Teaching mathematics to future high school mathematics teachers, I have noticed that many of them, while they do enjoy the subject, seem to like it mostly as a means to an end, not necessarily for its intrinsic value. Maybe it's a consequence of how mathematics is taught to them, but there certainly is a wide assumption (also shared by mathematics education specialists) that people in general need to be shown "why" we're making them to mathematics; that is, we need to explain to them what (non-mathematical) thing is the real purpose of whatever mathematics they're learning. This can explain the fad for project-based or inquiry learning, and also the abundance of pseudocontext in mathematics textbooks, which I believe has the opposite effect to what they textbook authors want, confirming the uselessness of mathematics rather than justifying its use.
If I had to wager a guess as to where this comes from, I might say that the North American countries, and possibly other Anglosphere countries like Australia, tend to have an anti-intellectual streak. Doing things just for the sake of the intellectual stimulation is frowned upon, while building real-life stuff is seen as much more valuable. "Doing math", while it does have value, as well as inherent beauty, is very much a purely intellectual pursuit that doesn't easily translate into real world concerns. The irony, of course, is that mathematics also has valuable applications that require prior mastery of the subject, and inferior mathematics teaching methods that are too focused on showing the "why" make students less competent and less able to apply their knowledge.
I agree, and I'll add that I can't help but feel that shortened attention spans, life's faster pace, and society's need for instant gratification play a part as well.
One explanation may be that teachers in Anglo counties, where this viewpoint toward math seems to be the strongest, appear to have weaker numerical skills than teachers in other developed countries. Hanushek and his co-authors use data from the OECD's Survey of Adult Skills, which finds that teachers in the US, Australia and UK have relatively strong literacy skills compared to teachers in other OECD countries. However, Anglo-country teachers' numerical skills -- while not terrible -- aren't as strong. For instance, US teachers' scores on the numeracy test rank 19th of 23 countries surveyed. This is all teachers, not just math teachers, but it might point toward US teachers just not being as math-inclined.
As one of those U.S. teachers, I can honestly say I believe it's sad but true. If I have another high school student tell me that the smallest prime number is ONE, I'm likely to jump out of the window. More than 75% of my students - Algebra 2 through AP Calculus - all report that they were taught that a prime number is a number that can only be divided by itself and 1.
There are two many good career options for people who love maths compared to the number of people who love it.
If anyone is making a difference here it is Richard Rusczyk.
But he is only reaching a few thousand kids a year. That’s more than there are UD math phds per year so not nothing, but I’d guess 50 years of compound growth in engagement of math for the joy of it to make it available to most children.
Teaching mathematics to future high school mathematics teachers, I have noticed that many of them, while they do enjoy the subject, seem to like it mostly as a means to an end, not necessarily for its intrinsic value. Maybe it's a consequence of how mathematics is taught to them, but there certainly is a wide assumption (also shared by mathematics education specialists) that people in general need to be shown "why" we're making them to mathematics; that is, we need to explain to them what (non-mathematical) thing is the real purpose of whatever mathematics they're learning. This can explain the fad for project-based or inquiry learning, and also the abundance of pseudocontext in mathematics textbooks, which I believe has the opposite effect to what they textbook authors want, confirming the uselessness of mathematics rather than justifying its use.
If I had to wager a guess as to where this comes from, I might say that the North American countries, and possibly other Anglosphere countries like Australia, tend to have an anti-intellectual streak. Doing things just for the sake of the intellectual stimulation is frowned upon, while building real-life stuff is seen as much more valuable. "Doing math", while it does have value, as well as inherent beauty, is very much a purely intellectual pursuit that doesn't easily translate into real world concerns. The irony, of course, is that mathematics also has valuable applications that require prior mastery of the subject, and inferior mathematics teaching methods that are too focused on showing the "why" make students less competent and less able to apply their knowledge.
I agree, and I'll add that I can't help but feel that shortened attention spans, life's faster pace, and society's need for instant gratification play a part as well.
One explanation may be that teachers in Anglo counties, where this viewpoint toward math seems to be the strongest, appear to have weaker numerical skills than teachers in other developed countries. Hanushek and his co-authors use data from the OECD's Survey of Adult Skills, which finds that teachers in the US, Australia and UK have relatively strong literacy skills compared to teachers in other OECD countries. However, Anglo-country teachers' numerical skills -- while not terrible -- aren't as strong. For instance, US teachers' scores on the numeracy test rank 19th of 23 countries surveyed. This is all teachers, not just math teachers, but it might point toward US teachers just not being as math-inclined.
https://kingcenter.stanford.edu/sites/g/files/sbiybj16611/files/media/file/573wp_0.pdf
As one of those U.S. teachers, I can honestly say I believe it's sad but true. If I have another high school student tell me that the smallest prime number is ONE, I'm likely to jump out of the window. More than 75% of my students - Algebra 2 through AP Calculus - all report that they were taught that a prime number is a number that can only be divided by itself and 1.
I think this can’t be solved every where quickly.
There are two many good career options for people who love maths compared to the number of people who love it.
If anyone is making a difference here it is Richard Rusczyk.
But he is only reaching a few thousand kids a year. That’s more than there are UD math phds per year so not nothing, but I’d guess 50 years of compound growth in engagement of math for the joy of it to make it available to most children.
https://www.newyorker.com/culture/persons-of-interest/richard-rusczyks-worldwide-math-camp