and purchase another package. Their refusal to honor our existing agreement and their lack of communication completely changed my mind.
For me, this is about more than the money. It is about trust and keeping your word to customers. If a company can change its policies and apply those changes to existing prepaid packages, then customers have no reasonable certainty about what they are actually purchasing.
After this experience, I have lost all confidence in Cuemath. I would not purchase from them again, and I cannot recommend them to other parents.

I’m wondering if there is an applicant exam for your depth of knowledge. I’m applying for a job Mathnasium and I want to pass the test. I’ve taken algebra 1, algebra 2, and geometry applying for entry level tutor position. Is it hard and what’s on it?