"Battleground Schools: Mathematics Education" Article Reflection

            Susan Gerofsky’s article “Battleground Schools: Mathematics Education” discussed some of the conflicts that occurred in mathematics education (and are still occurring) in the past century.  The conflict for the most part has been a clash between the “progressive” and “conservative” or “traditionalist” views on how math should be taught in school.  Gerofsky’s article summarizes the differences these two positions hold in their approach towards math education.  The conservative view emphasizes fluency in mathematical learning and absorbing and applying facts so as to achieve the goal of obedience and a value of precision and correctness; in contrast, the progressive view stresses understanding achieved through inquiry and sense-making, with original thinking and generic problem-solving skills seen as the goal of math education.  The article goes on to describe how the battle between these two viewpoints was played out in public schools in North America, beginning with the Progressivist Reform from about 1910-1940, during which the work of John Dewey, advocating reflective inquiry in education, was accepted into progressive teachers’ colleges and was put into practice in some classrooms.  By the 1960’s, the Cold War between the US and Soviet Union brought on the movement known as “The New Math” which focussed on creating a unified, logical and highly abstract algebraic structure of mathematics based on set theory.  The goal of this program was to familiarize all students in the K-12 system with the mathematical foundation needed for future careers as scientists; however, by the 1970’s it was obvious this program wasn’t working and hence was soon put to an end.  The article ends discussing how the “Math Wars” over the NCTM Standards from the 1990’s to present have brought on both support and opposition from progressives and traditionalists, as well as from sensationalist media coverage in a battle that shows no sign of resolving anytime soon.

            I found this article to be a most interesting read.  Though I was not too familiar with all the curricular reforms implemented in the past or currently are being developed, I’ve always been quite aware of the debate surrounding differing teaching methods and ideologies being used in classrooms.  I agree with Susan Gerofsky’s opinion that much of the debate has been further inflamed by media coverage that has “little basis in fact” and has unfortunately resulted in math education becoming another stage for a left-vs-right political face-off.  I too feel that working towards balance and consensus would produce a more beneficial result than what the “Math Wars” are achieving now.  What else interested me about the article was the history of math education that was presented, especially “The New Math” movement of the 1960’s.  I’d never heard of this program before and it surprised me how such an initiative was started as a result of a space race against another nation.  It’s alarming to think how such political battles can often be fought in our classrooms.