This week I am leading a workshop at the 2017 NCTM Annual Conference in on “Cultivating Mathematical Affections through Service-Learning.” The talk is on integrating service-learning projects into mathematics curriculum, specifically with the goal of impacting students on an affective level. Since this is my dissertation topic, I’ve presented on it numerous times before – and now that my dissertation is done (!), I hope to finally be bale to devote more time to building out resources on this site. In addition to the resources that you will find below, feel free to check out some of the prior posts on service learning:

ABSTRACT:

This session will examine the benefits of service-learning projects in mathematics. Service-learning projects engage students in integrating their conceptual understanding of math with the practical functioning of their local community. Ultimately students gain deeper content knowledge and a deeper appreciation for the role math plays in society.

PRESENTATION:

You can click the image below to find the PowerPoint that accompanied my presentation.

For many of the service-learning projects that my students have completed I am indebted to the willing partnership of Mobile Loaves and Fishes. Here is some introductory information on this great ministry:

10 THINGS TO CONSIDER BEFORE IMPLEMENTING A SERVICE-LEARNING PROJECT:

The following are the foundational questions that you as an instructor should consider and reflect upon prior to implementing a service-learning project. This list is not meant to be chronological though some aspects will naturally precede others. Start by considering the course learning objectives and your method of assessing those objectives and then go from there.

1.What are the major learning objectives/big ideas/enduring understandings for your course?

2. What are real-world situations where students can apply the concepts studied in your course?

3. List some potential community partners along with some basic descriptors that may impact how your students work with each partner (ex: What is the size of the organization? What issues does the organization address? Is the organization non-profit, governmental, religiously affiliated? Etc.) In lieu of a partner organization you can also consider a general community need for students to address. List some general descriptors of the project involved in addressing this community need.

4. Look for potential matches between organizations on your list from question 3 and your responses to questions 1 and 2. If there are multiple potential matches then consider the pros/cons of each and list them. Be sure to recognize how your matching affects the organization of the project (large scale as a class v. small scale as groups), which in turn may affect your response to question 5 below.

5. Once you have begun narrowing potential community partners that offer opportunities for students to interact with course content, consider how will you assess students? What will be the final product? What expectations will you have for students throughout the project and how will you communicate that to the students?

6. How will students be organized to meet the objectives that they will be assessed on? Will students work as individuals, teams, as a whole class?

7. How will students be equipped to complete the project successfully? What will they have gained from the course up to the point of assigning the project that will aid them? What additional tools/skills/knowledge will students need as the project proceeds?

8. What will be the timeframe for the project? How will students be held accountable to the timeframe? At what points will students receive feedback on their progress?

9. Why should students care about the project? What will you do as an instructor to get student buy-in on the project?

10. How will students reflect throughout the project? What opportunities will you provide for students to pause and consider the work they have done?

A few weeks ago, NCTM President Linda M. Gojak posted her final message as president entitled “A Reflection on 25 Years in Mathematics Education.” You can follow the link to read the article in its entirety. In this message Gojak outlines from her perspective what the mathematics education community has accomplished over the last 25 years and what challenges still need to be addressed. I will let you determine for yourself how much you agree with her assessments. What I am most interested in is her closing remark:

B. F. Skinner famously said, “We shouldn’t teach great books; we should teach a love of reading. Knowing the contents of a few works of literature is a trivial achievement. Being inclined to go on reading is a great achievement.” With apologies to Skinner, as mathematics educators we might say, “We should not just teach mathematics, we should teach a love of mathematics. Knowing the content of some mathematics is a trivial achievement. Being inclined to see the beauty in mathematics and to go on doing mathematics are great achievements.”

We should teach a love of mathematics.

Knowing the content of some mathematics is a trivial achievement.

I agree with both of these statements, as I believe the majority of math educators would. However, these two statements get to the heart of the issue with the state of mathematics education today: while the majority of educators would agree on the sentiments of these two statements, both statements run contradictory to the current system of mathematical standards and assessments.

If we really believe that our goal as educators is to teach a love of mathematics (which I should note is a very different thing than saying every student has to love math) then we as a community of educators need to actually determine how to go about doing so. Because trust me, focusing on core standards/higher order thinking/critical reasoning/whatever you want to call increased cognitive demands, will not influence people’s affections. The issue is much more complex than that. We are talking about teaching love, beauty, truth to human beings created in the image of God.

I will have a lot more to say on this issue in the coming weeks/months/years as this is essentially the focus of my dissertation research. For now I will leave you to contemplate Gojak’s closing remark and consider why the underlying sentiment of the remark does not appear anywhere else in her summary of math education’s “accomplishments” and challenges.