Home|Intro|Projects|Feature Articles|History|Funding

TTT - Taming the Tyrannical T's

Goal

The "Tyrannical T's" of mathematics education (and many other subjects) discussed here are "Time, Topics, and Temperament". To tame them would require reversing the trends that have turned them into tyrants. Too little time, too trivial topics, and completely unproductive temperaments all around.

Time

There is not enough time given to students for reflection and discovery. Material is presented at a breakneck pace, with a strong emphasis on simple algorithm mastery, devoid of understanding.

Topics

A terrible T to tame, the topics are one of the thorniest problems. There are plenty of fascinating mathematics topics that could be taught to students, but aren't. If you allowed the time and chose the topics well, the temperaments would likely take care of themselves.

Temperaments

The issue here is our attitudes about the learning and teaching of mathematics. Students that don't want to think about anything that won't be on a test. Teachers whose grading depends only on tests. Parents and politicians who don't care about anything but test scores.

What if students were only in classes that they wanted to take? What if teachers weren't required to grade, and knew that the only way students would retain anything is if it were presented clearly and interestingly? What if parents and politicians set their sights on lifelong learning rather than short-term, numerically oriented goals?

Toward a T-Taming Theory

Imagine a world in which the combinations of pressure and apathy induced by the three T's didn't exist. Suppose a class was held in which there was no set amount of material to cover, no grade pressure, and complete freedom to explore any topic in mathematics for as long as a student wished to continue. What would the new possibilities be in terms of time, topics, and temperaments?

Theoretically, one might be able to introduce several interesting mathematics topics, chosen exclusively for their ability to interest students, and then let the students decide how far they wanted to go with each. Then, perhaps after several activities done as a class, the students might be encouraged to choose one of the introduced topics to study in greater depth, culminating in some presentation to be given to the class at the end of the course.

If my hypothetical approach to this class sounds suspiciously as if it were a description of a real event rather than an theoretical one, that may be because I did, in fact, have the wonderful opportunity to perform this exact experiment in conditions very close to those stated above. What happened was every bit as incredible as I was predisposed to believe it could be.

Testing the Theory

Unfortunately, time does not permit a full description of the course at this moment. However, I'll try to give the reader a glimpse of the amazing events with an all too brief summary.

First, it should be noted that the conditions for the experiment were not exactly those referred to above. The students in question were selected based on very high-percentile SAT scores. The class took place in a fairly relaxed atmosphere, but the students were given a final evaluation (very flexibly defined, but it was there, nevertheless). However, I was able to set the content of the course myself (except that the course title was "Discrete Math", which is a restriction, but not much of one), and thus was under no external pressure to cover any particular body of material. Students were under very little pressure from me to learn anything, except that their final evaluation was based on the presentation. However, even considering this there was evidence that their mindsets changed to one of voluntary, enthusiastic, interested learners.

The topics introduced to the class included

Would that I could do justice to what happened! To describe the incredible feeling of liberation at not being forced to force the students into an externally-defined agenda--what it meant to be able to fully exploit the synergy of my fascination and expertise coupled with their curiosity and thirst for knowledge. The chaotic beauty of a classroom full of students working in small teams or individually on a problem of their own choosing. The sheer elation at being contacted after the course was over by students still working on their problems. I feel that if I could just show people what happened there they would just stand up en masse and walk away from the tired old notions of rigid curricula, required classes, grading, and everything else that contributes to changing the teaching and learning of mathematics from sheer joy into a chore with the occasional bright spot.

However, we'll have to take what we can get. True to the form of how the class went, I'll just go on from here to describe whatever I think of next.

Student Projects

The final week of the three week course (the course met all day, every day--it's enough time (with these students, at least) to cover an entire Algebra II course, for example) was dedicated almost exclusively to whatever projects the students had chosen during the first two weeks. There was about an even split between the students that worked individually and those that worked in groups of two or three. One of the small groups chose to tackle the 2x2x2 Rubik's cube. Their objective was to find a general method for solving it.

During one of our sessions on abstract algebra, we saw how to represent permutations and "multiply them" (perform the operation of function composition). The students attacking the mini-cube went right to work translating combinations of motions on the cube to permutations. At one point, one memeber of the team came to me excitedly showing how a combination of three moves worked out to be a five-cycle and a two-cycle--meaning that if he repeated the three moves five times, he would transpose two of the cubes without changing the positions of the others! Getting the first four cubes in place is easy, and (also during the course) I had figured out a similar combination of moves that got one more in place. Their discovery was the final (and arguably the most difficult to find) piece of the puzzle. Nobody, including me, knew whether they would be able to solve it all. I had intentionally avoided working on it before the course in order to both prevent myself from being tempted to give away the answer, and (more importantly) to make the process of discovery as authentic as possible. Part of the fun of doing mathematics is that you don't know where your explorations will take you, and I wanted them to have a sense of that.

Graph Theory

Speaking of not knowing where you're going, I presented a problem that I first saw on MegaMath. A particular instance of the degree-diameter problem, the challenge is to determine whether it is possible to make a planar graph of maximum degree 3 and diameter three which has more than 12 vertices. One solution for 12 vertices was presented on MegaMath. I did not show this to the class, but told them that it existed, and that I had found a distinct one. But whether such a graph exists with more than twelve vertices is actually an open question--a wonderful fact that implies, as Nancy Casey and Mike Fellows (of the MegaMath project) point out, that it is possible to do research in mathematics with simple crayon drawings. My students didn't crack it, but they did discover the MegaMath solution and discovered an improvement on it (namely, that one of the edges could be removed--of course, the MegaMath presentation of the problem requires that the graph be three-regular, so it's not an improvement in that case). But they did work on a real problem that real mathematicians don't know the answer to--something essentially impossible to do withing the boundaries of tyrannical topic selection.

To be continued...

Alas, this is all I have for now. Tune in later to read about the symmetries of the cube and the airplane, the student who learned more about number theory than I knew, nd the TopSpin solution.