In this article, Swetz gives a brief history of math
textbooks. He contrasts those that are mostly a series of problems (to be
accompanied with oral instruction by a teacher) and those that contain
instruction. He also discusses how authors used diagrams and manipulatives to accompany
texts, and what these might mean about how the authors hoped their texts might
be understood.
In my relatively short teaching career, I have already
observed two curriculum changes (one in Ontario and one in BC). As a result of
this (and of changing schools multiple times in Vancouver,) I have been involved
with many different department meetings selecting new textbooks (or workbooks)
within the financial constraints of our current educational system. Most of the
newer texts tend to spend most of their pages constructing knowledge with detailed
explanations and investigative questions. This often comes at the cost of
practice questions, and I find myself generally sending students home with
worksheets to practice concepts.
Certainly, the construction of knowledge featured in these
books is important, but students still need practice to master a concept. In
addition, these textbooks don’t take into account that few students read them.
I find students are more likely to follow links I provide (such as
purplemath.com) to get an explanation for a topic they find challenging than
looking a concept up in their textbook. I have always felt that my job is to help
students construct knowledge and give clear explanation of topics – All I hope
for from a textbook is interesting and challenging practice questions, which
are rarely featured in newer ministry approved textbooks.
