How to respond to "unfair to write English" comments?

Question

I teach mathematics and computing; for example, our department's discrete mathematics course. As is customary for that course, it's used as the first foray into formal mathematics, including a heavy emphasis on reading and writing proofs throughout the semester (required for both our math & computing majors). In response to difficulties I've seen students wrestle with in past semesters, on the first day of the course I have a slide with this quote:

Writing Proofs in English

“The best notation is no notation; whenever it is possible to avoid the use of a complicated alphabetic apparatus, avoid it. A good attitude to the preparation of written mathematical exposition is to pretend that it is spoken. Pretend that you are explaining the subject to a friend on a long walk in the woods, with no paper available; fall back on symbolism only when it is really necessary.” – Paul Halmos, How to Write Mathematics

Now, the last few semesters I've done this I find that I regularly get pushback. For example, this semester I had a student write in the live online chat, something like, "This seems unfair to students who have poor English skills". And I've been a bit stumped for a short, solid response to that.

Note that I'm at a community college in the U.S., which is part of a large urban university, and about half of our student population is foreign-born. We have a TOEFL requirement for enrollment, but some students indeed have very weak English skills (I've had a small number that apparently needed every course lecture translated by a friend, and couldn't communicate with me directly).

My initial instinct is something like, "You enrolled at a university where the instruction is in English, and has an English requirement for registration, so no one should be surprised at this." But (a) that seems wordy and byzantine, and (b) misses the underlying problem that people are led to believe that math work is entirely deterministic symbol-pushing, such that some people pursue it precisely because they think they won't need strong language skills (in fact, some of our advisors explicitly say this to students).

Obviously, replace "English" here with "natural language" at whatever institution and location you might consider.

What's the best, shortest response to student criticism that "It's unfair to expect writing in English"?

Related from SE Mathematics: Why there is no sign of logic symbols in mathematical texts?

Answer 1

For writing proofs, full knowledge of English is not necessary. Most proofs can be written using a single tense. It is sufficient (and often advisable) to keep the structure of sentences very simple; that is very similar to how logic statements are written using math notation. Arguably, this exercise requires students to use only a small and simple subset of English level. Most students are expected to have it by the admission requirements of the course they signed on.

Answer 2

Your experience resonates with me. In my classes I also have many students with imperfect English. I have often noticed (including as recently as a couple of weeks ago) that when I give lengthy word questions explaining a complicated real-life problem and asking to model it mathematically, some students struggle to understand what they are being asked to do due to language difficulties; and this is despite the fact that the question is written in grammatically correct, plain English, and I even make a conscious effort to edit the questions and “water down” the level of the English by removing complicated words and phrases to the extent possible.

Although I haven’t gotten pushback and don’t believe I have anything to answer for, thinking about this issue over the years has led me to conclude that there is a real problem of students who come to US universities with an incomplete mastery of English being at a disadvantage — often a significant one — because of their language skills. And I’ve wondered what I can do about it. For example, consciously trying to speak and write with slightly less complicated English words and phrases than I might be inclined to do if I knew I was addressing only native English speakers is one remedy. But it is a small and mostly (as far as I can tell) ineffective one. The students who were going to struggle are still struggling.

Now, whether or not this is “unfair” is a complicated ethical question and I don’t think it is my place to answer it. But one thing I’ve come to believe is that, at least, to the extent that it is unfair, the unfairness is a systemic kind of unfairness that is built into a university system that admits a large number of foreign students and expects them to handle an environment in which knowledge of (high-level, academic) English is assumed. In other words, it is not me who introduced the unfairness, and it is not me who has much power to do anything about it.

At the end of the day, my job is to teach mathematics, using English as the language of instruction, and that is what I do. If the subject I’m teaching involves writing word problems to teach people how to model and interpret real-life problems, that is what I will do. If the subject requires students to write proofs verbally, that is what I will require (though grading will be done based on the mathematical correctness of the answer and not based on correct grammar and spelling). There just isn’t any other way.

When a student says to you that what you are doing is unfair, tell them that you are simply teaching the subject you were assigned to teach as it should be taught by a qualified instructor. Ask them what they are suggesting that you do instead. My guess is they will not be able to make a coherent suggestion, and perhaps that will lead them to understand that the problem is more complicated than they realized.

