Page 423 - Cultural Studies of Science Education

398 B.C. Luitel and P.C. Taylor

“Before sharing my comments, let me ask you one straight question: Which system
are you following here, one that is followed by The University of the West or one that
you have brought from the university where you completed your advanced studies?”
I am saddened by meaningless questions again. What should I do next, just hang
up the phone and forget about launching the new teacher education program. But
I feel the presence of a consoling self that says: Don’t walk away. There is more to it.
“Yes I have completed postgraduate studies from a country different from
where you undertook your advanced studies. But Sir, this is not a program
based on the systems of either Country West or the country where I completed my
postgraduate studies, this is an attempt to develop a good teacher education
program that can help improve Nepali mathematics education.”
“I am asking this question because you missed some important concepts in the
proposed course of mathematics education. A friend of mine told me some years back
that mathematics teacher education departments of universities other than Country
West are not serious about following the foundation of mathematics education. I have
also heard recently that some universities of Country West have left this recently and
started questioning the foundation. But, they are in a minority. Your program does not
follow the foundational framework. You have included much non-”mathematics edu-
cation” stuff in the course outline. I suggest you pay special attention to the logical
and psychological aspects of the foundation. For me, the sociological aspect is not that
important because it brings unnecessary stuff to mathematics education. Let me make
clear that the logical aspect of the foundation is helpful for preserving the analytical
rigor, deductive power and purity of mathematical algorithms whereas the psycho-
logical component helps teachers understand and make use of valid, objective and
proven theories of learning. And, such theories of learning are the ultimate source of
pedagogy for our mathematics teachers.”
Is he bringing his nearly three-decades old experience of doing his doctoral
studies at The University of the West into the conversation? I know he is talking
about the foundation that I came to know during my M Ed studies. It is hopeless. It
promotes transmissionist pedagogy. Well, I am not interested in having arguments
on meaningless issues. But can I avoid this in the present situation? Can I ever
escape from such naive questions and comments?
“Sir, could you please suggest the sources that I can read to incorporate the
foundational aspect in the course?”
“Well, I have a book published some years back. If you want to have a look, I
can send it with your mailperson when he comes to collect my written comments on
your proposal. Please take it seriously that the foundation of mathematics education
has become our identity, it is an indubitable concept, we have internalised it, and
it is a perspective that helps orient our teachers to the importance of the logical
structure of mathematics and an appropriate pedagogy for it.”
I tighten my mouth for a while. It is amazing that silence can be a sustainable means
of resistance. I read in a book that one of Buddha’s popular methods was silence, and
that helped him to avoid unnecessary debates and unempathetic exchanges.
“Thank you for your comments. I will look into them when I receive a written
copy of your comments. By the way, do you want to share any other urgent comments?
I have a meeting with students.”