Chapter 6: Who Needs Mathematics Educators for Mathematics Education, Anyway?

In this chapter, I have three aims. The first is to respond directly to the polemic: Who needs mathematicians for math, anyway (Stotsky, 2009). The second is to comment on the suppression of the field of mathematics education within the deliberations and publications of the National Mathematics Advisory Panel (NMAP) (United States Department of Education, 2008). The third is to weigh the necessary, but not sufficient, contribution of mathematicians to mathematics education.

Echoing Spindler and Spindler (1998, p. 27): “This is a biased paper written from a liberal point of view.”

The article by Stotsky (2009) was published, not as an academic publication, but in City Journal, a publication of the Manhattan Institute, a conservative think tank (Spring, 2010, pp. 136–141). I assume that Stotsky, by her title, meant: Who needs mathematicians for mathematics education, anyway? Even the revised tide is odd, since the contributions of mathematicians to mathematics education are obviously necessary; and it is easy to think of many mathematicians who have so contributed. However, they are certainly not sufficient; and it is equally easy to name names of mathematicians whose influence on mathematics education has been detrimental.