Currently "analysis-teaching" is one of the most popular tags (see here). My question is:

Should we be using analysis (or perhaps real-analysis) instead of analysis-teaching?

Here's my argument that "analysis" is better:

  1. There are several other tags for math subjects that don't include the word "teaching", including "calculus", "geometry", "linear-algebra", "real-analysis", "algebra", "statistics", and "trigonometry". If we want to be consistent, we should either drop the "teaching" from "analysis-teaching", or add the word "teaching" to all of these other tags.

  2. I don't see the purpose of including the word "teaching". This site is about teaching, so any question tagged with, say, "geometry" is necessarily about the teaching of geometry.

  • $\begingroup$ I'm not sure how to indicate this, but I agree with this proposal. $\endgroup$
    – adamblan
    Commented Mar 15, 2014 at 22:02
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ @adamblan on meta, upvotes mean agreement $\endgroup$ Commented Mar 16, 2014 at 1:33

3 Answers 3


I agree that tag names that clearly correspond to mathematical subjects should be considered indicating a question about teaching that subject.

This could be especially useful, since I think for some we might soon decide to indicate the 'level' in the tag name to avoid confusion and/or too broad tags (e.g., ), and then we might soon hit the character limit when '-teaching' is appended all the time.

For some other tags things could be more complex, like , where one might want to distinguish between

  • the tag being used for questions looking for a proof with certain properties, like not requiring prior knowledge in some subject.

  • the tag being used for questions about "teaching proofs" in a general/introductory sense.

But we might see how things develop regarding this second point.


I think and should be merged. For the new name, I find "real analysis" too restrictive, and "analysis" might be confusing, especially for educators on lower level.

Analysis might mean the "analysis of a teaching procedure" as well, as it stands. This ambiguity does not pop up with geometry, algebra, combinatorics, etc. So either I would leave it as , or change it to .

  • 1
    $\begingroup$ I agree. Since education uses concepts from psychology and statistics, the tag "analysis" could be confused with psychoanalysis or data analysis. $\endgroup$
    – JRN
    Commented Apr 2, 2014 at 7:44
  • $\begingroup$ Good point. So perhaps actually analysis is more like 'proof than 'algebra' (in the distinction I make). @JoelReyesNoche to add to this, then somebody will be teaching a 'data analysis' course and as about this, and then we will be in real trouble :-) $\endgroup$
    – quid
    Commented Apr 2, 2014 at 8:23
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ I like mathematical-analysis. $\endgroup$ Commented Apr 2, 2014 at 8:39
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Absent opposition until then I intend to carry this out this evening (UTC): merge both into mathematical-analysis with a synoym from real-analysis to mathematica-analysis. $\endgroup$
    – quid
    Commented Apr 2, 2014 at 12:39
  • $\begingroup$ Just performed the merges. $\endgroup$
    – quid
    Commented Apr 2, 2014 at 22:37

I agree with your point since everything here should be somehow related to teaching. We should maybe wait and look trough all the given tags at some point before public beta starts in order to re-organize the tags depending on more content being avaviable at that point.


You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .