Battleground Schools - Article Response

 I wasn’t expecting to have as strong a reaction to this article as I did. This is the first time I have heard of the New Math, and it is the first time that I’ve read any account of the explicit style of mathematics taught to my parent’s generation. Frankly, this article made me angry. 

First, I was very impressed by the type of mathematical education suggested by Dewey. Given the quality of public mathematic education in North America for the past 60-ish years, I was surprised to learn that in the early 20^th century, Dewey advocated for unpredictable classrooms driven by student autonomy. Mathematics is returning to this style, demonstrating how modern Dewey was in his thinking. As suggested in this article, I can only speculate that the unbearably intense global politics of the mid-20^th century scared the public away from Dewey’s slower, more authentic approach to education. It makes me wonder what qualities of Dewey's education were infused in this generation of students. It is perhaps noteworthy that many of the young hippies of the 60s would have had parents educated under Dewey's system. Perhaps parents raised to see the value of student autonomy were more inclined to let their children pursue authentic ways of living. This is deeply speculative. 

My mom, born in 1969, was traumatized by her math class. This article gives me the understanding that the education she received was some abomination of ‘New Math’ and neo-liberal politics, completely absent of authentic problem solving, geometry, and critical thinking. For her, mathematics is instrumental calculation. This did not align with her strengths as a student – consequently, she has actively avoided any semblance of mathematics for nearly 50 years. It is terrifying to speculate on the number of elementary teachers who share this disposition.

Perhaps the most sinister quality of New Math mentioned in this article was its attempt to create a global, ‘teacher-proof’ curriculum. As has been discussed, teachers in the modern age do NOT exist as sources of content. It is only by cultivating authentic intellectual relationships with their students that are teachers able to facilitate the transmission of knowledge. A ‘teacher-proof’ curriculum blatantly goes against this pedagogy. If a 'teacher-proof' curriculum was possible, there would be no (human) teachers in the 21st century. 

Finally, I have a much greater appreciation for the role the NCTM has played in the current state of mathematics. The NCTM’s prophetic attitude towards standards enabled teachers to articulate their ideals, as well as to preserve those ideals against the static, fundamentalist world view of the religious right. Upon concluding this article, I feel a much greater motivation to improve my understanding of the NCTM standards. In particular, I plan to understand how they align with the BC Curriculum.