The more I explore the field of Education and its history, the more I recognize its deeply political nature. In Gerofsky's (2007) article from Mathison and Ross's "Battleground Schools", it is highlighted that John Dewey’s progressive ideas gained prominence because “[t]he all-American ideals of egalitarianism, individuality, experimentation, innovation, and practicality were celebrated as the Allies won victories in World War II.” This statement grounds the evolution of Education within a historical timeline, deepening my appreciation for the hard-won efforts of earlier generations, which have shaped the peace and "progress" we experience today. It also surprised me to learn that the "Progressivist Reform" began as early as 1910 to 1940. A century later, North American schools are still slowly adopting and evolving these progressive approaches in mathematics education.
The New Math movement in the 1960s was cited to meet strong resistance from teachers "[having] little or no familiarity with the mathematical topics they were suddenly expected to teach" and parents "[being] unable to help their children with their math homework" (Gerofsky, 2007). To me, they are unfortunate reasons for any change, disregarding how elite and inequitable the New Math movement was. There will always be these concerns whenever a big change happens in our curriculum. We always want to prepare high school students for the future, not only immediately after graduation and transition to adulthood, but also five to ten years after then. How, in teacher education programs, do we also prepare teachers likewise? How do we convince parents to shift the focus from helping students with homework to expanding their skills and mathematical knowledge in their home context? This discussion is especially relevant now with the BC Curriculum being fairly new, and updates and changes are necessary constants to make education contextually relevant to societal developments.
Finally, I find the ranking from the Third International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS) intriguing, particularly how American eighth-graders were ranked "28th in the world in mathematics" (Gerofsky, 2007). What criteria were used for this ranking? If it relied on paper-and-pencil test scores from international competitions, it seems to favor the traditionalist standards in math. This reminds me of the US News & World Report’s ranking of Best National Universities, which often prioritizes metrics such as published research, funding, and competition rankings—criteria that overlook key aspects of a student’s learning experience, like teacher-to-student ratios or professors’ years of teaching experience. Is the U.S. education system aligning itself with traditionalist standards, or does it aspire to foster critical and creative thinking in math—areas that are far more challenging to assess and rank?
Jasmin, you raised important points about preparing both teachers and parents for changes in the curriculum. How do you think teacher education programs could better equip future teachers to handle significant curriculum reforms, especially in math education?
ReplyDelete