Developmental Mathematics Revival!

Generalities

I have to admit that I am a bit grumpy. I have to even admit that I was grumpy yesterday in a meeting at my college about developmental education. #Pathways #MathProfessors

As you may know, I have been in the profession of developmental mathematics for quite a while; in a way, I stumbled upon this work back in 1973, when I was not able to find a high school teaching job … I had spent a year working in a local car dealership doing odd jobs, and managed to get interviewed for an adjunct position at the local community college.

After some time in the work, I discovered that there were both rewards and significant challenges. I stayed with the job, and eventually connected with AMATYC and our state affiliate; that connection was a key turning point in my life. All of us involved with mathematics in the first two years of college have a responsibility to our profession and the professional group (AMATYC).

Our work is incredibly important; we make a difference in student lives every day.

So, the grumpiness … essentially, the profession that I have been committed to for over 40 years has been under attack for the past few years. Reports, foundations, policy makers, and state lawmakers have stepped in to our work; many of declared that developmental mathematics is a failure, and many suggest that students would be better served by being placed directly in to college-level courses with ‘support’. These attacks, filled with pseudo-data and articulated with propaganda features, seek to preempt the faculty responsibility to maintain the curriculum in colleges.

Generalities … the attacks take some valid criticisms of developmental mathematics, supported by external forces, to create the types of change that certain groups want to see. Generalities … the challenge of speaking the truth while recognizing the extremes of variation in the work.

At one point in my meeting yesterday, I made some comments about the guided pathways work being started here. My college has a long history of separation between academics, and between academics and service functions; my ‘generalities’ were meant to suggest that prolonged effort was needed to overcome our decades of certain work climates.

Generalities … when a person does not agree with generalities, the response is often “don’t speak in generalities” (which is what I was told yesterday). Generalities are the only way to describe a system; this is comparable to having shared definitions in a mathematical system. Generalities are not the end of the conversation, nor the only factor in decision making; a successful human system requires long-term effort among the community involved.

I am tired of the ‘generalities’ presented as attacks on developmental mathematics. We know that much needs to be fixed, and I am confident that we (the professionals in the field) can create solutions which will serve our students better. Some people lob generalities at us in the same way that people lob the “f bomb” in groups; there is an element of bullying involved when outsiders state generalities about how bad our work is.

Rare is the profession where non-professionals are able to implement specific procedures within the profession.

We need a “TEA Party” type movement; perhaps call it “Legislated Enough Already” (LEA) or “Bashed Enough, Dummies” (BED).

Thanks for reading!

Join Dev Math Revival on Facebook:

politics of developmental mathematics | Jack Rotman | December 1, 2015 4:13 pm

4 Comments

By Laura, December 2, 2015 @ 12:12 am

I am so so grumpy. I also have been doing this for a while. If I’m not fighting off the sort of top down “reforms” from above that you outline, I am trying to convince my colleagues that multiple representations are important even essential to helping dev math students develop conceptual as well as procedural understandings. That we do our students no favors by concentrating on teaching them to do tricks in response to standard prompts. That not only objectives but linked assessments and pedagogy create a coherent curriculum.

I’m not only grumpy, I’m tired. 🙂
By Stacey, December 8, 2015 @ 11:57 pm

How can we all be living this same experience? I am so tired. You have much more experience in this field than I, and I would LOVE to talk to you about how you are facing all of this. I feel like it is a battle every day. My colleagues and I got a huge blow today. We are not sure what to do next. The state of Missouri is talking about eliminating developmental math from all college campuses by 2018. This while we are midstream working with the Dana Center and others to develop math pathways across the state.
By Jack Rotman, December 9, 2015 @ 7:45 am

Thanks for the reply … our profession faces many challenges, especially for people who have dedicated their work to developmental mathematics. We can ‘chat’ by email, if you’d like. If you can manage it, come to the 2nd national summit on developmental mathematics (March 15, 16 in Anaheim, prior to NADE). I’ll be there, doing a presentation and a panel.
I also hope that you can get some support from colleagues in your AMATYC affiliate, as you share these experiences. It’s even possible that the MoMATYC president can share expert testimony with the policy makers who are looking at the ‘elimination’ option.
By Stacey, December 9, 2015 @ 8:54 am

Thank you! I do plan on being in Anaheim, but I would like to ask you some questions related to your experiences in the field if you have the time. I will email you. Thanks again.