Math. This word invokes disdain, fear, and possibly the contemplation of suicide for most normal students. There are those lone students who thrive on math and even more oddly, they will major and make a living looking at numbers. This was my original plan when I came to college. Throughout high school I had always been able to understand math and its ideas easily. Not to mention I found math to be a very creative subject.
At this point in time I am sure most of you are wondering how much acid I dropped to be seeing math, (normally seen as very black and white), as a creative subject, one that invokes more than two colors. Well I shall lead you through my thought process on the creativity of math. Most personality tests have a cheesy question along the lines of "is the journey or end result more important?" If you ask someone who truly understands math, they will tell you the journey is more important.
I will concede that math has a definite answer, but I will not give into the fact that math is analytical. Math teaches, up until proofs are introduced, that there is a simple right and a simple wrong. This takes the creativity out of math and stifles the education of people who want to pursue math.
Once proofs are introduced, math should begin to appear more creative. I have found out that teachers tend to do a bad job of this. The proof is the journey, and there are many different routes to the end. In 1637 a factual theorem was stated without a proof; this theorem is "It is impossible to separate any power higher than the second into two like powers" and is known as Fermat's last theorem. The author of this theorem, Pierre de Fermat, stated that he had a proof, but the margins were too small to contain it. Up until 1993 this theorem remained unsolved.
Now the creativity of math may not be apparent from this anecdote, so I shall explain. When this theorem was solved in 1993, math beyond the knowledge known in 1637 was used. This simply means that a new proof for the theorem was created as opposed to the one discovered by Pierre de Fermat. There are those mathematicians who are still trying to figure out the proof given by Fermat. The creativity is in the journey to the answer, there are many different paths to a single end. (Einstein would argue the correct one is the one that looks the most elegant.)
Now, it is established that math is creative, so why am I no longer a math major if I find math fascinating and creative? The answer lies in how math is taught. I stated that math is taught analytically, and I have found it even so with proofs. I have taken a couple of proofs classes here at ASU, and only one teacher was able to keep me motivated in math. His teaching method was one which promoted thought, not simple regurgitation; the other professors were about regurgitation. I understand that the majority of this is due to the fact that it is an undergraduate course and there tend to be engineering students as well as math students in the classes, but only one of the classes I took was for anyone other than math majors. Furthermore, for the class that I took that engineers could also take, there was an application-based class also offered. I could be asking for more than I should, but when an application class is offered along with a theory based class, the theory-based class should focus on theory and proofs not simple applications.
Now this is not a problem that is inherent in the ASU math program, but one that is a problem throughout America. I have friends who are attending schools with amazing math programs (Rice, Cal Tech, Duke) who have found the same problem with how math is taught. It is a shame that this problem drives away potential math majors; it is even more of a shame that it drives away potential math majors who look at math in a creative light. I don't have a way to fix it, but I think the first step is to recognize the problem.
Reach the reporter at norman.shamas@gmail.com
