In the BeginningAuthor(s): Peter ReynoldsSource: Mathematics in School, Vol. 25, No. 5, Mathematics and I.T. (Nov., 1996), pp. 4-5Published by: The Mathematical AssociationStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/30215255 .

Accessed: 07/04/2014 15:08

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

.

The Mathematical Association is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access toMathematics in School.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 143.167.195.254 on Mon, 7 Apr 2014 15:08:31 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

N -1] IBGNNN

by Peter Reynolds

Exactly 25 years ago I edited the first issue of Mathematics in School. It was in the nature of a free sample to encourage subscriptions for the planned six issues in 1972 (a July issue was published until 1975 when the number of issues per year was reduced to five).

There were several reasons for a new magazine. The Association already published the Gazette, a journal with an international reputation for quality but which was mainly concerned with fairly advanced mathematics rather than teaching and learning. Many members found that most of the articles in the Gazette were of little value in helping them to cope in the classroom with the rather turbulent but exciting times of rapid change. (For a fuller account, see my article, A Sister For The Gazette, in the recent centenary issue of the Gazette.)

The decision to publish a new journal was significant. It was also a gamble. No one was more surprised than me, an unknown College of Education lecturer, when the editor of the Gazette, Douglas Quadling, sent an invitation to edit it. Initially, no indication was given of size, style or intended readership. Gradually, after much discussion, it was decided to use an A4 format and publish through Longman rather than G Bell and Sons who had been the Association's pub- lishers since the 1890s. Clearly, it was to be different.

The first editorial attempted to define a philosophy for the new magazine, by now called Mathematics in School. It was 'to provide teachers of 7-16 year old children with practical and interesting material which has a direct connection with their work in the classroom'. Another aim was to be less formal: articles in the Gazette and the many Reports of the Association had often been regarded as authoritative state- ments. To a large extent this was true since the Association took great care that its publications were of the highest quality. Although I did not intend to produce sloppy articles or incorrect mathematics, there was a role for describing unfinished work in progress which 'will benefit by public debate' and for offering 'a platform where ideas can be floated and prejudices can be aired'.

The first issue contained several examples of articles which, in style and content, have remained much the same over 25 years. Some of the issues aired in the first volume are still relevant despite 25 years' worth of airing. For example my first editorial included a comment on the quality of recruits to industry: despite the Cockcroft report we still hear the same ill-informed comments to-day. There were articles on going metric, fractions and directed numbers, which are still live issues, although an article on educational technology, which advocated programmed learning and the use of media such as radio and television programmes, has a quaint 1960s feel. (Why is it that the superb resource provided by television programmes, which treat school mathematics in a lively and dramatic way, has been used so little?)

One of my intentions foundered rather badly. As Mathe- matics in School was a magazine, it was designed by a profes- sional designer whereas, in previous publications of the Association, articles just ran on, one after another, rather as the Gazette still does to-day. Generally, articles were intended to fit on a single page or a double page spread. The designer chose a suitable layout and appropriate artwork and a rather glossy article resulted. This was rather new: one unkind critic commented, half joking, that MiS looked rather like Playboy!

4 Mathematics in School, November 1996

This content downloaded from 143.167.195.254 on Mon, 7 Apr 2014 15:08:31 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Although it was gratifying to produce a polished product, it did have several unexpected results including giving the impression that all the articles were also polished - which was clearly false and never intended - and intimidating potential contributors who felt the magazine was too grand for their humble offering. The polish made MiS much more formal than intended. (It is, perhaps, difficult to-day, when many pupils with desk top publishing and a modern printer can produce sophisticated layouts, to realise the full impact of the new magazine.)

It was always my hope that talented teachers would share their ideas with others but I soon discovered that good practitioners are often so modest that they cannot believe that every other teacher in the land is not doing exactly the same thing! It was surprisingly difficult to get good teachers to write about their classrooms: to-day, it must be even more difficult with the added pressures which were delightfully absent in 1971.

