thoughts on battleground schools

The first stop for me was the bullet point descriptions of some cultural assumptions with regards to math. I especially appreciate how these are described as "socially sanctioned." As someone who thinks math is a really interesting subject, it irks me how it is not only socially acceptable, but also socially reinforced to dislike math. This ties into the 4th bullet point, which mentions how there is "lots of positive valuation" for students who vocalize their struggles with math. It's absolutely understandable for people to seek comfort with others when they are dealing with something difficult - I get that. I just wish it was framed differently. For example, why do people wear their struggles with math as a badge of honor? I'm not saying you should be ashamed, but it is frustrating because it propagates this idea that math is beyond understanding and has no value for most people (2nd bullet point). I think this is all basically a defense mechanism resulting from years of traumatic education experiences. So it's slightly forgivable on the parts of students commiserating with each other. On the other hand, I dislike it when parents say things like "Oh it's so funny how bad I am at math." Then again, I must acknowledge that growing up I was the beneficiary of at least some respect from teachers and peers as a kind of rare breed who enjoyed math class and was halfway competent with the subject.

The second stop for me was at the mention of "New Math." I've heard this referenced before, mostly derogatorily in popular culture, but I can't say I know too much about it. Just from reading a bit about it in the article and just now on wikipedia... It actually sounds pretty nifty to me. I'm sure its criticism are valid, but how can you not respect trying something different? Easy for me to say as someone who didn't actually experience it. The article points out that in many important respects, it was still quite traditional. And looking at a some other examples of "New Math problems" from google... I feel like I can see some of its DNA in contemporary math education (like Jump Math, for example). Were I a parent during that time period, I can see myself getting a kick out of it while simultaneously joining in on the chorus of people dog-piling on its obtuseness. If I'm understanding the history correctly, it seems like it was kind of an important development insofar as catalyzing changes to the curriculum. I think we're far from having perfected the math curriculum (it's impossible anyway), but I would love to see more and more "radical" changes to it, at least just to trying something different for a minute. It seems like such a long drawn-out ordeal to see any changes, I wish something like New Math would come out every couple of years just to keep us on our toes and have us thinking about alternative ways of teaching the subject.

The third stop for me was the point about the NCTM Standards being used as a model for the development of similar standards for other subjects. This kind of feeds into my egotistical opinion that math is the most important and influential subject in school. Along those lines... Nobody is out here comparing social sciences or language arts test scores between countries. It seems slightly contradictory how as individuals, most folks actually literally detest math, and yet as a collective, we all seem to look at success in math (and sciences) as the de facto barometer for the quality of education. This kind of ties into my thoughts on my first stop... In particular, how I can personally feel like a cool black sheep for actually enjoying math, while at the same time criticize "the masses" for not enjoying it. We're all a bunch of math fetishizing hypocrites is my point, but I might just be speaking for myself.