Sally A. Sloan
Department of Mathematics / Statistics
Winona State University
Winona, MN 55987
Here in Minnesota we are agonizing over politically motivated decisions about scope of licenses (K-8, 5-12). Yet we are under extreme pressure to prepare teachers in 4 years or less. I believe it is healthy to be made to defend your position periodically. There may be many things we do because we have always done them that way - or worse because it was the way it was done for us. So to review programs thoughtfully is healthy. After fighting (losing) this move for several years I have personally actually begun to consider the process of selection of candidates for education programs and wonder if we are failing to screen for what may be important factors. I think of our very well CONTENT prepared secondary mathematics candidates and wonder how they will fare with pants wetting 5th graders. Some will be fine and others will quit. That led to memories of years in Junior High and the impression that it was not a place for every secondary mathematics graduate. Having taught grade 4 through Graduate School I can see the differences. And I have begun to wonder if we have left a big necessary prerequisite out of the usual entrance requirements.
As we try to align our programs with the INTASC standards (obligatory in Minnesota) the word "disposition" is often mentioned. Do we screen for dispositions? Is every secondary grad ready to face pubescent adolescents? Or are some only disposed to high school students - and is that because they prefer teaching more like commonly seen college lecture model instruction? Schools of nursing try to screen out those who are not psychologically disposed to serve sick people in messy situations. We try to get candidates into schools early to do somewhat the same screening. Too often I see students going against their personal feelings just because they have decided this is what they want to do or they believe this is all they CAN do!
Perhaps my question is simply: What really are the characteristics of a good secondary math teacher? Just a 3.5 GPA in mathematics and some education and methods courses? Or should there also be personal dispositions? And could we screen more carefully before they are admitted to programs?
We have had a Learning Project for new faculty in our College of Science and Engineering this term. Mathematics Education is part of the Mathematics department of that college rather than in Education. We teach content mathematics for Elementary candidates, Methods for Secondary and of course content for Secondary in the department. As facilitator of the Learning Project (designed to give new faculty some foundation in learning theory and practical tips for effective teaching), I watched these wonderful young people develop excellent teaching ideas and try them. They absorbed a substantial amount and are also involved in informal research on the pedagogy they are trying. A few are considering more formal research on the pedagogy of their college classes. My question to the members of the field is: If we do our job very well, will the test of our effectiveness be that we elimnate the need for our own existence?
Before reacting - take a global look. What if content faculty did indeed model those teaching techniques we try to teach in our methods classes. What if everyone experienced their own learning that way? Ball (1989) is certainly confirmed everywhere - people teach as they were taught! So if new faculty teach in constructivist based ways, using cognitively guided classrooms and all the other tested methods of effective teaching for understanding... why are we needed?
Please note that I have some answers to that for myself but I really would like to hear from others in the field. Many of us are in settings where, as mathematics educators we are perceived as less valuable because we do not have Ph.Ds in Mathematics or Statistics where there is little or no understanding of the field - or for that matter, no acceptance that mathematics education is indeed a viable field. Perhaps because research in mathematics education is so very different from research in mathematics or statistics it is not perceived as valid or valuable. The MAA publishes a journal considered to be the education arm of the field of mathematics. Mathematicians read the articles and believe they are knowledgeable (and perhaps wonder why anyone would be offered an advanced degree in that subject). I look around and see some young faculty using some group work, some writing, some very creative activities. As that grows, could our field actually collapse into nothing, with the learning theory going from cognitive science directly to subject area experts? Are we a dinosaur headed for extinction?
I get requests for info about technology conferences and tech societies. How about a list of places to look? We could all submit our favorite professional societies (e.g., ISTE, the International Society for Technology in Education), journals, web site etc. For example does everyone know that there are several international conferences that are of interest to AMTE folks? I have the great pleasure of heading to Oslo this August for the International Conference on Technology in Education (ICTE). There was the big NECC (National Education Computer Conference) in Seattle at the end of June. The Florida State tech conferences may be the best in the nation. Every fall ISTE runs a Tel-Ed conference (telecommunications is the base so everything from Web to Distance learning to whatever you need to telecommunicate to do - and at all levels from intro to advanced). They really walk the talk too - the conference is both in Austin and Mexico City. Attendance in either place includes viewing events at the other.
[ Top of Document ] [ Back to index ]