Math Stories

Mr. Moses proposes a litmus test:

To meet the So What part you have to answer this question; Why are you making your students do the things that they do? Two answers are automatically out

• Because it's in the state standards
• Because I said so

If the people you are forcing to do something cannot clearly state why they have to do that something and how it will make any difference in their future life, and their future world, then you have not met the "so what" part of this litmus.

And to a large extent I agree with him. We should know why they're learning what they are. We should be building a knowledge platform for their growth, and we should know what that knowledge is, what it's going to be, and how to develop it. And lord knows, having some sort of "Why am I learning this" provides some incentive to keep learning.

But, once again, the barrier between math and literary arts rears its head. I can explain to you how learning to balance an equation in algebra will help you think more rationally. If I knew what you were going to be doing in 6 years, I could even tell you how it would help in your specific instance. The tool is that powerful. The problem is that it won't make sense to you until you've learned all of that stuff in the six intervening years. I know it. You can know it. But to explain it to you, you need to learn what i'm teaching you, plus 6 more years of stuff first. It's a chicken and egg problem.

Here's the irony: Mr. Moses is a big fan of technology. His kids blog, podcast, and use wikis. All of that technology is right there, serves an immediate purpose, and the kids get it.

Right?

Not Quite.

None of that stuff would exist if it weren't for people taking their education on faith. I can guarantee you that every single person who ever designed a chip, designed a hard drive, laid out a motherboard, wrote a driver, or an os, or the webserver or webclients that he uses for his technology went through at least 6 years of math not sure why they were learning it, but taking it on faith that it'd be useful for something. The outcome of that faith? Mr. Moses's classroom tools.

For me, math was always a game - a fun logic puzzle. I enjoyed it in and of itself. It wasn't until my senior year in high school, after the first of three semesters of calculus, that I started to see real world applications for what i'd been doing since 5th grade. Algebra problems concerning Mary's 30 turtles don't count as real world. Solving ballistic trajectories, determining precipitating conditions for traffic backups, designing just in time production methods, or finding buckling loads for cantilever beams are not only real world problems, but all fall out of the same semester of math, after 6-7 years of "Why am I learning this?"

More irony:

He points at the classic Did You Know? video. He, and just about every other person i've seen present this, use it as an argument for including more technology in the classroom. I just watched another video which makes a clear case that biology right now is where the transistor was 50 years ago, and realized that in 30 years:

• No one will own a cell phone. (except maybe in the 3rd world).
• CDs and DVDs will be as anachronistic as wire recorders. They almost are, already.
• Computers as such, will be gone also. No boxes, no keyboards. Maybe displays, but likely not.
• Steroids and piercings will be quaint and old fashioned compared to the new bodymods that will be available.
• War and terrorism will not be subject to physical boundaries as it is now, but genetic boundaries. Recreational drug use probably will too.
• 90% of what doctors do today will be obsolete.
• 90% of the technical skills we have today will be obsolete. Driving a car is probably in the remaining 10%.

Why is this irony? Because the technology being pushed is already on the verge of obsolete. Because the best tools to get ready¹ for the new world are knowledge, logic, and thinking - skills that can be taught with a stick and a bare patch of dirt. And you'll never be able to answer "Why am I learning this?" because the things they'll use it for haven't even been imagined yet.

And so I will continue teaching, continue pushing my kids to develop the skills to solve problems, and not just solve them, but solve them effectively and rationally, and be able to explain their solutions. I'll even make up plausible excuses to keep the Mr. Moses of the world happy while I do it.

And then, it 20 years, they can come back and tell me why they really needed to know it.

¹ It is worth noting that there is a difference between getting ready to use whatever technology there will be, and being part of creating it. It is arguable that most people won't have a hand in creating any of it (any more than most people now need to know how to build a car). Still, the skills to adapt to a changing world are going to come from having a good basis in the fundamentals, rather than from understanding an advanced but rapidly obsolescing skill. (back)