Skip to main content

Revealing and overcoming the dogmatism of sterile certainty in mathematics education

ZDM volume 49, pages 1009–1021 (2017)Cite this article

Abstract

This article employs an interdisciplinary approach to explore some psychological dimensions of mathematical creativity and the dogmatism that can emerge when mathematical applications are confined within a single worldview. More specifically, it explores some ways in which mathematics has been confined and distorted in service of dogmatic conceptions of important phenomena, and for various purposes, some unwittingly damaging and others wittingly nefarious. Some of the topics dealt with include the dogmatic use of distorted mathematical modeling in economics, the sterile certainty that arises from excessive entrapment within the mechanistic worldview in various disciplines, and the dogmatism of artificial precision in educational reform initiatives. Methods for breaking free of dogmatism and for injecting ethics into mathematical applications also are explored.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Access options

Buy single article

Instant access to the full article PDF.

USD 39.95

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

References

  • Abrams, S. E. (2016). Education and the commercial mindset. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Akerlof, G. A., & Shiller, R. J. (2015). Phishing for phools: The economics of manipulation and deception. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Ambrose, D. (1996). Unifying theories of creativity: Metaphorical thought and the unification process. New Ideas in Psychology, 14, 257–267.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ambrose, D. (1998). A model for clarification and expansion of conceptual foundations. Gifted Child Quarterly, 42, 77–86.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ambrose, D. (2000). World-view entrapment: Moral-ethical implications for gifted education. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 23, 159–186.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ambrose, D. (2009a). Expanding visions of creative intelligence: An interdisciplinary exploration. Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ambrose, D. (2009b). Morality and high ability: Navigating a landscape of altruism and malevolence. In D. Ambrose & T. L. Cross (Eds.), Morality, ethics, and gifted minds (pp. 49–71). New York, NY: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Ambrose, D. (2012a). An interdisciplinary flight over dogmatic socioeconomic, political, ideological, and cultural terrain. In D. Ambrose & R. J. Sternberg (Eds.), How dogmatic beliefs harm creativity and higher-level thinking (pp. 64–76). New York, NY: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ambrose, D. (2012b). Dogmatic neoclassical economics and neoliberal ideology suppressing talent development in mathematics: Implications for teacher education. In L. J. Jacobsen, J. Mistele & B. Sriraman (Eds.), Mathematics teacher education in the public interest: Equity and social justice (pp. 83–97). Scottsdale, AZ: Information Age.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ambrose, D. (2012c). The not-so-invisible hand of economics and its impact on conceptions and manifestations of high abiliy. In D. Ambrose, R. J. Sternberg & B. Sriraman (Eds.), Confronting dogmatism in gifted education (pp. 97–114). New York, NY: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ambrose, D. (2013). Socioeconomic inequality and giftedness: Suppression and distortion of high ability. Roeper Review, 35, 81–92.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ambrose, D. (2014a). Creative emergence, order, and chaos: Grappling with the complexity of complexity theory. In D. Ambrose, B. Sriraman, & K. M. Pierce (Eds.), A critique of creativity and complexity: Deconstructing clichés (pp. 3–15). Rotterdam, The Netherlands: Sense.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ambrose, D. (2014b). Invigorating innovation and combating dogmatism through creative, metaphorical business leadership. In F. K. Reisman (Ed.), Application of creativity in business (pp. 52–66). London: KIE Conference Book Series.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ambrose, D. (2016a). Avoiding dogmatic traps in creativity and education through awareness of worldviews and visual metaphor. In R. A. Beghetto & B. Sriraman (Eds.), Creative contradictions in education: Cross-disciplinary paradoxes and perspectives (pp. 55–73). New York, NY: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ambrose, D. (2016b). Borrowing insights from other disciplines to strengthen the conceptual foundations for gifted education. International Journal for Talent Development and Creativity, 3(2), 33–57. (invited focus article for a special issue on interdisciplinary scholarship).