I also regret that it was not possible to be a little more like a newspaper with reporters telling readers about exciting ideas. The reality was and still is, that many hopeful articles came from lecturers in higher education who need to publish, not because they have something useful to say but because their career prospects depend on publication of research however bizarre. In the end, you have to print what you can get!

Every reader of this magazine will have their favourite items. I am sure that many teachers enjoy articles directly concerned with the classroom. Unfortunately, teaching has become much more political over the last 25 years and teachers now need to know more about the background to issues so that they can, if necessary, explain and defend what they are doing to parents, governors and, maybe, even headteachers! I now look back over some of the important issues as I saw them.

An important feature of the early years of MiS was a commentary on the many, often conflicting, themes of the times - modern mathematics, discovery methods and indi- vidualised learning. Many issues would contain at least one article taking up a position which appeared to offer no compromise with other views.

The 1960s had witnessed the introduction of 'modern

mathematics'. This was, essentially, some new content (such as sets, statistics and matrices) but often it was taught in a very traditional way. The early SMP books are a good exam- ple of this trend, but there were other projects, each with its own distinctive emphasis. For example, the Midlands Mathe- matical Experiment (MME) used vectors to teach geometry as opposed to SMP's more informal 'motion geometry' using rotations and reflections. At primary level, it often appeared that different approaches, often with powerful proponents such as Edith Biggs HMI, Geoffrey Matthews with his Nuf- field Project and Harold Fletcher, had rival teams of support- ers (disciples?) who fervently believed that they alone were on the right road. It was not until the Cockcroft report 10 years later that the issue of modem mathematics had ceased to be an issue: some topics such as matrices had died a natural death and all but disappeared, other topics such as statistics had become main stream.

A quite separate strand in the early issues of MiS was teaching styles. A helpful oversimplification is to state that teachers teach mathematics and children. Up to the 1960s, the emphasis was largely on teaching mathematics. In the 1960s there was a greater emphasis on 'child development' and the importance of'discovery methods'. For example, the Nuffield Primary Project had a slogan 'I do and I understand', sometimes misinterpreted as any activity leads to under- standing and characterised (with a hint of truth) by children racing round the playground with trundle wheels and little idea of the nature of measurement.

Another aspect, often quite desperate in the late 1960s and early 1970s, was the lack of qualified secondary mathematics teachers. A possible solution, developed in London, through the SMILE project, and elsewhere, was individualised learn- ing. The intention was that if suitable high quality materials, from which children could teach themselves, could be pro- vided then a non-mathematical teacher could act as a 'man- ager of learning' without the necessity to teach. Individualised learning was also advocated by those who felt that mixed ability teaching is a more appropriate approach to ensuring that all pupils receive a sound education.

The fascinating aspect to all of this discussion was that the government took little or no interest in suggesting solutions. The DES, as it was then, rarely ventured a view although HMIs, through personal comments and occasional published surveys and reports, did indicate views on the wisdom of what was happening. In fact, the DES had delegated to Local Education Authorities any responsibility for the curriculum and assessing standards.

Perhaps I have concentrated too much on the politics of teaching mathematics which has dominated my professional life in recent years. On looking back through the early issues of MiS, there were many other topics and articles which I could have revisited amongst the wide range printed. Some things have remained constant: others have changed, includ- ing I note with regret, the greater external control which teachers now experience.

Finally, in congratulating my successors on surviving until 1996, it is interesting to speculate what might happen in another 25 years. Perhaps it will be found at MIS @ MA.UK on the internet.

Author

Peter Reynolds 6 Rosebery Road, Felixstowe, Suffolk. IP11 7JR

Note Peter Reynolds was editor of Mathematics in School from 1970 until 1976. He was subsequently Chair of the MA's Diploma Board and then President of the MA in 1989/90. He is currently Chair of the Professional Development Committee and also an MA Trustee.

Mathematics in School, November 1996 5

This content downloaded from 143.167.195.254 on Mon, 7 Apr 2014 15:08:31 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions