“Next week we’ll have a big announcement,” he said. “We are going to change math.”
“and!” I answered.
“As you can see, we are doing the math all wrong. Too many teachers today are obsessed with numbers, multiplication and the ‘right’ answers. Forget the 22nd century. That is not even suitable for the 21st century! It is not innovative, inclusive, learner-centered, or forward-thinking. or fair.”
I was feverishly typing notes on my laptop.
“We have $100 million in funding and we are going to completely shake this thing up. “It’s time to cut back and have more fun,” he said. “Escape division and enjoy diversity. Negative emotions are out and positive emotions are in.”
I scrambled to keep up. I didn't want to miss a word.
“No more dusty 19th century mathematics! With mathematics in the 22nd century.”
He continued: “Think of the equal sign, two small parallel lines that we so easily take for granted. Too often, they are just impersonal instructions to ‘do this calculation’. It's all very dictatorial. ‘Add this’ or ‘Subtract that’.”
“okay.” I muttered.
“Learners are not given the opportunity to fully enjoy the colors, sounds and smells of mathematics. They're so focused on whether the sum here matches the sum there that they don't experience the texture of it all. “It’s like I’m a math robot, not a math student.”
I was typing so fast that I was afraid my laptop would overheat.
“When we teach equals as if it were a mechanical procedure, we miss the opportunity to have students explore the true meaning of equivalence and consider balance in social structures. In fact, some of my favorite math experts say the equal sign is best understood as a hegemonic device that hinders those who want to fight inequality.”
I hate to admit it, but I'm starting to feel a little lost. I said as much.
“it's okay.” Banksley generously granted permission. “This is really annoying. Let me put it this way: In algebra, students manipulate equations to find solutions. To do so, we need to ensure that operations performed on one side of the equation are reflected on the other side.”
“okay.” I said.
“There are two problems here,” Banksley explained. “The first is that all of this is posed in the language of equality, not equity. It is not a vision of diversity, but a vision of sameness.”
“It really is.” I heard myself whispering.
“The second is that students learn to see the equal sign as a reductive imperative and lose the moral dimension of equation solving. We are seeking deeper, more human governance.”
“What does the classroom look like?” I wondered out loud.
“The possibilities are endless. Instead of a 19th century problem set, teachers could ask how many trees students should plant to combat intolerance.”
My eyes widened.
“Or how many servings of spaghetti would it take to throw on the Mona Lisa to stop climate change?” He stopped. “This won’t just be math,” he said. “It’ll be mathematical.”
I wanted to point with joy, but my fingers were too busy flying across the keyboard. “Was it difficult to get funders on board?” I asked.
“We needed to help them see real-world relevance for things like transitioning students to fifth-generation technologies in a co-created, dynamic learning environment.”
“Are students still learning old-fashioned addition and subtraction?” I asked.
He stopped. “That’s the wrong question, Rick,” Banksley said. It's one of the few times I remember him feeling frustrated. “You’re obsessed with trivia.”
I apologized.