Experiment and Learn

In my highschool, like the many described by Gerofsky, we had only two teachers for a school of 1500 fully qualified to teach mathematics. I was brought up in more conservative system of mathematics education. Fortunately, this worked well for me. I can easy understand with what was said about those who have “found ways to make sense and understand the mathematics they were presented, and expect that anyone who is good at math should be able to succeed as they did, under a similar system.” Does this mean that how I should teach should model the education practices under which I was taught? As many would argue - no. I must remember there exists a diverse range of learning styles and that a conservative mathematics education will very likely make it difficult or even impossible for many students to thrive. Can I expect students to extract an relational understanding of the material from a class involving mainly drills and memorization of facts and formulas? I don’t think I can.

The alternative to this would then be a progressive approach - a stance involving experimentation which can be “messy, uncertain, and unsettling.” I can also understand the parents’ “worries that their children were being shortchanged by teachers experimenting with their education.” I believe this is a necessary risk if we want to provide students with the best possible education. We must set the example that it is ok to take risks, mess up and learn from our mistakes. It is very important that we learn. We have the responsibility to educate and if each educational experiment we conduct fails, I believe we are failing even if we establish the belief that mistakes are ok.

In short, I believe that, as math educators, we must not be lazy and conform to the traditional ways in which we have been taught. Instead, we must make the effort to challenge students in a variety of ways while at the same time learning and reflecting on our efforts.