    Google Scholar 

  • Ambrose, D. (2016c). Twenty-first century contextual influences on the life trajectories of creative young people. In D. Ambrose & R. J. Sternberg (Eds.), Creative intelligence in the 21st century: Grappling with enormous problems and huge opportunities (pp. 21–48). Rotterdam: Sense.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Ambrose, D. (2017). Interdisciplinary exploration supports Sternberg’s expansion of giftedness. Roeper Review, 39(3), 178–182.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ambrose, D., & Ambrose, V. K. (2013). Adult lost prizes missing aspirations, a 21st-century education, and self-fulfillment. International Journal for Talent Development and Creativity, 1(1), 75–86.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ambrose, D., & Cross, T. L. (Eds.). (2009). Morality, ethics, and gifted minds. New York, NY: Springer Science.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ambrose, D., Sriraman, B., & Pierce, K. M. (Eds.). (2014). A critique of creativity and complexity: Deconstructing clichés. Rotterdam, The Netherlands: Sense.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ambrose, D., & Sternberg, R. J. (Eds.). (2012). How dogmatic beliefs harm creativity and higher-level thinking. New York, NY: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ambrose, D., & Sternberg, R. J. (Eds.). (2016a). Creative intelligence in the 21st century: Grappling with enormous problems and huge opportunities. Rotterdam: Sense.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ambrose, D., & Sternberg, R. J. (Eds.). (2016b). Giftedness and talent in the 21st century: Adapting to the turbulence of globalization. Rotterdam: Sense.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ambrose, D., Sternberg, R. J., & Sriraman, B. (Eds.). (2012). Confronting dogmatism in gifted education. New York, NY: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Amin, T. G. (2009). Conceptual metaphor meets conceptual change. Human Development, 52, 1–57.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Babiak, P., & Hare, R. D. (2006). Snakes in suits: When psychopaths go to work. New York, NY: HarperCollins.

    Google Scholar 

  • Babiak, P., Neumann, C. S., & Hare, R. D. (2010). Corporate psychopathy: Talking the walk. Behavioral Sciences & the Law, 28, 174–193.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baer, J. (2012). Domain specificity and the limits of creativity theory. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 46, 16–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baer, J. (2015). The importance of domain-specific expertise in creativity. Roeper Review, 37, 165–178.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baer, J. (2016). Domain specificity of creativity. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beghetto, R. A. (2010). Creativity in the classroom. In J. C. Kaufman & R. J. Sternberg (Eds.), Cambridge Handbook of Creativity (pp. 459–466). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bender, T., & Schorske, C. E. (Eds.). (1997). American academic culture in transformation: Fifty years, four disciplines. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berlin, I. (2013). The hedgehog and the fox: An essay on Tolstoy’s view of history (2nd ed.). Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. (Original work published 1951).

    Google Scholar 

  • Berliner, D. C. (2009). MCLB (much curriculum left behind): A US calamity in the making. Educational Forum, 74, 284–296. doi:10.1080/00131720903166788.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berliner, D. C. (2011). Rational responses to high stakes testing: The case of curriculum narrowing and the harm that follows. Cambridge Journal of Education, 41, 287–302. doi:10.1080/0305764X.2011.607151.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berliner, D. C. (2012). Narrowing curriculum, assessments, and conceptions of what it means to be smart in the US schools: Creaticide by design. In D. Ambrose & R. J. Sternberg (Eds.), How dogmatic beliefs harm creativity and higher-level thinking (pp. 79–93). New York, NY: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berliner, D. C., & Glass, G. V. (2014). 50 myths and lies that threaten America’s public schools: The real crisis in education. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bowers, C. A. (1993). Critical essays on education, modernity, and the recovery of the ecological imperative. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bowers, C. A., & Flinders, D. J. (1990). Responsive teaching. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boyd, R. (1993). Metaphor and theory change: What is “metaphor” a metaphor for? In A. Ortony (Ed.), Metaphor and thought (pp. 481–532). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Byers, W. (2007). How mathematicians think: Using ambiguity, contradiction, and paradox to create mathematics. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Byers, W. (2011). The blind spot: Science and the crisis of uncertainty. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Byers, W. (2014). Deep thinking: What mathematics can teach us about the mind. Singapore: World scientific.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Chaitin, G. J. (1995). Randomness in arithmetic and the decline and fall of reductionism in pure mathematics. In J. Cornwell (Ed.), Nature’s imagination: The frontiers of scientific vision (pp. 27–44). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Changeux, J.-P., & Connes, l. (1998). Conversations on mind, matter, and mathematics (M. B. DeBevoise, Trans.). Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Charteris-Black, J. (2005). Politicians and rhetoric: The persuasive power of metaphor. London: Palgrave-MacMillan.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, T. (2008). Thinking of others: On the talent for metaphor. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coyle, D. (2015). GDP: A brief but affectionate history. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Cropley, D. H., Cropley, A. J., Kaufman, J. C., & Runco, M. A. (Eds.). (2010). The dark side of creativity. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Desai, M. (2015). Hubris: Why economists failed to predict the crisis and how to avoid the next one. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dickens, C. (1981). Hard times. New York, NY: Bantam Classics (Original work published 1854).

