Slashdot recently featured "A Mathematician’s Lament" by Paul Lockhart.

The big question everyone had in middle-to-high school mathematics classes was "When am I ever going to use this?" Those few who had interest in the subject tried to justify the existence of math class. But we were completely wrong. You asked the right quesion, and the answer was: Never. Your time is being wasted, and you are being frustrated needlessly, because they are teaching all the wrong things.

I do recommend everyone read this, although it is a bit long. Below are my favorite excerpts.

By removing the creative process and leaving only the results of that process, you virtually guarantee that no one will have any real engagement with the subject. It is like

sayingthat Michelangelo created a beautiful sculpture, without letting meseeit. How am I supposed to be inspired by that? (And of course it’s actually much worse than this— at least it’s understood that there is an art of sculpture that I am being prevented from appreciating).By concentrating on

what, and leaving outwhy, mathematics is reduced to an empty shell. The art is not in the "truth" but in the explanation, the argument. It is the argument itself which gives the truth its context, and determines what is really being said and meant. Mathematics isthe art of explanation. If you deny students the opportunity to engage in this activity— to pose their own problems, make their own conjectures and discoveries, to be wrong, to be creatively frustrated, to have an inspiration, and to cobble together their own explanations and proofs— you deny them mathematics itself. So no, I’m not complaining about the presence of facts and formulas in our mathematics classes, I’m complaining about the lack ofmathematicsin our mathematics classes.

The saddest part of all this "reform" are the attempts to "make math interesting" and "relevant to kids’ lives." You don’t need to

makemath interesting— it’s already more interesting than we can handle! And the glory of it is its completeirrelevanceto our lives. That’s why it’s so fun!

In place of a natural problem context in which students can make decisions about what they want their words to mean, and what notions they wish to codify, they are instead subjected to an endless sequence of unmotivated and a priori "definitions." The curriculum is obsessed with jargon and nomenclature, seemingly for no other purpose than to provide teachers with something to test the students on. No mathematician in the world would bother making these senseless distinctions: 2 1/2 is a "mixed number," while 5/2 is an "improper fraction. " They’re

equalfor crying out loud. They are the same exact numbers, and have the same exact properties. Who uses such words outside of fourth grade?

What is happening is the systematic undermining of the student’s intuition. A proof, that is, a mathematical argument, is a work of fiction, a poem. Its goal is to

satisfy. A beautiful proof should explain, and it should explain clearly, deeply, and elegantly. A well-written, well-crafted argument should feel like a splash of cool water, and be a beacon of light— it should refresh the spirit and illuminate the mind. And it should becharming.There is nothing charming about what passes for proof in geometry class. Students are presented a rigid and dogmatic format in which their so-called "proofs" are to be conducted— a format as unnecessary and inappropriate as insisting that children who wish to plant a garden refer to their flowers by genus and species.