AMATYC Standards … Where is the Math in IMPACT?

What is the role of professional standards? Do they address instructional practices only? Do we need or want guidance on curricular issues?

I am hoping that you consider these questions routinely. Within college mathematics, both AMATYC and MAA have released standards over the years … with the MAA standards strongly tilted towards curricular concerns. The AMATYC standards (in the original “Crossroads”), dealt with both instructional practices and curricular issues (see https://amatyc.site-ym.com/page/GuidelineCrossroads/Crossroads-in-Mathematics.htm), though the curricular guidance in that document was primarily a validation of the status quo.

Since that time, AMATYC has released two more standards documents — Beyond Crossroads (2006, https://amatyc.site-ym.com/page/GuidelineCrossroads/Crossroads-in-Mathematics.htm) and IMPACT (2018, https://amatyc.site-ym.com/mpage/IMPACT). The 2006 standards focused on a process, the improvement cycle, which was to be applied to both instructional practices and the curriculum.

So, what happened with IMPACT? Curricular issues (the mathematics) are not addressed at all. The only math in the document arises coincidentally as instructional practices are described. What does this exclusive focus on instruction mean? Does it suggest that AMATYC does not see any need to update the curriculum? No, I don’t believe so. Is there a lack of consensus? Very likely, but that does not prevent the development of standards on curriculum.

I think this missed opportunity was the result of a focus on perceptions of what members and faculty in general WANTED to see. I see this as a confusion between want (a comfortable condition) and need (a challenged condition). If we judge ‘need’ by what is popular at conferences, the need is certainly for instructional practices — especially those which can be implemented now, regardless of other instruction and regardless of curriculum.

However, leadership involves also judging what people need even when this need is not measured by session attendance. In some ways, judging this need involves measuring need indirectly — such as the actions of state legislatures and policy makers to mandate curricular changes. We certainly enjoy discussions about effective and cool teaching methods; it is not happy or comfortable to deal with curricular challenges.

By being even more silent on curricular issues, the newest AMATYC standards leave us (the professionals) with no guidance and no support when faced with external forces and directives.

Now, I need to disclose that I was deeply involved with this newest AMATYC standards project. From when it started in 2014 as a vague ‘update Beyond Crossroads’ until 2017, I was on the planning team. In late 2016, I even wrote a chapter for the new standards on faculty issues — combining curriculum and instruction. You will not see a single word from this chapter in the final document, and that (by itself) does not bother me. For personal reasons, I had to stop my involvement with the project last year so I had to ‘let go’ of the work. Other people took the responsibility of creating the document, so they got the decisions.

I would not have minded if “IMPACT” had material having no connection to the chapter I wrote — as long as it supported faculty and departments in all ways. Instead, we have a very nice catalog of good ideas for teaching … with no guidance on ‘what’ to teach.

The MAA has continued to issue guidance (sort of standards) on curricular issues; I use the CUPM 2015 material far more than I use the AMATYC standards — even though I had been a member of AMATYC for over 25 years and a member of MAA for one.

Our curriculum is under pressure to change, and our curriculum needs to change. Much of what we teach has remained constant for over half a century, while the needs of our students and our client disciplines have changed dramatically. If we do not have professional standards from AMATYC, we will have to update the curriculum based on MAA standards — which focus on calculus and ‘beyond’. We are dealing with a period of change without any professional standards for the curriculum in the first two years of college mathematics.

Developmental Mathematics Revival!

Bringing a new vitality to college mathematics 2011 to 2019