I have never considered textbooks to have a genre or a writing style. This is partly because we see these texts as infallible sources of knowledge that exist above any human authorship or bias. My social studies cohort has been discussing this topic a lot since old textbooks can contain harmful interpretations of history in an objective tone. Extending this thought, I think math has been "over-objectivized." What I mean here is that a lot of Math is objectively "true"; that is, there are many mathematical conclusions that can be replicated in many different contexts. This replicability is what we've collectively decided to define as the objective truths of mathematics. However, harkening back to Hewitt, while the necessary may be objective (and ever-evolving) the arbitrary is highly subjective. So, a math textbook that mobilizes the same tone of objectivity for ALL of Math, even the arbitrary, is questionable to me. This tone is especially important to the section about the relationship between students and math from a text. The phrases "you conclude," "you know," etc. project that objectiveness into the math student. It's a rather manipulative way of getting students to assume "common knowledge" without qualification.
With all this being said, I'm entirely uncertain whether students actually internalize this linguism. One of the skills I learned in math classes was to cut through the language of a math question and extract the information needed to solve the problem. Therefore, I'm left wondering to what extent this debate is realistically impacting math students. However, if I accept this potential for negative impact, I can see a spectrum of possible solutions. One extreme is to subjectify/storify all aspects of math, and the other is to proverbially slash the math to the bone and publish a text of only numbers and verbs. And still, these come with their own advantages and drawbacks.
And now I realize I've rambled for about 300 words pontificating over a theoretical impact that I have no idea how to solve...
You mention the spectrum of possible solutions for addressing the objectivity of math textbooks. How do you think these approaches could affect different types of learners, such as those who prefer structure versus those who thrive with creative exploration?
ReplyDelete