Last month, Jennie Yabroff wrote an article for Newsweek discussing the new film Precious. I haven’t seen the film, but this trailer makes a fairly strong impression:

The theme of finding redemption through writing is certainly not new to this genre of film, as Yabroff points out. Films such as Dangerous Minds and Freedom Writers have explored this territory before, although perhaps with less success than Precious. However, Yabroff wonders if all this time spent journaling wouldn’t be better spent learning some mathematics.

In her article, Yabroff writes:

The idea that every underprivileged young adult harbors the soul of a Rimbaud is a favorite trope of popular culture. We don’t expect our bankers and lawyers to be secret Baudelaires, but we eagerly accept the idea that every poor person has a “story,” and just needs the right teacher or mentor to give it voice…

…But, contrary to what Hollywood would have us believe, the world does not reward self-expression as readily or consistently as it rewards a good head for numbers. It’s hard for any writer to support herself writing. Precious’s teacher should have known that, and given her a calculator along with that journal.

Stand and Deliver is one film that shows how mathematics can improve the lives of inner city youths, but as a general rule it does seem much more likely that a film will attempt to highlight the potential of students through writing rather than through math. Part of this bias is to be expected, since, as Yabroff points out, movies are written by writers and not mathematicians. Also, given Precious’s illiteracy, it would make more sense to build up her fundamental reading and writing skills before asking her to pick up a math book. Even so, should we be concerned that nearly every film that shows inner city youth turning their lives around does it by emphasizing words over equations?

One may be tempted to argue that it’s just harder to write a film that portrays math honestly and in a compelling way, but I think that’s only true if you’re a lazy writer or you don’t know anything about math. Especially at the high school level, the fundamental concepts could be explained in a way that’s understandable to general audience, and, dare I say it, even interesting. The end result may not seem to be as glamorous if one’s education is focused on math – given the choice, I’m guessing that kids would rather be like Kanye instead of Urkel – but this just means we need to do a better job showing kids why mathematical skills are so attractive.

I for one would love to see more movies like Stand and Deliver, especially ones that follow through and show what can be done with a background in science and math. Who knows when that will happen, though. I guess we need a character with the technical know-how of Steve Urkel, but the charm and sophistication of is suave doppelganger, Stephan Urquelle. I am confident that character is out there, and am hopeful that his (or her) time will soon come.

Sorry Steve – lose the suspenders, and then we can talk.

Recently, I decided to watch this film for a third time, to see how this film compares with other films that involve mathematics. Lou Diamond Phillips was as charming as ever – but how did the math stack up?

For the uninitiated, Stand and Deliver aims to tell the true story of Jaime Escalante, a man who gained a fair amount of press in the 1980′s for developing an extremely successful advanced placement math program at an inner city school in Los Angeles. The film tells the story of the first batch of kids to study Calculus under Escalante’s tutelage, and aims to show that regardless of your background, an understanding of mathematics is not beyond your reach.

Most of the time when I discuss the representation of math in films, there are two main things to consider: the portrayal of mathematicians, and the portrayal of mathematics itself. For this film, Mr. Escalante is not a mathematician, however – he is instead a very good math teacher. Nevertheless, being a good math teacher means he must be good at math, and whenever someone who is good at math is presented on film, there is a danger that the character will have certain stereotypical attributes.

Thankfully, this doesn’t seem to be the case here. Let’s take a closer look at some stereotypes of mathematics.

- People who are good at math are socially awkward.

Jaime Escalante is many things in this film, but socially awkward is not one of them. He’s a charismatic dude with a comb over to match. Sure, some of the things he says may not be entirely appropriate for the classroom, but everyone seems to enjoy it. Plus, he has a stable home life with a loving wife and a son – it’s not often that people who are good at math are shown in such drama free households. +1.

- To be good at math, you must be insane.

This movie shows all types of students, from the nerdy girls who work at their dad’s restaurant, to the wannabe gangsters with no aspirations for higher education. Many of the students come from less than ideal family situations. Nevertheless, there is one thing that binds them all together: their ability to learn math.

While some students are stronger than others, there isn’t one among them who is completely lost. They all learn Calculus, despite the skepticism that surrounds them. At one point Mr. Escalante opines that “students will rise to the level of expectation,” and in this case, he is correct. You don’t need to be crazy to be good at math. Having a good teacher, however, certainly helps. +1.

Real Jaime Escalante versus movie Jaime Escalante.

- Mathematics is inherently difficult and complicated, and only gifted people have a hope of doing well.

This is arguably the most harmful stereotype about mathematics. While it’s certainly true that math is difficult, and that there are those who seem to have an innate mathematical ability, it is certainly not the case that every professional mathematician (or those who use math in a technical career) are math savants. More often, they are simply people who had a few good teachers and were motivated to really understand mathematics.

Usually a film’s mathematics perspective is weighted heavily towards the savant end of the scale, which only reinforces stereotypes about people who study mathematics. Thankfully, this film really emphases the latter standard – that even if you aren’t the most naturally gifted when it comes to math, you can still succeed with enough hard work. All the students in the film work extremely hard, even the ones who may be better at math than the others. And aside from a bit involving Andy Garcia who plays a total tool, the students are all rewarded for their hard work, not only with good grades, but with a deeper understanding of math, and greater confidence about their abilities as students. As Mr. Escalante says, “Calculus is not made to be easy – it already is.” +1.

This film is very different from most films that involve math. Math isn’t presented as some mystical oracle that can only be deciphered by the borderline insane. Instead, it is presented as a difficult subject, but one that can be mastered with dedication and practice. It’s no wonder, then, that this film has secured such an enduring spot in the hearts of math teachers nationwide.

For those of you who may not find the film appealing, there’s always the counterpoint offered by South Park. Mr. Cartmanez may not have the heart of Mr. Escalante, but at least he has the comb over. Their teaching styles couldn’t be more different, and yet in their own way, both are successful. Somehow, though, I don’t think math teachers will find the story of Mr. Cartmanez as appropriate for their students.