My history of mathematics education focused entirely on Eurocentric mathematics. We never learned about anything other than Eurocentric mathematics. I do feel that this was oppressive and discriminating for other students in the class. We were forced to learn this way of math without ever considering the different ways that math exists in other cultures. Our math program did silence and suppress other perspectives and we were never given opportunities to look at different sources of mathematics. Even if we did projects including other cultures, such as Indigenous culture, we always had to relate it back to Eurocentric mathematics. We never actually learned about other sources of mathematics and this helped maintain the singular social order that Leroy Little Bear mentioned in his work. This expectation of knowing and excelling in Eurocentric math most likely made it much harder for students in my school who had come to Canada knowing a different source of mathematics.

One way Inuit mathematics challenges Eurocentric ideas surrounding mathematics is their system for expressing numbers orally. They do not have another way of representing numbers since their symbols were borrowed from the Europeans. However, each number can be expressed orally in different forms depending on the context. This means that the Inuktitut speaker must be mindful of being understood by others since the form of the number can change to show the context in which it is being used. With Eurocentric ideas of math, we do not have a way of changing the form of a word orally to show the context. Inuit mathematics also challenges the Eurocentric ways of learning about measuring time. In European mathematics, we measure the time using a calendar, such as the Gregorian calendar, that has set days and months. Inuit mathematics shows a different way of measuring time; they use a traditional calendar that is “based on natural, independently recurring yearly events” (Poirier 61). The names of the months come from animal activities or nature and the length of each month depends on how long that event takes. Their way of measuring the months is entirely different than the European way of doing so. A third way that Inuit mathematics challenges the Eurocentric ideas of mathematics is how they measure length. In European mathematics, tools such as rulers would be used to measure the length of something. This would give a precise measurement using centimetres or millimetres. However, Inuit peoples tend to use parts of their bodies, such as fingers and palms, to measure. This article also only mentions measuring length in practical situations, such as making clothing. This shows that Inuit mathematics is used in more practical and real-life situations than European mathematics. In fact, when discussing the use of European mathematics in Inuit communities Poirier stated that “they do not perceive mathematics as something that can help them solve everyday problems” (55). Poirier also stated in regards to Inuit mathematics that “different cultures. . . developed different mathematical tools according to their needs and their environment” (54). European mathematics has little practical use in one’s day-to-day life but Inuit mathematics was specifically designed to be useful in the day-to-day lives of Inuit peoples.