A common misconception is that mathematics appears difficult to some learners merely because of the manner in which it is presented. According to this view, if the curriculum were simply redesigned with more effective packaging, the subject would become universally accessible. This assumption, however, does not withstand scrutiny. Mathematics, even at its most elementary level, is inherently abstract. Its foundational concept—numbers—is not an instinctive capacity of the human brain, but rather a construct that requires deliberate training to comprehend (Dehaene, 2011). The subsequent development of arithmetic skills similarly demands sustained practice, patience, and discipline, with some learners requiring considerably more time than others to achieve proficiency (Geary, 2013).
Efforts to reform the teaching of mathematics are not new. For centuries, educators have attempted to devise methods of instruction that would render mathematics easier to learn. If a universally effective pedagogical strategy existed, it would likely have been discovered by now. Nevertheless, curriculum designers continue to introduce revisions, often on a cyclical basis, in pursuit of an idealized approach that emphasizes the practical or engaging aspects of mathematics. Despite these efforts, empirical evidence suggests otherwise: in the United States, average mathematics scores have steadily declined, reflecting an ongoing failure to ensure mastery of even the most basic competencies (National Center for Education Statistics [NCES], 2022).
One factor contributing to this problem is well documented: some teachers harbor a personal dislike or even fear of mathematics. This attitude often permeates the classroom, transmitting anxiety to students and undermining their confidence (Beilock, Gunderson, Ramirez, & Levine, 2010). Enhancing teachers’ mathematical competence and comfort is therefore a critical step toward improving outcomes. Simply put, individuals who dislike or fear mathematics are unlikely to teach it effectively, regardless of the instructional strategies employed.
The key takeaway of this is that we have learned many things that are fundamentally abstract to the brain. For these, it can take much time to learn them – often without shortcuts.
P.S. This is a slight revision of a contribution I previously made to quora.com
References
-
Beilock, S. L., Gunderson, E. A., Ramirez, G., & Levine, S. C. (2010). Female teachers’ math anxiety affects girls’ math achievement. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 107(5), 1860–1863. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0910967107
-
Dehaene, S. (2011). The number sense: How the mind creates mathematics (Revised and updated ed.). Oxford University Press.
-
Geary, D. C. (2013). Early foundations for mathematics learning and their relations to learning disabilities. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 22(1), 23–27. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721412469398
-
National Center for Education Statistics. (2022). NAEP report card: Mathematics results. U.S. Department of Education. Retrieved from https://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard
Comments
Post a Comment
Please Comment.