    Google Scholar 

  • Eisenberg, A. (1992, May). Metaphor in the language of science. Scientific American, 266(5), 144.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fabricant, M., & Fine, M. (2013). The changing politics of education: Privatization and the dispossessed lives left behind. Boulder, CO: Paradigm.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ferguson, E. S. (1992). Engineering and the mind’s eye. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ferguson, T., & Johnson, R. (2014). Too big to bail: The “Paulson put,” presidential politics, and the global financial meltdown. International Journal of Political Economy, 38(1), 3–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fisher, E., & Beltran-Del-Rio, D. (2017). Mathematics and root interdisciplinarity: Historical perspectives. In R. Carlos, & D. S. Pacheco (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of interdisciplinarity (2nd ed., pp. 114–116). Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fleischacker, S. (2004). On Adam Smith’s wealth of nations: A philosophical companion. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fourcade, M., Ollion, E., & Algan, Y. (2015). The superiority of economists. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 29(1), 89–114. doi:10.1257/jep.29.1.89.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Frodeman, R., Klein, J. T., Mitcham, C., & Holbrook, J. B. (Eds.). (2010). The Oxford handbook of interdisciplinarity. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fullbrook, E. (2016). Narrative fixation in economics. London: College Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gibbs, R. W. (Ed.). (2008). The Cambridge handbook of metaphor and thought. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gino, F., & Ariely, D. (2012). The dark side of creativity: Original thinkers can be more dishonest. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 102, 445–459.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grosholz, E. R. (2007). Representation and productive ambiguity in mathematics and the sciences. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gruber, H. E., & Bödeker, K. (Eds.). (2005). Creativity, psychology and the history of science. New York, NY: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harmon, J. E. (1994). The uses of metaphor in citation classics from the scientific literature. Technical Communication Quarterly, 3, 179–194.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hersh, R. (1991). Mathematics has a front and a back. Synthese, 88(2), 127–133.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holton, G. (1996). On the art of scientific imagination. Daedalus, 125, 183–208.

    Google Scholar 

  • Holton, G. (1998). The scientific imagination (2nd ed.). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press (Original work published 1978).

    Google Scholar 

  • Horn, J., & Wilburn, D. (2013). The mismeasure of education. Charlotte, NC: Information Age.

