My talk from the 2016 NCTM Annual Meeting is online. I won’t claim that this is a good talk in absolute terms or that this talk will be good for your interests. I only know that, given *my* interests, this is the best talk I have ever given.

My premise is that we’re all sympathetic towards students who dislike mathematics, this course they’re forced to take. We all have answers to the question, “What does it take to interest students in mathematics?” Though those answers are often implicit and unspoken, they’re powerful. They determine the experiences students have in our classes.

I lay out three of the most common answers I hear from teachers, principals, policymakers, publishers, etc., two of which are “make math real world” and “make math relevant.” I offer evidence that those answers are incomplete and unreliable.

Then I dive into research from Willingham, Kasmer, Roger & David Johnson, Mayer, et al., presenting stronger strategies for creating interest in mathematics education.

My call to action will only make sense if you watch the talk, but I hope you’ll take it seriously, give it a try, and let us know how it goes.

**BTW.** I’ve already received one email asking me, “Wait? Are you saying *never* make math real world?” No. My principles for instructional design often *lead me* to design applied math tasks. But “make math real world” isn’t a great *first-order* principle because, as a category, “real world” is poorly defined and subjective to the student.

**Featured Comment**

This was a really helpful talk in illuminating why it doesnâ€™t work to simply drop a mundane math task into some sort of â€œrelevantâ€ or â€œreal-worldâ€ context. And it was great that you didnâ€™t stop at deconstructing these unhelpful approaches, but instead went on to share specific ways to think, steps to take, and tools to use to increase engagement and thoughtfulness in our math classrooms. A very natural follow-up to the famous â€œMath class needs a makeoverâ€ talk.