Abstract

Afterword

Highlights

  • From the moment that authors from different parts of the world began to question the absence of sociocultural bases in the formation of mathematical knowledge, inside and outside the academic universe, a fertile field was opened to face truths that had long been ignored in discourses about the nature of mathematics

  • With the new production of knowledge, there was a confrontation with conceptions that, in their bases, devalued cultures, but excluded them from any process that referred to the construction of mathematical knowledge

  • At the same time that prejudices and historical manipulations became evident, there were contradictions, inconsistencies and boundaries that challenged, and still challenged, researchers, educators and all those who led a movement in favor of the construction of the field of ethnomathematics

Read more

Summary

Introduction

From the moment that authors from different parts of the world began to question the absence of sociocultural bases in the formation of mathematical knowledge, inside and outside the academic universe, a fertile field was opened to face truths that had long been ignored in discourses about the nature of mathematics. Mmbm@fct.unl.pt 2 Associated professor of rural education, University of Brasília, Brasília / Brazil; and Researcher on ethnomathematics of social movements, indigenous, and quilombola. With the new production of knowledge, there was a confrontation with conceptions that, in their bases, devalued cultures, but excluded them from any process that referred to the construction of mathematical knowledge.

Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call