There was effectively nothing about linear algebra on that page. After some link followings, it appears that http://www.scotthyoung.com/mit/1806-exam.pdf is the exam which the student was happy with (having done worse on the first version). The final score appears to be 66 out of 100.
Based on that test, I think the title is link-bait as it isn't "mastering linear algebra" but "passing an introductory algebra course."
My thoughts exactly. The author should reconsider what he means by "mastering" something. Not passing a final exam for an introductory course isn't mastering the topic.
I am totally on board with the idea of seeing how fast someone can complete coursework and push the boundaries of what they can learn in a set amount of time, but name the article about it something other than "Mastering Linear Algebra in 10 Days".
I am quite confused looking at that final; it seems incredibly basic for even an introductory course at MIT (that might have been a midterm when I was the graduate instructor for linear algebra at Berkeley).
18.06 is the very basic, more applied version of linear algebra at MIT. About half of the students that take it aren't in the math department. The more theoretical option is 18.700. And then there's 18.701, Algebra 1, taught by Artin using his book. The latter two are almost completely theoretical/proof based.
Yes, that is strange. It looks more like the mid-term of the linear algebra class that I took at MIT: i.e., 18.700. And I have to say that 18.700 was one of the easiest classes that I ever took at MIT.
It's kind of a bummer that they gave me a C, in it though. I found it so easy that I never bothered to do the homework and just showed up for the exams and got A's on them all. For non-lab classes at MIT, they'd usually give you an A -- or at least a B -- if you got an A on all of the exams, even if you neglected the homework.
Based on that test, I think the title is link-bait as it isn't "mastering linear algebra" but "passing an introductory algebra course."