    Google Scholar 

  • Huang, Y., Zhang, Y., Youtie, J., Porter, A. L., & Wang, X. (2016). How does national scientific funding support emerging interdisciplinary research: A comparison study of big data research in the US and China. PLoS One. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0154509.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ivanova, M. (2016). Poincaré’s aesthetics of science. Synthese. doi:10.1007/s11229-016-1069-1.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, M. (2009). What cognitive science brings to ethics. In D. Ambrose & T. L. Cross (Eds.), Morality, ethics, and gifted minds (pp. 147–150). New York, NY: Springer Science.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Kohn, A. (2015). Schooling beyond measure and other unorthodox essays about education. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kotz, D. M. (2015). The rise and fall of neoliberal capitalism. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Kozol, J. (2005). The shame of the nation: The restoration of apartheid schooling in America. New York, NY: Crown.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuhn, T. S. (1993). Metaphor in science. In A. Ortony (Ed.), Metaphor and thought (pp. 533–542). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Lakoff, G. (1993). The contemporary theory of metaphor. In A. Ortony (Ed.), Metaphor and thought (2nd ed., pp. 202–251). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors we live by. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1999). Philosophy in the flesh: The embodied mind and its challenge to western thought. New York, NY: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Larson, B. (2014). Metaphors for environmental sustainability: Redefining our relationship with nature. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Levine, G. (2006). Darwin loves you: Natural selection and the re-enchantment of the world. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lu, G. M. (2016). Science without boundary: Interdisciplinary research. National Science Review, 3(3), 263. doi:10.1093/nsr/nww021.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lubienski, C. A., & Lubienski, S. T. (2014). The public school advantage: Why public schools outperform private schools. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Madni, A. M. (2007). Transdisciplinarity: Reaching beyond disciplines to find connections. Journal of Integrated Design and Process Science, 11(1), 1–11.

    Google Scholar 

  • Madrick, J. (2011). Age of greed: The triumph of finance and the decline of America, 1970 to the present. New York, NY: Alfred A. Knopf.

    Google Scholar 

  • Madrick, J. (2014). Seven bad ideas: How mainstream economists have damaged America and the world. New York, NY: Alfred A. Knopf.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mäki, U., & MacLeod, M. (2016). Interdisciplinarity in action: Philosophy of science perspectives. European Journal for philosophy of science, 6, 323–326.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marglin, S. A. (2008). The dismal science: How thinking like an economist undermines community. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • McAllister, J. W. (1996). Beauty and revolution in science. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller, D. (Ed.). (1994). Goethe, volume 12: Scientific studies. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morson, G. S., & Schapiro, M. (2017). Cents and sensibility: What economics can learn from the humanities. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Nadeau, R. L. (2003). The wealth of nature: How mainstream economics has failed the environment. New York, NY: Columbia University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • National Research Council (2014). Convergence: Facilitating transdisciplinary integration of life sciences, physical sciences, engineering, and beyond. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nicolescu, B. (2010). Methodology of transdisciplinary: Levels of reality, logic of the included middle and complexity. Transdisciplinary Journal of Engineering & Science, 1(1), 19–38.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nussbaum, M. (2010). Not for profit: Why democracy needs the humanities. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Olszewski-Kubilius, P., Subotnik, R. F., & Worrell, F. C. (2016). The role of domains in the conceptualization of talent. In D. Ambrose & R. J. Sternberg (Eds.), Giftedness and talent in the 21st century: Adapting to the turbulence of globalization (pp. 81–99). Rotterdam, The Netherlands: Sense.

    Google Scholar 

  • Osowski, J. V. (1989). Ensembles of metaphor in the psychology of William James. In D. B. Wallace & H. E. Gruber (Eds.), Creative people at work (pp. 126–145). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Overton, W. F. (1984). World views and their influence on psychological thoughts and research: Khun-Lakatos-Laudan. In H. W. Reese (Ed.), Advances in child development and behavior (Vol. 18, pp. 91–226). New York, NY: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Parnes, S. J., & Biondi, A. M. (1975). Creative behavior: A delicate balance. Journal of Creative Behavior, 6(3), 149–158.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Paul, R. W., & Elder, L. (2002). Critical thinking: Tools for taking charge of your professional and personal life. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.