Also: tell the advisors at your college not to tell students that mathematics does not require strong language skills! That is a horribly false and misleading thing to tell people and can obviously set them up for trouble and disappointment.

Answer 3

Being at a disadvantage due to a lack of necessary skills does not seem unfair to me. The ability to communicate clearly in written form is an essential skill for pretty well everything that we hope that our students will go on to do in their later life. Thus, it is a skill that we should actively encourage them to develop, by pretty much the same methods that we encourage them to develop, say, mathematical skills. That includes methods such as assessing them on that ability.

Just for reference, my department explicitly awards 20% of the available marks on each assignment (not including exams, because expecting people to re-draft work under time pressure is unreasonable) for "clarity of written communication". Neither this, nor a more implicit approach, is unfair: it is an assessment system rewarding better results to more able students, which is precisely what assessment systems are supposed to do.

Answer 4

Frankly, I wouldn’t be surprised if changing “English” to “Plain Language” was sufficient to quell students’ concerns. It neatly sidesteps their manifest discomfort with the language itself. I doubt the manifest objection is the whole story—STEM folks always bristle at problems you can’t just calculate—so maybe you’ll even have more interesting and relevant conversations.

If you still hear objections, why not provide some resources? From the lowest level of personal effort to the greatest: You could refer your students to an on-campus writing clinic. You could offer a list of texts you found particularly illuminating when you learned to express complex mathematical ideas in writing. Or you could make sure students who were struggling knew you were available to discuss their work during office hours.

The responses others have offered are oriented towards winning your conversations with your students. It’s true there are larger structural problems in play for which it would be unreasonable to hold you responsible. The observation that Kids Today demand license and call it liberty is also hard to dispute. But your class isn’t about that, and your students aren’t an expedient means to proving a broader claim about society.

Your question makes it clear that you take your students’ education seriously and believe you do them a service by pushing them. Good! That’s demanding work, and too few academics are interested in doing it. But whatever else it may accomplish, making “Life is unfair” the hill you die on doesn’t teach them anything they didn’t know already.

(It also seems way more exhausting than pasting a couple hyperlinks into your PowerPoint, but that’s between you and your clipboard.)

The quotation is meant to be a little uncomfortable—counterintuitive, surprising, thought-provoking. Discomfort is an opportunity to learn. For that purpose, “English” is the single least interesting and relevant word you’ve got.

Answer 5

A short explanation of my grading philosophy in this instance often comforts my ESL learners:

While I will not take off points for general English mistakes (for example with grammar), I do take off points for mathematical English mistakes, that change/obscure the mathematical interpretation of your response.

While this does not put ESL students on the same footing as native English speakers, both groups struggle with technical language in their early proof classes, and so this puts the emphasis on what it's my job to teach all of them: good technical writing skills.

Answer 6

The ultimate defence against 'It's unfair to assess us on skill X' is 'Skill X is listed in the published "Intended Learning Outcomes" document for the module/programme'. So, the question for OP is: does the "Intended Learning Outcomes" document, either for the module or for the programme, include something like "By the end of the module/programme, students will be able to make a case for a particular result, using verbal reasoning in English"?

Answer 7

For my university at least, English proficiency is a requirement for enrollment to the point that students who learned English as a second language are required to take an English test like TOEFL as part of the admissions package. Therefore, although it may sound harsh,

You enrolled at a university where the instruction is in English, and has an English requirement for registration, so no one should be surprised at this.

is the assumption I make. (If I were to take classes or teach in a country that does not speak English, I would think it reasonable to have to learn the local language.) My class is not about reading, writing, or speaking English, so I will suggest students visit the university writing center if I notice them struggling.

(b) misses the underlying problem that people are led to believe that math work is entirely deterministic symbol-pushing, such that some people pursue it precisely because they think they won't need strong language skills (in fact, some of our advisors explicitly say this to students).

I think that math work definitely requires less language skills than some other subjects where writing is a larger part of the answer, but students still have to be able to understand the instructor's communication and explain their answers.

As a side note, I sometimes see students trying to derive a result algebraically without understanding what the math represents, and I usually suggest they describe their approach conceptually before going through the technical details.

