Or maybe you abstract math out to the "science of patterns" and emphasize using that patterning skillset to identify and think about patterns in any situation whether it is math-based or not.
Yeah. I got some great advice once; it was "Don't become an expert in a narrow technique. What will you do when the technique gets outdated? Instead, be a problem-solver and learn new techniques to solve problems."
Longer term, if you had to choose between going deep and learning intensely in a field or emphasizing flexibility and autodidactic flightiness, which has the bigger payoff?
I don't think this is an either-or proposition. I like people who teach themselves new skills. People who dig deep on their own show evidence of strong internal drive. Get those people working together on something here excited about and the results can be terrific.
And must be late as my rambling also has me thinking: why in the heck am I letting public schools teach my child with their classically twenty year backwards post-sightedness?
Because they're "certified" (tm) and "accredited" (tm) and are Experts in (this space left intentionally blank). Don't you feel better now?
