Talk:Ethnomathematics

Merge: Anti-racism in mathematics teaching
Anti-racism in mathematics teaching is barely more than a stub. While that article states that "anti-racism in mathematics teaching" and ethnomathematics "should not be confused with one another" it has yet to state why not or how they are different. The article states that anti-racist mathematics includes "discussion of the mathematical knowledge of" various cultures. This is ethnomathematics. Furthermore, the article has yet to document the use of this term or acknowledgment of this supposed area by anyone practicing "anti-racist mathematics", but instead documents opposition by conservatives to something they have no experience with. Hyacinth (talk) 01:42, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

Support merge. I proposed one several years ago and got hardly any feedback. The 'anti-racism in mathematics teaching' article is still flawed, and salvageable content could be merged into 'ethnomathematics' and 'Anti-bias curriculum'. Dialectric (talk) 11:13, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

I do not think this merge is appropriate. Ethnomathematics describes an area of informal mathematical activity and practice but it is not necessarily either anti-racist or part of mathematics education - it can be part of anthropology. Hence the identification is inappropriate. PE — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rnest2002 (talk • contribs) 17:53, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

Disagree strongly with merging with Anti-bias curriculum, as the latter is too wide-ranging and it would make for a messy article. Was less sure regarding merging with ethnomathematics, but the comment by Rnest2002 seems pretty convincing. That said, the current article needs work done on it 'cos it ain't clear enough on some aspects. Regards, --Technopat (talk) 00:49, 28 June 2013 (UTC)

Support merging anti-racism in mathematics teaching into anti-bias curriculum, oppose merging into ethnomathematics for the reasons already stated. The anti-racism in mathematics teaching article is vague, but the points makes seem to be pedagogical, not specific to mathematics. It makes many of the same points as the anti-bias curriculum article and could probably be shortened on merge, so I'm not sure I understand Technopat's point about messiness. Proxyma (talk) 08:13, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

Support merging. This is just one aspect anti-bias curriculum. It's not clear to me that it is an independent enough topic to deserve its own article. Jason Quinn (talk) 14:58, 24 August 2013 (UTC)

Strongly disagree. Respected editors have already given strong arguments to keep the article. One article is about education and discrimination, the other one is about anthropology. The article is strongly flawed as it is, but it need to be edited, not merged.EternalFlare (talk) 04:34, 27 June 2014 (UTC)

Another example ?
https://www.facebook.com/pages/Kryptogeometrie-Geometry-of-Phaistos-Diskos-Disk-Disc-Disque/174559075930905 89.204.136.52 (talk) 07:17, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

Barton 1996?
I do not see a full citation for Barton 1996 in this article. It looks like this guy publishes a lot of articles on this topic, so can someone provide the citation to which note 27 refers?74.232.112.226 (talk) 15:48, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

"mathematics" in what sense?
It is my impression that when this article says "mathematics", it means the teaching of elementary mathematics to primary school pupils, and not mathematics in the sense of an abstract academic field or the Pythagorean notion of mathematics as truth.

Because academic mathematics must be the least "ethnic" field there is. If you can prove Fermat's theorem, you will have proven it regardless of your cultural background, once and for all, to all mathematicians of any other cultural backgrounds, forever. Sure, there may be cultural bias in notation, we are using Arabic-Indian numerals because the Indians/Persians came up with the decimal system in the early medieval period. But hey, it's a set of ten symbols, it should be possible to get over this "Indo-Persian ethnocentrism" in all of about 15 minutes.

Most of this "ethnomathematics" stuff seems to be concerned with elememary stuff like counting on your fingers, or at best the developent of elementary mathematics up to and including the medieval period.

That's fine, but perhaps then this should be made clear, as it immediately means that any modern or advanced mathematics is not within the scope of this article and not subject to any kind of "ethnomathematical" politicizing. --dab (𒁳) 09:50, 24 September 2014 (UTC)

The citations in this article need to be converted into proper cite-web format
(Author, Year) ain't gonna cut it for Wikipedia. If someone is up to the task, I can help. CVDX (talk) 18:32, 27 March 2024 (UTC)


 * The "webcites" with PDF can be converted easily. As for the book refs, I guess Harvard style references would be nice in this case, but the specific pages will be needed. InternetowyGołąb (talk) 18:35, 27 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Yeah, the problem is the ones that are just Author, Year. I appreciate your edit though! It's helping. CVDX (talk) 20:41, 27 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Ye I see. I guess  template would do it. InternetowyGołąb (talk) 20:59, 27 March 2024 (UTC)