Answer 8

Communicating academic work is a key part of doing academic work. Communicating in different forms (symbolic, graphical, natural language prose, computer code, ...) is essential to engage with different audiences. As an effective communicator of academic work, you don't get to choose what is best for your audience, so you have to learn to be effective in multiple approaches.

Answer 9

In addition to the other good answers:

There are two somewhat separate questions here, or maybe three. One is about the way "natural" mathematical questions arise in an English environment. Another is about old-or-new English formulations of direct mathematical questions in a classroom setting. Another is about responses in either case.

For complaints about having to respond coherently, as though it demanded an inordinate level of English fluency: well, no, it doesn't. A very rudimentary style is sufficient, and perhaps even better than long compound-complex sentences that self-interrupts, etc. Hemingway, not Faulkner. But, yes, English-style sentences. Not strings of various nouns and verbs with neurotic periods and capitalization.

Comprehension is a harder question. But for kids wanting to work in the U.S., "even in Math or tech", the "secondary" skill of fluency in English can be a decisive competitive edge. There are lots of people with good technical background, but with communication problems.

Answer 10

Each unnecessary mathematical symbol has a universally-applicable English equivalent

Replacing symbols with words is easy. Your students can just learn a single phrase to replace each symbol, and use that whenever they would use the symbol. Avoiding symbols isn't the hard part of writing mathematics in English.

The hard part of writing proofs is writing with proper structure. Students need to present their ideas in a logical order, signpost how each idea relates to the next, and have an appropriate structure for their proof. Importantly, these skills are only slightly language-dependent. If a student can write a good proof in their native language, a word-for-word translation of that would probably be better than many proofs written by native English speakers.

Your course notes or textbooks contain many examples of the language used in proofs

Native speakers as well as non-native speakers often don't know how to write proofs. I tutor a mathematics course with a writing assignment, and our standard first-instance answer when students ask how to write proofs is that they should copy the style in the notes. Our university devotes two weeks of one of its courses just to writing proofs, and I've heard of a university with an entire course dedicated to mathematical writing.

Answer 11

I would answer:

"It is, nevertheless, an essential part of the skill you are here to learn. It is no different in principle to students with a weak mathematical background due to their previous education. As with any other challenging circumstance a student may face, specialist help is available for anyone having difficulties with any part of the curriculum and who needs to catch up on prerequisites."

If this is a common problem, there ought to be language tuition available specialising in remedial technical/mathematical English. Or they could get in touch with older/former students with a similar language/subject combination, find a study group, etc. But as regards "fairness", this is no different to the disadvantage faced by students who went to bad schools that didn't teach them calculus, or complex numbers, or whatever. Everyone has their own individual hurdles. For one student it's calculus, for another, English. Ask yourself, how would you answer someone who said they were not taught some prerequisite bit of mathematics at their previous school and it "wasn't fair"?

Answer 12

Consider the statement "Requiring students to exhibit a skill is unfair to students who don't have that skill."

The statement is true if the skill is not related to the course. It is unfair for a course in, say, discrete mathematics to require that students exhibit, say, the ability to swim. This is because one can do discrete mathematics even if one cannot swim.

The statement is false if the skill is related to the course. If is fair for a course in discrete mathematics to require that students exhibit the ability to count. This is because one cannot do discrete mathematics if one cannot count.

Is the ability to write mathematical proofs related to a course in discrete mathematics? Yes, if the focus is on theory; no, if the focus is on applications.

Is the ability to write in English related to a course in discrete mathematics? Yes, if the course is taught in English; no, if the course is not taught in English.

Tell your students that your course focuses on theory and is taught in English.

---

^{Edit: It has (correctly) been pointed out in the comments that even though one cannot do discrete mathematics if one cannot count, one can still do discrete mathematics if one cannot write in English. The reasoning I used in paragraphs 3 and 4 is not the same as the reasoning I used in paragraphs 2 and 3.}

Answer 13

Maybe something like:

"It is important to understand the motivation of why something is done as well as the underlying beliefs/assumptions the writer has made. The role of mathematics is to allow us to understand complicated relationships between aspects of reality, the symbols' role is to help reduce mistakes in logical reasoning and allow us to deduce counter-intuitive relations with a high degree of confidence. However seeing a formula, and understanding a formula, are very different things. The second of which is important for extending our understanding to more advanced mathematics and applying these formulas in new or innovative situations."

If you are working with computer scientists or physicists this ability to explain in words rather than just symbols is important since the mathematics is only a means to an end rather than a thing unto itself. For mathematics students you could find the counter argument that mathematics is separate from the rest of reality and so symbol pushing should be enough. But that fails to take into account that the mathematics that they are working with is being worked with in a fleshy ball of meat, living deep within reality. Something that doesn't work well with just symbols disconnected from reality and has a limited amount of memory. This leads to the need for any student to be able to chunk ideas together when they want to learn more advanced topics, this is much easier to do with verbal and intuitive explanations than just a bunch of formulas and relations.

As for the students who are really bad with English, get them to first write their response in English, then a second time in their native language and run it through google translate. You're not going to be testing them on their grammar so the mistakes google translate put in probably won't obscure the underlying understanding that much if it was there to begin with (assuming its a fairly well represented language). And since your language of instruction is English, then if they can't understand that they should be spending time improving their English, and this gives them an opportunity to practice using English in a highly specialised case which they probably wouldn't otherwise get.

Answer 14

I first would recommend that you talk to the writing support services people at your institution, such as the writing center or the center for teaching and learning. They will have some suggestions for you about how to approach this topic in a way that is constructive and useful for students. I'm not in math, but I do have students who have challenges with standard written English, both immigrant and native born.

Here are some ideas I would suggest.

1. I always say that one of my learning outcomes is that you will improve your skill in writing. This is not a grammar class, and writing mechanics will not be an important part of the grading, but what will be important is that you get a lot of practice in professional writing in our discipline.

2. You can also add oral expression to this, and your example of explaining on a walk is a nice way of expressing this. I would even consider adding something about that in your learning outcomes.

3. All the writing pedagogy people will tell you two things. One is that to get better at writing you have to write a lot. The second is that revision is essential. Create opportunities for your students to revise their writing.

4. Don't try to teach a grammar or composition course. You're not actually qualified for that besides the fact that you have math content to cover. If you can help students make small steps in their writing be happy with that.

5. Make sure you encourage students to take advantage of tutoring and other academic supports. Remind them every week that this is an option so that using them becomes de-stigmatized.

Since you are a fellow CUNY person I would strongly suggest that you see if you can get a WAC fellow to work with you. They are generally excellent and have good training.

---

Update I have been thinking a lot about your question. I think we were missing the point (largely) because the students weren't asking about writing but about writing in English. Here's what I've been thinking.

First I think you should reassure them that if they are doing math in their first language, that is normal. Being able to do math in a second language is the last or close to the last point of fluency.

What I might suggest is that you say they can write in their own language, but then translate into English if they prefer. I'd have them hand in both along with the Google translate version so that you know they went beyond that (which is the obvious first step). Your goal then, even though you won't exactly grade on it, is to help them get more fluent in English.I think you should stress to them how important this will be in the workforce. You can also encourage them to write directly in English and say that you'll grade it to the same standard as the translated submissions, not expecting perfection.

Answer 15

Rather than trying to respond to student reactions to that particular quote, it might be better from a sensitivity standpoint to simply give several examples with explanations, perhaps categorizing the examples into a few named types of poor exposition. Then, perhaps at some later time when students have had some experience in "writing mathematics" and getting feedback, you could present the Halmos quote in class and ask students to discuss what they think it means.

One type of poor exposition is excessive symbolism, which is discussed in Section 15 Resist Symbols of the Halmos paper (originally published in 1970 and reprinted many times since then). For example, one should resist the temptation to introduce notation in the statement of a theorem that is only needed to prove the theorem, such as "Theorem: Every point p in a bop-bee quasi-uniform space X has a proactive neighborhood." There is no need to include p or X into the statement of this theorem. However, I see this advice violated in just about every math paper I look at. Regarding excessive symbolism in general, see my answers to the Mathematics Stack Exchange questions Using the implies symbol in proofs and How formal or informal should math texts (written for different purposes) be?

Another type of poor exposition could be roughly identified with the linguistic term "structural ambiguity", and would include both incorrect and ambiguous uses of quantifiers, such as missing quantifiers, incorrect quantifier order, and what is sometimes called a hanging quantifier. It also includes more English-specific scope issues like "John sent a letter to each of his students" (Was the same letter sent to all students, or did each student get a personalized letter?), and "Every researcher of a company gave a presentation" (Did all of the researchers belong to the same company?), and "big truck driver" (Does this refer to a driver of big-trucks or to a big-driver of trucks?), although these more English-specific issues might be too tangential and overload your students with too much information (and thus handled on a case-by-case basis as they arise).

Still another type of poor exposition is the incorrect use of notation and terms, and I'm sure you can give many examples. One type of ambiguity that ordinarily doesn't cause problems, but which might be useful to mention in light of your course topics, is the use of "and" when an order is involved, such as "the ratio of p and q" and "the difference of p and q" and "the quotient of p and q" (example in my present line of work and my comments about it). However, I definitely recommend not falling into the rabbit hole of being obsessively correct for your students, and instead stick to the most significant concerns. Some things in the answers/comments to Abusing mathematical notation, are these examples of abuse? are what I consider as obsessively correct for your students, and very many of the things discussed in this critique of Rotman's book An Introduction to the Theory of Groups, written by the author of this book, are what I consider as obsessively correct for your students. Probably a better term than "obsessively correct" exists, but this is the best I can think of now.

For the most part the examples I've given are of a logical and mathematical character, and I think most of your focus should be on these types of examples, and not on grammar issues specific to English, although of course when grading student work you should point out grammar issues if you notice them (except those students who have a huge number of grammar issues in their writing, and for those students you may want to seek the advice of someone locally, as suggested at the end of @Elin's answer).

Answer 16

There's so many great answers here -- so I'm submitting my own so as to organize my favorite observations for future reference. My answer in future classes will be a combination of these insights:

• English proficiency was required, and tested, to enter the college.
• Writing in natural language is an integral part of the subject, as well as any academic work.
• The writing we do is in fairly plain, simple English. If one can write a cogent, simple proof in another language, then it's a fairly easy job to translate it.
• The hard part is really understanding the mathematics, not the notation.
• If someone is weak at writing, then it's good to get practice, which we provide.

Answer 17

If students have been assigned to write in English and they complain:

This seems unfair to students who have poor English skills

The correct response is

1. Some students learned English as a native language and other students learned some other native language, but everyone is expected to write in English. Yes, this is unfair.
2. Most of the money and power in the world is associated with using the English language. This is unfair to people who speak other languages, but nobody knows how to change it.
3. The best thing we are able to do about the situation is help students learn English.
4. Completing this course will help you learn English. For example, writing proofs in English will help you learn English.
5. Many students who are English language learners are successful in this course and in this discipline. (add examples)
6. The resources available to help you are ...

Answer 18

I agree with the students, and think that quote is used in the wrong context. I don't know why you'd discourage using standard notation. In my teaching I wanted the students to use the correct technical terms. More importantly, I tried to get them to understand that jargon for a complex idea is natural and not show-offy at all. It seems to me you're going out-of-your way to add English proficiency where it's not needed.

Jargon-wise (which I realize isn't the same as notation, but close) I was glad when students were finally comfortable replacing "rules for how the symbols have to be" with "syntax" or "the input value in the call" with "the argument" and so on (I taught lots of intro programming). I had plenty of international students and quickly realized that most plain English is chock full of idioms, complex tenses and other challenging bits. They're already stuck listening to my colloquial English explanations, which is torture enough. And it's not as if jargon is a crutch -- you have to understand it to use it properly.

That quote -- I think I know what it's about. Most new notations are bad. Alternate ones spring up and it takes a decade before the "obvious" best way takes hold. I've read papers on new ideas where they spent time on a notation which wasn't all that clear and wasn't used much. They could have simply written "let A-prime be a compressed version of A which adheres to the previously discussed requirements". I think the quote is saying: "if you have a new idea, just say it. A good notation will come much later once the idea is explored".

