Mainstream pedagogy seeks to teach the facts in an isolated fashion. This is based on the assumption that only a few lucky ones have the ability to be good at math. Following Common Core Requirements, students are taught a topic and forced to solve specific and limited sets of problems. This is problematic because, while children do learn the material and are able to follow provided instructions in their problem solving, few can understand why they are doing it. A topic is properly understood only when the child is able to solve the problems which are not presented in a familiar way. Students should be able to identify the math problem in a totally uncommon setting, like a real-life situation or in a non-technical subject, where you would least expect to find a need for mathematics. Once that kind of level of thinking is reached, and the data is internalized to the extent that it becomes a part of your daily life observation, it can be safely said that the understanding of the material is present. The teacher’s goal should be to develop exactly this kind of mathematical sensitivity in the student, which would allow them to perceive mathematics as an integral part of their daily life.

Surrounded by a vast number of educational methods, one often wonders which would be the best in the teaching process. While I enjoy having many tools at hand to assist me, I have found that no approach works for all students. I often remind myself of Maria Montessori’s thoughtful advice to “follow the child.” Often it’s better to take time to observe the child and identify their genuine interests in order to be able to adjust the teaching approach accordingly. I believe that the teacher’s goal shouldn’t be to take away students’ freedom and turn them into submissive followers but to let them be free in expressing their genuine interests and finding ways to incorporate math into activities of their own pursuit. One would be amazed to find that the use of math can be found in pretty much everything.