    Google Scholar 

  • Penrose, R. (1995). Must mathematical physics be reductionist? In J. Cornwell (Ed.), Nature’s imagination: The frontiers of scientific vision (pp. 12–26). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pepper, S. C. (1942). World hypotheses. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Piirto, J. (2016). The creative intelligence of teachers resisting the Pearsonization of global education. In D. Ambrose & R. J. Sternberg (Eds.), Creative intelligence in the 21st century: Grappling with enormous problems and huge opportunities (pp. 139–156). Rotterdam, The Netherlands: Sense.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Piketty, T. (2014). Capital in the twenty-first century. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Piketty, T. (2015). The economics of inequality. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Quiggin, J. (2010). Zombie economics: How dead ideas still walk among us. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rajan, R. (2010). Fault lines: How hidden fractures still threaten the world economy. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rand, A. (1964). The virtue of selfishness. New York, NY: Signet.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rand, A., Branden, N., Greenspan, A., & Hessen, R. (1967). Capitalism: The unknown ideal. New York, NY: Signet.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ravitch, D. (2010). The death and life of the great American school system: How testing and choice are undermining education. New York, NY: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ravitch, D. (2013). Reign of error: The hoax of the privatization movement and the danger to America’s public schools. New York, NY: Knopf.

    Google Scholar 

  • Resnick, L. B. (1987). Education and learning to think. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rice, M. (2013). Spanning disciplinary, sectoral and international boundaries: A sea change towards transdisciplinary global environmental change research? Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 5(3–4), 409–419.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ruelle, D. (2007). The mathematician’s brain: A personal tour through the essentials of mathematics and some of the great minds behind them. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Russakoff, D. (2015). The prize: Who’s in charge of American schools? New York, NY: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schlefer, J. (2012). The assumptions economists make. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Schon, D. A. (1993). Generative metaphor: A perspective on problem-setting in social policy. In A. Ortony (Ed.), Metaphor and thought (2nd ed., pp. 137–163). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Shapiro, I. (2005). The flight from reality in the human sciences. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Simonton, D. K. (2004). Psychology’s status as a scientific discipline: It’s empirical placement within an implicit hierarchy of the sciences. Review of General Psychology, 8, 59–67.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simonton, D. K. (2009). Varieties of (scientific) creativity: A hierarchical model of disposition, development, and achievement. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 4, 441–452.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simonton, D. K. (2012). One creator’s meat is another creator’s poison: Field and domain restrictions on individual creativity. In D. Ambrose & R. J. Sternberg (Eds.), How dogmatic beliefs harm creativity and higher level thinking (pp. 125–134). New York, NY: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sondel, B. (2015). Raising citizens or raising test scores? Teach for America, “no excuses” charters, and the development of the neoliberal citizen. Theory & Research in Social Education, 43(3), 289–313. doi:10.1080/00933104.2015.1064505.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sriraman, B. (2005). Are giftedness and creativity synonyms in mathematics? The Journal of Secondary Gifted Education, 17(1), 20–36.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sriraman, B. (2009). Interdisciplinarity and mathematics education: Psychology, philosophy, aesthetics, modeling and curriculum. The ZDM-The International Journal on Mathematics Education, 41(1&2), 1–4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sriraman, B. (2017). Dimensions of mathematical thinking and learning in ACCEL. Roeper Review, 39, 206–209.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sriraman, B., & Dahl, B. (2009). On bringing interdisciplinary ideas to gifted education. In L. V. Shavinina (Ed.), International handbook on giftedness (pp. 1235–1256). New York, NY: Springer Science.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sriraman, B., & Freiman, V. (Eds.). (2009). Interdisciplinarity for the twenty-first century: Proceedings of the Third International Symposium on Mathematics and Its Connections to Arts and Sciences; Moncton 2009. Charlotte, NC: Information Age.

  • Sriraman, B., & Leikin, R. (2017). Commentary on interdisciplinary perspectives to creativity and giftedness. In R. Leikin & B. Sriraman (Eds.), Creativity and giftedness (pp. 259–264). Switzerland: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Sriraman, B., & Roscoe, M. (2016). Interdisciplinary perspectives to the development of high ability in the 21st century. International Journal for Talent Development and Creativity, 3(2), 147–152.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sternberg, R. J. (1990). Metaphors of mind: Conceptions of the nature of intelligence. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sternberg, R. J. (1993). Procedures for identifying intellectual potential in the gifted: A perspective on alternative “metaphors of mind.”. In K. A. Heller, F. J. Mönks & A. H. Passow (Eds.), International handbook of research and development of giftedness and talent (pp. 185–207). Oxford: Pergamon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sternberg, R. J. (2010). College admissions for the 21st century. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sternberg, R. J. (2011). Who is really adrift? Inside Higher Ed, retrieved from http://www.insidehighered.com/views/2011/02/08/a_critique_of_academically_adrift_and_the_test_behind_many_of_the_findings.

