Chapter 3 discussed three different types of mathematical teaching approaches in three different schools. The first school Boaler visited was Railside High School which used a communicative approach in teaching. Students would need to explain their work to other students. Students were also placed in different groups to discuss mathematical problems. The students of this school described math as being language instead of being a "set of rules". This way of teaching appeared to be very effective.

I have experienced both a traditional way of being taught math and I have experienced the "communicative approach" Personally, I did not enjoy either of these methods. Though, the communicative approach seems to work at Railside. In high school, we were sat in different groups and we would be forced to work together. The problem was, it was high school, and a lot of people (at least at my high school) did not get along. I found myself a lot of the time not being able to discuss math because someone in my group thought they were "too cool" to talk to me. Another issue was the students that did not care about their education whatsoever. Those students would not do any work and I found myself doing their work for them, since they would just copy me. Using groups like this in high school is difficult because of these situations. For this method to work, I believe that it really depends on the class and their motivation to be successful in school.

The other two approaches Boaler explored were the "Project-Based Approach" and the "Typical Traditional Approach". With a project-based approach there is a lot less organization, but this approach seemed to be very effective. This approach allows students to explore and choose what they want about mathematics. It allows students to be creative with math and makes it enjoyable. With the traditional approach the classroom was more controlled, but was a lot less creative and was very traditional. The Project Based students ended up doing better on examinations than the traditional mathematics students. This shows that creativity in the classroom, especially a math classroom, helps students be more successful.

I have experienced both a traditional way of being taught math and I have experienced the "communicative approach" Personally, I did not enjoy either of these methods. Though, the communicative approach seems to work at Railside. In high school, we were sat in different groups and we would be forced to work together. The problem was, it was high school, and a lot of people (at least at my high school) did not get along. I found myself a lot of the time not being able to discuss math because someone in my group thought they were "too cool" to talk to me. Another issue was the students that did not care about their education whatsoever. Those students would not do any work and I found myself doing their work for them, since they would just copy me. Using groups like this in high school is difficult because of these situations. For this method to work, I believe that it really depends on the class and their motivation to be successful in school.

The other two approaches Boaler explored were the "Project-Based Approach" and the "Typical Traditional Approach". With a project-based approach there is a lot less organization, but this approach seemed to be very effective. This approach allows students to explore and choose what they want about mathematics. It allows students to be creative with math and makes it enjoyable. With the traditional approach the classroom was more controlled, but was a lot less creative and was very traditional. The Project Based students ended up doing better on examinations than the traditional mathematics students. This shows that creativity in the classroom, especially a math classroom, helps students be more successful.