The Ideology of Certainty in Mathematics Education.

Abstract

Mathematical results and statistical figures are constantly referred to during the ongoing debates in society. They form part of the structure of argumentation. In this way, mathematics is used to frame the political debate. But not only this. It becomes part of the language in which political, technological and administrative suggestions are presented. Mathematics becomes part of the language of power. In this article, we present one aspect which makes mathematics the final word in many discussions. The power attributed to mathematics to comprise the definitive argument is supported by what we will call an 'ideology of certainty' (Borba, 1992). Many authors have argued that mathematics has political dimensions. Mellin-Olsen (1987) and Volmink (1989) argue that students who do not learn mathematics will be disadvantaged, since they will not be able to deal with the complexity of present society. Frankenstein (1989) points out that misuse of mathematical information leads to racist, sexist and socio-economic discrimination in society, and proposes using mathematical problems embedded in social situations as a way of empowering students with mathematical tools that will enable them to have a critical approach to the world. And Frankenstein and Powell (1994) argue for a society in which minority and female students will not be mathematically disempowered by the social, political and economical filters of the U.S.A. which screen them out because of their mathematical skills. These authors emphasise the (mis-)use of mathematics and the effects on those who do not have access to mathematics education. It might be reasonable to assume that these disempowered students will be able to become more critical actors in society if they have access to mathematics. But, on the other hand, gaining access to mathematics education without being critical of the ideology of certainty may reinforce the status quo.