  • Sternberg, R. J. (2012). Ethical drift. Liberal Education, 98(3), 60.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sternberg, R. J. (2016). The gift that keeps on giving—but for how long? Journal of Intelligence, 4(1), 4. doi:10.3390/jintelligence4010004.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sternberg, R. J. (2017). ACCEL: A new model for identifying the gifted. Roeper Review, 39, 152–169.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stiglitz, J. B. (2015). The great divide: Unequal societies and what we can do about them. New York, NY: W. W. Norton.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stiglitz, J. E. (2010). Free fall: America, free markets, and the sinking of the world economy. New York, NY: W. W. Norton.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stiglitz, J. E. (2016). Rewriting the rules of the American economy: An agenda for growth and shared prosperity. New York, NY: W. W. Norton.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sturges, K. M. (Ed.). (2015). Neoliberalizing educational reform. Rotterdam: Sense.

    Google Scholar 

  • Subotnik, R. F., Olszewski-Kubilius, P., & Worrell, F. C. (2011). Rethinking giftedness and gifted education: A proposed direction forward based on psychological science. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 12, 3–54. doi:10.1177/1529100611418056.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Suresh, S. (2013). To tap the world’s vast and growing potential for new ideas, we need new rules. Scientific American, 309(4), 60.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Szostak, R., Gnoli, C., & López-Huertas, M. (2016). Interdisciplinary knowledge organization. Switzerland: Springer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Taleb, N. N. (2013). The fourth quadrant: A map of the limits of statistics. In J. Brockman (Ed.), Thinking: The new science of decision-making, problem-solving, and prediction (pp. 225–251). New York, NY: HarperCollins.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tirri, K. (2016). Holistic perspectives on gifted education for the 21st century. In D. Ambrose & R. J. Sternberg (Eds.), Giftedness and talent in the 21st century: Adapting to the turbulence of globalization (pp. 101–110). Rotterdam, The Netherlands: Sense.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weiss, G. (2012). Ayn Rand nation: The hidden struggle for America’s soul. New York, NY: MacMillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhao, Y. (2009). Catching up or leading the way: American education in the age of globalization. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhao, Y. (2013). Directions of change: Why the United States and China are moving in opposite directions. In H. Janc & Malone (Eds.), Leading educational change: Global issues, challenges, and lessons on whole-system reform (pp. 16–19). New York, NY: Teachers College Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhao, Y. (2014). Who’s afraid of the big bad dragon? Why China has the best (and worst) education system in the world. San Franciso, CA: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhao, Y., & Gearin, B. (2016). Squeezed out: The threat of global homogenization of education to creativity. In D. Ambrose & R. J. Sternberg (Eds.), Creative intelligence in the 21st century: Grappling with enormous problems and huge opportunities (pp. 121–138). Rotterdam: Sense.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. College of Education and Human Services, Rider University, 2083 Lawrenceville Road, Lawrenceville, NJ, 08648-3099, USA

    Don Ambrose

Authors
  1. Don Ambrose
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Don Ambrose.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

11858_2017_888_MOESM1_ESM.tiff

Figure 1: The root-metaphorical worldviews. The gear from the machine represents the precision and reductionism of mechanism. The root system and branches of the plant represent the holistic integration and long-term development of organicism. The canoeists shooting rapids represent the importance of context and the unpredictable emergence of novelty in contextualism. The intricate, repetitive patterns in the fractal image represent the patterns of similarity that become visible through formism (TIFF 691 KB)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Ambrose, D. Revealing and overcoming the dogmatism of sterile certainty in mathematics education. ZDM Mathematics Education 49, 1009–1021 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-017-0888-y

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-017-0888-y

Keywords

  • Interdisciplinary
  • Mathematics
  • Dogmatism
  • Economics
  • Education reform
  • Worldviews