
MATHEMATICS EDUCATION FORUM 

July 31, 2015  
FIELDS MATHEMATICS EDUCATION FORUM

Present: Stewart Craven, Shirley Dalrymple, Gord Doctorow, Gary Flewelling, George Gadanidis, Gila Hanna, John Kezys, Miroslav Lovric, Kenning Marchant, Doug McDougall, Eric Muller, David Poole, Fred Pulfer, Geoff Roulet, Tom Sepp, Margaret Sinclair, Peter Taylor, Walter Whiteley
1. George Gadanidis discussed the February Meeting in Online Mathematics.
See link.
Two major themes were how to test the programs, and the importance
of learnerfocussed development in the online programs.
2. George Gadanidis discussed the Math as Story Symposium. See link.
3. Walter Whiteley presented a report from CMESG regarding . See circulated
memo.
Why turn to CMS? Because they are the most respected body of professional
mathematicians.
From the university perspective: perhaps what is important is not necessarily
a list of topics, but a mathematical experience that allows for students
to apply skills to new problems.
CMESG statement tried to avoid teacherbashing, and so avoided exact
topics that need to be improved on.
There is a need to highlight the distinction between technical and
conceptual proficiency.
Currently, the high school curriculum is so packed that the areas that
will excite kids can't be squeezed in.
4. Towards the 2005 Math Ed Forum to be hosted by Fields  Bradd Hart
A discussion of the questions in the attached document. See
link.
Also circulated was the CMS Manifesto on Mathematics Preparation for
Universities. See link.
Main question for the upcoming Montreal Forum: How do we set a focus
coming out of the meeting?
Question 1: What is the vision for the meeting?
to build liaison: invite outside participants
establishing followup projects
Question 2: What is the target audience?
Stewart Craven discussed the creation of a Canadian Math Teachers Society,
which would create an umbrella organization for provincial math educator
groups; currently, these Canadian groups meet outside of Canada
Question 3: What should the format of the meeting be?
Topics should be focussed: not too much segmenting or division, but
rather 1 or 2 issues should be addressed comprehensively
If smaller breakout groups happen, then reportback sessions will be
necessary.
Will there be students involved?