Discussion and reflection on "integrating history of mathematics in the classroom"

 Mathematics is an integral part of human history. Whenever I am reading mathematics out of the school context (freedom from constraints and failure-success rules) I enjoy learning theories along with important events on its development history. Within the school environment in which grades are important for personal future and time is to be optimized for that purpose, I think students need motivation. When the historical part is blended in assignment and graded, then it would be a motivational factor. Better motivation would be when students come to understand the usefulness or need of learning some historical events behind the theory they are studying. If properly integrated, history of math allows us to capture the steps involved in shaping of a theory which strengthen and enrich our understanding of the theory. Many of the historical events can be considered as parts of the theory itself. For example, there are different notations used in differential calculus such as Leibniz, Newton, and Lagrange. When we multiply two large numbers we look for computationally efficient ways. Different techniques were developed in different parts of the world at different times. Learning them is learning a history itself partly because we see the faster algorithms in the later points on the time line as well as magnitude of time and afford invested (in development) for an increase in computing speed.

Behind each body of human knowledge, there is an underlying human population on a single planet who are going to feel the influence of development on them even if most of us are not the developers and decision makers of theories or technologies. With respect to educational materials, peoples should have the right to know what is going on. (1) The magnitude of jargons used in the paper is a concern for us because it limits the readership. (2) In the argument in support for history in mathematics education, in part (3) of (d), the author correctly argued that failures, mistakes, uncertainties or misunderstandings have been building blocks of mathematicians. However in today school exam system, failure at the exam will be failure. These two particular things are where I stopped for thinking.

After reading this article, with respect to whether or not integrating history in mathematics education, my idea remains the same. I am in support of it. However, more important things are the details and larger picture of consequences. Some objects not regarded as (academic) math in the past have become part of math. Today, if art is not math, it could become part of math in the future. Suppose in history study we find that two groups of humans produced much different amounts of contributions to mathematics, then what occur in our minds? Do we quietly assign rating (aka give grading) to them and why?