According to a recent article in the Globe and Mail, the Ontario government is considering changing the high school calculus curriculum and removing some of the more advanced topics (“Ontario may change high school calculus”, Dec. 20). The announcement confirms the rumours that portions the grade twelve math syllabus could soon come under the axe.
Sadly, this appears to be another instance of treating the symptoms but not the disease. Faced with increasing dropout rates and the popular sentiment that calculus is simply too difficult to understand, our politicians seek to dilute the course material so as to artificially increase the success rate. A little clear-minded thought should reveal this for what it is: a band-aid solution, which while providing inflated success in the calculus course detracts from the underlying goal-a proper calculus education.
This type of “solution” is a step backwards for any education system. By catering to the lowest common denominator, it penalizes those curious minds who are eager to learn more than just the bare basics. While it would be elitist to think that only the best students deserve a solid education, it is likewise unfair to offer mediocre, “one size fits all” schooling to those willing and capable of more. Ideally, students would be offered the entire spectrum of difficulties without an arbitrary cap in place.
It used to be that a high school diploma guaranteed a certain level of academic prowess, but if these changes to the math curriculum come into effect, this would no longer be true. At the post-secondary level, though, there are standards that must be met. All undergraduate engineering programs in Canada must be certified by the Canadian Engineering Accreditation Board. This ensures that every engineering student acquires the skills and knowledge necessary to be a professional engineer in Canada. By the end of the four-year program, every engineering student must have learned a set number of things, regardless of what his or her high school education covered. If less material were to be covered at the high school level, the burden of teaching it would just be uploaded onto an already constricted university curriculum.
At heart, high school level-calculus is not a difficult subject to master, even though many students have difficulty with it. Certainly part of the problem is psychological: there is a stigma associated with the very word “calculus.” Many students pass judgment on the subject even before they open the textbook, simply because of the horror stories they associate with the name. Perhaps if we called it “Rates of Change” instead they would be more open to the subject.
I believe the fundamental problem, however, is that children do not become enthusiastic about math until it is too late. It comes as a shock to many students to realize that calculus is a prerequisite for their university program of choice, when up until that point math had just been an annoyance. Growing up we are told that we can be whatever we want, but no one ever mentions the necessary skill set we need to acquire. Scrambling at the last minute to catch up on years of missed math skills, it is no wonder that so many students face problems in-and feel resentment for-grade twelve math courses.
The challenge of reversing this trend inevitably falls to early childhood educators. If a child learns to enjoy math at a young age, they will be “hooked” for life. Unfortunately, math often seems to take a backseat in grade school, and this is where major reforms are warranted. The current grade school math curriculum is tedious and repetitive; it is little wonder that math is branded as boring by young, developing minds.
At a time when children’s minds are most impressionable, the quality of their teachers is a deciding factor in determining their attitudes toward mathematics. While it is critical that our high school teachers be well-educated, I believe it is doubly important that grade school teachers be competent in these areas of study. Not only is a young child’s knowledge expanding at its fastest rate, but he or she is also learning how to learn, and an unenthusiastic teacher is unlikely to motivate independent thought.
While it is not the norm, I have encountered grade school teachers who would argue vehemently that one minus negative one equals zero. More commonly, they harp on memorization of specific cases rather than emphasizing the underlying constants of mathematics, painting a patchy tableau instead of showing it as a continuous, dependable framework. When faced with such a self-contradictory picture of what math is, what child wouldn’t be confused?
If the decision is made to cater to the unenthusiastic attitude of students and teachers and simplify grade twelve calculus, then we are resignedly allowing our standards of education to slip even lower. This can only have negative repercussions, for the inextricable consequence of “dumbing down” our education system is the dumbing down of the leaders of tomorrow.
