Article On Mathematics Teaching Criticised

Press, Volume CIII, Issue 30406, 3 April 1964, Page 12

Article On Mathematics Teaching Criticised

Mr D. M. Goldsmith, president of the Canterbury Mathematics Association considers that a paragraph taken out of context by the author of “The Headmaster's Desk” article on yesterday's education page may give a false impression of the association's point of view. Mr Goldsmith says:— “The offending paragraph, •primary teachers are not adequately trained either for the teaching of mathematics at Forms I and II or for the teaching of arithmetic to provide adequate preparation for mathematics at that level,' was part of a constructive appraisal of the situation as seen by the members of a sub-committee of a retired inspector of primary schools, a teachers’ college lecturer of wide experience, and four practising primary teachers. “This report was approved unanimously not only by the committee of the association but also by an open meeting

of teachers in the Christchurch district. It would appear unfortunate that your correspondents—the author of “The Headmaster’s Desk' and ‘Practitioner,’ were not present at the two meetings called by the association when their views would have been most acceptable. “I can only reiterate that the apparently offensive section of the report, quoted above; expressed a realisation that in the ever-expand-ing school curriculum, opportunity must be given for adequate teacher training before any scheme can come into successful operation. It is with this end in view that the Canterbury Mathematical Association seeks for teachers at all levels the right to acquire this training and background knowledge so that devoted members of the community who are well trained as teachers of children may at the same time become better teachers of mathematics.”