Page 430 - Cultural Studies of Science Education

33 “What Is Ours and What Is Not Ours?” 405

unjustifiable resource allocation) surrounding the context in which the problem is
related. In my mind, imaginative knowing empowers students to cultivate various
forms of futuristic visions by using mathematics they study. I envisage that such a
vision-making process entails: (a) a discourse on the usefulness (and limitations) of
mathematics for their present and future lives, (b) the centrality of multiple logics
(e.g., metaphorical, poetic and dialectic) in articulating present and future possibili-
ties, and (c) opportunities to explore the nature of the values embedded in the
mathematics they study.
Dear Dr. Authority, arriving at the final point, I would like to request again that
you help me humanise the foundationalist view of mathematics education by
employing dialectical logic to incorporate positive aspects of foundationalism and
scepticism in mathematics teacher education. I believe that by creating synergies
between the positive aspects of foundationalism and scepticism, we will be able to
conceive inclusive pedagogies with an image of teachers as awakened facilitators
and students as creative thinkers and active citizens. Drawing from Sri Aurobindo
and McDermott (2005), I envisage that embracing an image of teacher as an awak-
ened facilitator helps mathematics teachers to think of alternatives to imposing
mathematical definitions, theorems and formula as though they are the infallible
apparatus of ever-developing mathematical knowledge systems. Perhaps, mathe-
matics teachers need to develop themselves as awakened beings, thereby living by
the ideals by which their students can be enlightened.
Sincerely yours
Bal Chandra

Conclusion

With the initial aim of deconstructing the hegemony of exclusive notions of globali-
sation and foundationalism in mathematics teacher education programs and
constructing transformative visions for addressing them, this chapter has presented
auto-ethnographic explorations aided by philosophical inquiry. In the first section,
we articulated a key disempowering feature of globalisation as universalisation.
Whilst recognising the positive meaning of globalisation as conversations between
competing interests and perspectives, we envision the concept of glocalisation that
offers a space for incorporating sometimes opposing views, perspectives and
notions related to mathematics teacher education. In the second section, we critiqued
the hegemonic influence of foundationalism in mathematics education. More so,
we identified ways to include both foundationalism and scepticism for transforming
mathematics teacher education from a closed (and clogged) program to an open and
more democratic enterprise. We envisage that such an enterprise is likely to promote
dialectical logic as a means for establishing symbiotic relationships between scepti-
cism and foundationalism, for foundationalism gives rise to scepticism, and vice
versa. With the help of such inclusive envisionings, mathematics teacher education
programs in Nepal are likely to: (i) promote both local and global knowledge