The authors throughout chapter 1 highlight what they see as a false dichotomy between teaching writing and teaching the content of a specific discipline.  If we start with a course and “add on” a writing component we’re playing into this dichotomy which separates teaching content from the writing itself.  As an educator if we already feel strapped for time in a given course, the idea of adding on anything (writing, technology, the use of maipulatives) seems daunting.  “I already have no time how can I possibly add x, y and z.”  It is this idea of an add-on that the authors argue against.  They argue that writing should be used as a tool for learning and communication.  It affords students a time and vehicle for considering questions and connections in the discipline, time to reflect, to connect and to question.  We learn the content through writing, we grapple with the central ideas of the discipline through writing, we raise questions and wrestle with ideas through writing and we share with one another through writing.  Though I should be clear in that the authors value writing, speaking and listening as a way of fostering learning and the engagement of students.

I liked the idea of considering not what body of knowledge we might want students to know but what skills particular to the discipline we wish to foster.  Knowing what types of questions we can ask and the valued ways of addressing these in a given discipline will take our students further than the accumulation of numerous facts. Recently (last semester I believe) I walked in on two of my colleagues working on pure mathematical research.  My background is in math education.  I know what types of questions one may study in education.  I can ask questions that have a shot of being addressed and know some methods for addressing these.  The process of research in math education (though I have a lot to learn yet) is somewhat familiar.  In pure mathematics, I don’t have these same skills.  So I asked these two colleagues how they select a problem that may have gone unsolved for ages and yet something they know they have some hope of making inroads into.  I shared that I really would love to explore some yet unsolved pure mathematical problems but know not how to select a good problem.  Interestingly my colleagues did what the authors of this chapter propose.  They didn’t just give me some information but rather invited me into the discussion.  You learn what makes a good problem by engaging in the work itself (with some guidance).  I began attending their informal seminar studying partitions.  It has been a wonderful experience where I am learning not just about the content (partitions though we have branched into graph theory a bit as well) but also to see how observed patterns lead to conjectures (hopefully to proofs) and how these yield new questions.  It is a matter of not just knowing the mathematics but being invited into the discussion; into the work of those experienced in this field which is what we want for our students though we may not always afford them this opportunity.

A few months ago I devised my own rather unrelated mathematics question which after a few months I was able to solve.  I do not know if the content of this problem of mine is of any relevance and/or importance to the mathematical community at large but the experience of devising my own problem, strategies and then carrying out the solution has been incredibly rewarding and I am now considering how to best share this with others.

I feel I have drifted a bit from the chapter.  Returning to the authors’ work, I see the main point of the chapter having to do with this idea of writing as an integral part of the course, as a means by which students grapple with ideas, make connections and grow in knowledge of both the content and the skills related to the discipline.  It should not be that we take a course and throw in some writing.  If there isn’t a synthesis between the writing and the other aspects of the course then it really will be an add-on which is frustrating to the students and professor both.  Now, how exactly one achieves this…well, I suppose I have another few chapters to read 🙂

I will get back to you all though on what I learn.