EDCP 553 – Week 2
Article Summary
Stylianidou &
Nardi (2019): Tactile Construction of Mathematical Meaning
Stylianidou and Nardi
argue that tactile mathematics should not be viewed only as an accommodation
for visually impaired (VI) students, but as a universally designed approach
that benefits all learners. Through a shared tactile task in a Year 5 classroom,
both VI and sighted students explored shapes using touch rather than vision.
The authors found that tactile perception supported deeper mathematical
meaning-making, revealed features of shapes that vision alone sometimes
obscured, and allowed VI students to contribute mathematically rich ideas that
were taken up by the class.
The study challenges
ableist assumptions about mathematical competence by showing that when
mathematics is designed to be accessed through multiple senses, it expands how
all students can think, reason, and communicate mathematically. The authors
conclude that tactile, embodied approaches should be seen as a strength of
inclusive mathematics classrooms rather than a special provision for a few.
Stop While Reading
While reading this
article, I kept thinking about the idea that things built out of necessity
often end up supporting everyone. Innovations created for people with
disabilities are not limited to those who “need” them; instead, they frequently
improve experiences for the general population. The examples in this paper
clearly showed that tactile tasks designed with visually impaired students in
mind also helped sighted students notice mathematical features they had
previously missed.
This made me reflect
on how often classrooms treat accommodations as separate or additional, rather
than as opportunities to rethink learning for everyone. The findings reinforced
my belief that when we intentionally design learning experiences to be accessible,
we are not lowering expectations, we are deepening understanding for all
learners.
Stop While Reading
Another moment that
stood out to me was thinking about how mathematics can be understood through
different senses. In the study, sighted students benefited from touch, and the
visually impaired student offered a powerful, embodied description of shape
based on movement and imagination. This made me think about the videos we
watched this week, where mathematics was expressed through food, folding, and
motion.
I began to wonder how
these experiences might work across different sensory losses. Someone without
hearing could still understand vectors or hexaflexagons through visual and
physical demonstration. Someone with limited vision could potentially recreate these
ideas through careful listening and tactile exploration. This reinforced for me
that the more senses we bring into learning, the more meaningful, powerful, and
intellectually lasting mathematical understanding can become.
Throughout this week's readings, it's clear that a throughline exists: accessible instruction, assessment, and curricula benefit all students. Upon reading your reflection, I was reminded of a story I read a while back, about the Green Man+ system in Singapore (https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/transport/seniors-to-get-longer-green-man-time-at-half-the-crossings-in-all-housing-estates-by-2027) Seniors with a specific type of card can tap a device at a crossing, and it will increase the amount of time they may use to cross the street. Now, this is not universal accessibility--not every citizen is privy to this accommodation. But it seems like it may play a part in creating equitable, pedestrian-prioritizing design. If everyone had the ability to dictate how long they might need to cross, it could make being a pedestrian much easier.
ReplyDeleteIn your first stop, you say, "...we are not lowering expectations, we are deepening understanding for all learners." This is a poignant position, and it is one that may be rare in today's modern school systems. There needs to be a paradigm shift to push people away from thinking of accommodations as a loosening of expectations. Many accommodations should be universal, and I argue this because for many students--especially those who are younger--they may not even know what could help them learn better. It is difficult to find wonder and be curious when all that's been given to you is the typical curriculum/stream-focused teaching that prepares you for standardized testing. Accommodations are the opening up of the pedagogical space in order to give more students a path to success.
The quote from your post that Ray pulled out is the one that stood out to me as well. I think especially in high school mathematics I have encountered an elitism between the various courses our province offers. Unfortunately I have seen that attitude that if we are accommodating, we are lowering expectations. How do we encourage our colleagues to shift their mindset to see these accommodations as inviting more people into mathematics and creating spaces for them to thrive? My experience in adult ed has really challenged me to make sure I am not making assumptions about who belongs in mathematics (or a particular stream of mathematics). Every individual might have a unique journey, but it doesn't make their learning superior or inferior to anyone else's.
ReplyDeleteI also agree with your comment on the impact of embodied, multi-modal learning creating a lasting impact on understanding. It brings us to question why we do or do not include something in our teaching. What is our goal - lasting learning or checking that item off the list? I admit that sometimes my teaching can fall into the latter; feeling pressure to get through as much curriculum as possible. I fear this is a continual tension of being an educator. It is important to reframe our goals and see them within the context of deep understanding and lifelong learning.