Answer 19

Short and to the point

This is not unfair. The college has a TOEFL requirement for enrollment, and any student work will be graded in English only.

Algo, the guidelines ask for simple English, so it's beneficial to people with no mastery of English.

Answer 20

This quote is not about English but about avoiding symbolism when natural language can be used. Paul Halmos was born Hungarian, and the best way to understand this is to imagine him discussing math in Hungarian with another Hungarian born prominent mathematician of his era, such as Paul Erdős or John von Neumann. And this quote is generally misunderstood when applied to students.

Students (and mathematicians) should acquire proficiency both in using symbolism and in avoiding it. When one is unsure if an argument is valid one should be able to write it symbolically and that may help in verifying whether the argument is valid. Then when one wants to communicate an argument to someone else, avoiding excessive use of symbols helps.

Students should be encouraged to experiment with writing the same argument with more and with less symbolism. Students who are less proficient in the natural language required in the homework would have the added value of acquiring more experience in the use of that language.

Answer 21

I've had a small number that apparently needed every course lecture translated by a friend, and couldn't communicate to me directly

If they can't communicate in even the most basic English, I have a difficult time understanding how they could pass TOEFL to begin with, unless your university's entry mark for TOEFL is in negative territory.

Anyway, you seem to think that this is something that's your responsibility and something you can and should do something about. It's not. If students are coming into an English university, with courses taught in English, then they had better bloody well be able to keep up with the English that the instructors are using.

The simplest way to explain this is by turning it around on them, so:

What's the best, shortest response to student criticism that "It's unfair to expect writing in English"?

"If I had chosen to study at an institution that uses <student's native language> for instruction, and I lacked a fundamental grasp of that language, would it be valid for me to claim that it is "unfair" that I cannot understand the instruction being given?"

If they answer "no", they have defeated their own argument.
If they answer "yes", get them to articulate why, because either they are just being difficult, or their reasoning will be unsound and easily defeated.

Answer 22

The original slide doesn't push the reader to use English. Pretend that you are explaining the subject to a friend. This pretense could be done in the favorite language the two of you share. It doesn't have to be English. There are many languages that are just as well suited as English for this purpose.

Now the question becomes how to communicate with the professor. If the best language for this purpose is English, then that's the language to use. This may not be fair, but it's useful.

It may put some people at a disadvantage. They may have to work harder to polish their English communication skills. This could serve them well later on. Another solution is to find a different professor who teaches the same course, but in the student's first language.

Answer 23

This is barely an answer, but having students with language issues is hardly new, and your college probably has resources for such students. You should locate them, and guide your students to them.

You should look into what language assistance resources are available for students, particularly ESL students, at your community college -- maybe there is a writing lab or something.

If you can locate the resource, you should have a discussion about this issue with the person that heads this resource, and work out a plan for how to bring these students to a higher level in your course.

Answer 24

I would turn this on its head: 1) English is a basic skill you need in all paths of life - especially but not only in an English speaking country. 2) Some natural language is specifically needed to communicate about math and in your course that is English. So English is a two-fold requirement, thus it is fair to use it and request using it and in addition, using it also supports acquiring and improving the general skill of communicating in English. Languages are far better acquired if they are actually trained in different settings than solely in language courses. So you do your students a favour in helping them improve their English alongside learning math.

I've studied in a country where English is a foreign language and yet the same argument was provided there (university-level/college) for why the majority of classes was in English. Sure there were nay-sayers, too, and they were guaranteed enough courses held in the country's official language to pass their Bachelor's degree without having to go to an English language course, but few used that offer and there it was English or official native language of the country which likely in your case is English, too.

Answer 25

This is an overreach, but I suggest that instead of just formulating a counter-response, you spend a class or two familiarizing the students with the required terms/words in their English sense (rather than the strictly mathematical sense). Many non-native English speakers struggle to build an intuition for slightly abstract math, because they have never used the words manifold, convergence, degenerate etc. in their daily life.

Exposing students to these terms in the preparatory part of the course will help allay anxiety and also implicitly convey that appropriate terminology/syntax is required in the course. Maybe that can be made explicit as well. If the course schedule doesn't permit these extra hours, you could consider circulating handouts and having a non-graded quiz on the same.