Early research in everyday mathematics lent support to diverse and often contradictory interpretations of the roles of schools in mathematics education. As research has progressed, we have begun to get a clearer view of the scope and possible contributions of learning out of school to learning in school. In order to appreciate this view it is necessary to carefully scrutinize concepts of real (as in "real life"), utility (or usefulness), context, as well as the distinction between concrete and abstract.These concepts are crucial for determining the relevance of everyday mathematics to mathematics education; yet each concept is deeply problematic. The tension between knowledge and experience acquired in and out of school is not a topic of mathematics.But it deserves to be a fundamental topic in mathematics education.
Everyday and Academic Mathematics 239We share with the other contributors to this monograph a number of premises about the nature of mathematical learning. We view mathematics, for example, as both a cultural and personal enterprise. It is cultural because it draws upon traditions, symbol systems, ideas, and techniques that evolved over the course of centuries, having originated in human activities such as surveying, astronomy, building, commerce, and navigation and eventually becoming a partially autonomous field of endeavor with its own subject matter, purposes, tools, and concerns. It is personal Everyday and Academic Mathematics 240 insofar as it demands from learners constructive processes and creative rediscovery even when they are apparently engaged in mere assimilation of facts and conventions.We also share a number of ideas and beliefs about the purposes and spirit of mathematics education. We tend to distrust rote, unquestioning learning. We favor situations in which students themselves must decide how to frame and represent problems, but we realize that, left to their own devices and inventiveness, students are not going to discover many important concepts of elementary mathematics. We value problems that promote engaging discussions among students. We recommend that students and teachers pursue multiple paths of reasoning when solving problems. We encourage educators to make frequent comparisons between everyday language and symbolism and the formal language and symbolism of mathematics. These value premises are rooted in our personal backgrounds, in the economic and political Zeitgeist, and in our theoretical lenses as well as in the legacies of Plato's Meno, Rousseau's Émile and Piaget's constructivism (even though they may at times push and pull in somewhat opposed directions). Some hallmarks of these influences include the belief that mathematical concepts are "out there" to be discovered but require the careful questioning and guidance of the more learned (Plato), faith in the capabilities of children to learn provided we are sensitive to their views and motivations (Rousseau), and the importance of painstakingly documenting children's reasoning and handling of mathematical invariants...