ECS 203

There are Always Other Ways of Interpreting the World

The very first sentence of the Leroy Little Bear article stands out to me: “No matter how dominant a worldview is, there are always other ways of interpreting the world” (2000, p. 77). Growing up, I was never a math person. My mind didn’t work in ways where math came easy to me, like it did for my brother. However, I worked hard to overcome this and I got good marks. My brother would often make comments like, “come on, how don’t you get this” and I would make similar comments back regarding English. Many people love math because there is a “right” and a “wrong”. It is a step-by-step where you can succeed if you memorize. The reason I struggled with this is because I was/am a visual learner and I need to understand the why. There were too many tears shed and too many hours of memorization for me to consider myself a math wiz!

 

It wasn’t until University that I realized that this whole concept of “right” and “wrong” in math is actually a Eurocentric construct. I took Math 101 at the First Nations University with a really awesome professor…and I loved it! He introduced us to different ways of thinking about numbers and how different cultures conceptualize things.  We learned about the Indigenous base 20 system. He stressed the visual learning and the why aspects of what we did. I succeeded in his class and I recommended it to friends. Then…a couple of my friends went through this course and they had a completely different experience. They told me it was complicated, confusing, and unnecessary. I was so confused because I thought that professor did such an amazing job of teaching the concepts. 

 

Reflecting on this now, I resonate with Leroy Little Bear’s words so much: “there are always other ways of interpreting the world”. As educators, it is so so so important that we recognize this and we find ways to make all of our students successful and confident. 

 

However, I also recognize the privilege that I have as a white person. Although the pedagogical approaches might not have “worked” with my brain in school, at the end of the day, the curriculum was made under Eurocentric worldviews. Not only this, but the way in which high school (and elementary for that matter) was so based around linear progression and a hierarchy is so Eurocentric, and this is something I have never thought about before. The entire system privileged minds like mine and oppressed those of others who had different ways of thinking, knowing, and doing. Thinking back on the frustration I felt, I am angered because this is only a tiny sliver of the barriers that so many students in this province and country face.

 

As we learned from Porirer’s article, Inuit mathematics challenges Eurocentric ideas about math in multiple ways. Firstly, Inuit children learn math in their first language, Inuktitut, during their first three years of schooling, whereas Eurocentric education relies on French or English as the dominant languages of instruction. This challenges the assumption that math must be taught in a standardized language and recognizes the value of preserving Inuit language and culture. 

 

Secondly, as the article says, “Different cultures have developed different mathematical tools according to their needs and their environment, and the Inuit community is no exception” (2010, p. 54).  Inuit math is deeply intertwined with their culture, language, and environment, resulting in a unique math system that differs from the standardized approach of Eurocentric math. For example, Inuit math uses a base-20 numeral system, whereas Eurocentric math uses a base-10 system. This challenges the notion of math as a universal language and it highlights the diversity of mathematical tools across cultures. 

 

Lastly, traditional Inuit teaching methods involve observing elders and enigmas for problem-solving, in contrast to the paper-and-pencil worksheet exercises that are so common in Eurocentric education. This challenges the assumption that standardized teaching methods are the most effective and recognizes the value of incorporating different ways of knowing, being, and doing that are culturally relevant. 

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *