“Integrating history of Mathematics in the classroom: an analytic survey” Reflection

Over the years I have taken a number of math courses in secondary school and in my mathematics major. Mathematics is the focus of my studies, and in some ironic or modest way, I’d like to admit that I’m not actually very good at it. My passion for math instead lies in satisfying an innate curiosity towards amateurly painting the abstractness of reality with profound numbers and logic, rather than solving homework questions one exam to another. So, I’ve always believed that in my future math classrooms, the emphasis would be placed on understanding how ideas came to be, allowing students to be inspired by that process, and giving them a space to apply logic to their imaginations. Because, mathematics at its heart really is much more than just numbers and equations- it’s a systematic way of thinking and presenting ideas that has influenced the development of so many fields, from fashion, to forestry, physics, and beyond. 

In my generation of secondary schooling in B.C., mathematics was not a mandatory course past grade 10. In fact, the only mandatory course up to grade 12 was English. The importance of English was emphasized due to its current social relevance and increasing need to enhance our comprehension and communication skills; however, History of Mathematics should be an equally important course on the basis that it focuses on the development of ideas, critically analyzes the relevance and application of specific topics, promotes thinking on and off-paper, and is globally relevant, which is extremely valuable to the student in both a long and short term. 

I enjoyed reading about the supporting arguments for amalgamating history and mathematics, and the practical ideas for classroom implementation. However, I was mildly appalled at the objections preventing it. Personally, I feel that the objections do not have much substance, and that they contradict the past and present efforts of educators to make schooling a more fulfilling experience. I believe in teaching the personality of mathematics, and that as future teachers, we have been granted the opportunity to bring this misunderstood subject past the fears of objections O2 and O4, which state that “History may be torturous and confusing” and “[m]any students dislike history, … or find it no less boring than mathematics” (Tzanakis & Arcavi, pg. 203). While these critiques seem to explicitly target the content of both mathematics and history, what it really does is draw attention to a possibly low quality of instruction and poor social stigmas, that as future teachers we need to address and overcome. And, points O7 to O10, cover a lack of time, resources, expertise, and assessment, to which, my simple (but, perhaps naive) response is: “If you approach the mountain in fear, it will look bigger than it actually is” (unknown).