Cover of The Moore Method

Robert Lee Moore was a mathematician and teacher who spent the majority of his long career at the University of Texas at Austin. As a mathematician he is best known for his work in linear point set topology. As an instructor of mathematics he is known for a method of teaching that often bears his name (The Moore Method) or is sometimes called the “Texas Method” since several of his colleagues at the University of Texas were converts to and proponents of his way of teaching.

Published by the Mathematical Association of America as MAA Notes #75, The Moore Method brings together four expert researchers and university-level teachers of mathematics to describe their experiences and offer practical advice on how to implement this particular style of learner-centered instruction.

What is the Moore Method?

The Moore Method is a form of inquiry-based learning in which students are given minimal guidance and instruction and then must extend what they have been given to discover and prove new (to them) theorems in mathematics. Moore developed his ideas on how best to teach mathematics while at the University of Pennsylvania and used the method throughout his career at Texas from 1920 until his forced retirement (!) in 1969.

In Moore’s own version, he would provide a few clearly stated theorems and then assign students to solve problems (proofs generally) by only using what had been given, without collaboration or the use of any textbooks or outside materials of any kind. During class periods, students got credit by going to the board and presenting their work to the class as a whole at which time the class would discuss the problems, although students were not allowed to suggest improvements to another student’s work. Students got credit for being first to present the correct solution to a problem, after which, no one else could get credit for it.

A “How-to” Manual for the Moore Method

The “pure” Moore Method (minimal information, no lecture, no collaboration, no consulting of textbooks) seems rather harsh to many people. The criticism that it fosters too much competition, induces a “kill or be killed” classroom atmosphere, and favors strong students over weaker ones, are valid. However, rarely do any of the authors implement such a pure Moore Method in their own classes. The basic principles of minimal guidance, rare lectures, personal struggle and discovery, and presentation at the board are the common themes that seem to define the Moore Method.

The authors go into some detail describing exactly what the Moore Method looks like in one of their classes, how they prepare for teaching such a class, and how they each modify and adjust the class depending on the student makeup. Details are provided on how to grade such a class, how develop and select a set of notes (but not a textbook!) to support such a class, and on what problems and opportunities to look out for along the way.

The book concludes with a chapter discussing research into the effectiveness of the method (contributed by a different group of authors) and a useful collection of “Frequently Asked Questions” about the Moore Method. The main authors also generously provide as examples some of their own syllabuses, course notes, handouts and exams from a variety of courses they have taught using the method.

Although the majority of math instruction at the college level still is presented in lecture format (somewhere around 75%), a small but growing number of professors are moving in the direction of a more constructivist approach. This is one area where higher education is clearly trailing K-12 education, which has moved strongly toward learner-centered methods and mastery learning in recent years. With the work of the Legacy of R. L. Moore Project, more and more college professors are learning about and considering trying something “Moore style.”

The Mixed Legacy or R. L. Moore

Moore is not everyone’s favorite example of a fine mathematics teacher in action. He was a lifelong racist and refused to teach African American students. In this respect he was clearly out of touch with the changing times of the 60′s. Even so, he was far ahead of the curve with respect to developing and refining a method of instruction in which the student must take responsibility for his or her own learning and construct their own knowledge and understanding of a subject.

References

The Moore Method; Charles A. Coppin, W. Ted Mahavier, E. Lee May and G. Edgar Parker; Mathematical Association of America, Washington, DC: 2009