End-of-Course Reflections and Demonstrations

Amy Hackenberg--Mathematics Education

I learned the most during this seminar when experiencing someoneÕs ideas of an activity or structure she/he might use in her/his mathematics classes. That kind of experience is powerful for me because it helps me see more clearly assumptions I might take for granted, helps me develop ideas about assumptions I do see but may not know how to "disrupt" in action, and helps me further develop my notions about the purposes of public (high school, mathematics) education.

Another thing I learned (or relearned) is this: when in "doubt" (when stuck, bothered, uncertain, confused) about matters educational (i.e., in the classroom, in the school, in the communityÉ), go back to my students. But donÕt just listen to them. Think about how to share with them; think about what they may be learning from my actions as a teacher; think about what I want them to learn (such as taking increasing responsibility for their own learning); think about what a community of responsible learners means.

Finally, I also thought about some questions asked of me after my presentationÉwhat means oppressive, for instance? And what I am being emancipated from (if, indeed, I claim to be looking for an emancipatory mathematics education)? My first thought is that I am being emancipated from subsuming the directions and pathways of my mind and self to those of other adults who have come before and have organized mathematical experience in a certain way. ItÕs not that I donÕt want to know about how other people have organized mathematical experience; in fact I need to know just that: that people have organized mathematical experience in a certain way, that I can do it to, and that there is not just one way (not just one rightÑnot even just a couple of rights.) But itÕs that (I believe) individual organization of mathematical experience gets lost in the mass process of mathematics education in the United StatesÑand along with it individual power.

However, I have now come to see that emancipatory may not be the ideal word choice for what I intend with my notions of the production and valuation of knowledge. Liberatory, in the sense of liberating the mind from conforming to othersÕ notions of organization while allowing the freedom for compatible and similar constructions, may be more accurate for my intentions.

Link to some documents from my demonstration on the production of valuation of knowledge: [note: both are pdf files]

Serkan Hekimoglu--Mathematics Education

Bob Ives--Special Education

Brian Lawler--Mathematics Education

Denise Mewborn--Mathematics Education

My big question at the end of this seminar is: "Is any pedagogical practice necessarily oppressive or non-oppressive/emancipatory?" It seems that oppression is in the eye of the beholder, so to speak, so it would be possible for two people to have the very same experience and for one to find it oppressive an the other to find it liberating. Cooperative learning, for example, might be a wonderfully engaging experience for one person and a terribly inhibiting experience for another. Of course, "cooperative learning" is not monolithic because it is interpreted and enacted n many different ways, so various instances of cooperative learning may be more or less oppressive.

I suppose that practices at the extremes could be clearly labeled as oppressive. Shouting at students and constantly belittling them could probably be agreed upon by most people as oppressive practices. IÕm trying to think of an instance where someone would not see this as oppressive. I canÕt think of a mathematics education example, but the military seems like a plausible quasi-educational example. In the military, conformity and uniformity are seen as desirable, and the practices that are used to achieve those goals are perhaps not seen as oppressive in that context.

At the other extreme, treating students with respect and encouraging them to develop and share their mathematical ideas could be argued to be non-oppressive. However, I have seen elementary school students who have been through four or five years of "traditional" mathematics instruction (and college students who have been through 13+ years of this type of instruction) who become terribly uncomfortable when placed in a teaching-learning situation that is "standards-like" (for lack of a better term). That leads me to question what qualifies as oppressive. If youÕre uncomfortable, are you necessarily oppressed? I also wonder if something can seem oppressive at the time but after gaining some distance from it seem liberating? Being asked to really grapple with mathematical ideas could seem very oppressive at first, especially if you do not think you have the tools to do so. But after engaging in this type of learning in a supportive environment for a significant period of time, a student might come to see this type of learning as very emancipatory.

The issues surrounding critical theory remind me of the issue surrounding equity. Equity is distinguished from equality in the following way: Treating students equitably means giving each student what s/he needs in order to succeed, whereas treating students equally means giving all students the same treatment. Implementing critical pedagogy in the classroom seems a bit like the equity perspective in that a teacher must know his/her students (as mathematicians, as learners, and as human beings) and strive to provide the most appropriate experiences for each student. Easier said than done, of course.

Amy Saylor--Social Science Education

Lisa Sheehy--Mathematics Education