Moons ago, while attending an NCTM conference, I received a tote bag with a slogan that read something like Do Math and You Can Do Anything! if my memory hadn’t deserted me. I suppose most attendees or geeks then were proud carrying their complimentary bag around to promote their favorite subject.
Today, it’s not uncommon to spot math-positive slogans or motivational messages like Math is everywhere! and Math Rocks! Or even acronyms-turned-mathematical such as MATH (Make America Think Harder!) and MAGA (Make America Geometric Again!).
When I brought the low-quality bag home, my wife commented that the “math-is-everything” message is rubbish or even sounds pretty “elitist,” probably hinting to me that we, math people, are quasi-useless in most things practical other than gossiping about numbers and their relationships.
Over the years, with one foot on teaching and another on editing, I realize that most math graduates, especially math teachers or educators, are often an “uncreative” or risk-averse lot even if a good proportion of them hold a relatively safe but oft-unexciting job, each drawing a decent salary.
From Teaching to Publishing
Even those who’ve left teaching to join publishing as a math editor, the transition is anything but smooth, simply because teaching skills aren’t transferable to editing (or rewriting) skills. In fact, it’s quasi-axiomatic to say that most math teachers struggle writing a grammatically correct email, much less feel competent or confident enough to editing an ill-written or half-baked manuscript.
Of course, with the double-edge AI, it’s going to be harder to differentiate between fake and genuine math editors, especially those who’d bought or used faked degrees to secure an editorial position, who could now deliver an AI-assisted or better edited manuscript than most senior editors or managing editors, who might condescendingly think that generative AI is only reserved for second- or third-rate editors.
I couldn’t disagree with a number of small or family-owned publishers that comment that the better math editors are often those who’ve quasi-zero school teaching experience, compared to their peers who’ve formally taught or tutored a number of years, which seems like an odd observation or conclusion to outsiders. Most people incorrectly assume that ex-math teachers or tutors would be a better bet or choice to be recruited as math editors.
Math Educators Are Poor Marketers
It’s no surprise that 99.99% of math educators are lousy at sales and marketing, which is often used as a simplistic excuse to justify or rationalize why their books or courses fail to attract a wider audience.
This is why I think math teachers and tutors ought to take up some discreet projects or gigs in the private sector to brush up their writing, reviewing, and presentation skills.
In general, the school milieu or academia tends to be a sanctuary for mediocre math teachers or educators with average communication skills (presentation, writing, editing, …). A few years’ stint out of the relatively cozy school system, say in competitive hire-or-fire publishing, would enhance their writing and editing skills a few folds.
The ruthless jungle of publishing—with all its politicking, backstabbing, and ghostwriting—serves as a fertile ground to improving someone’s editing, writing, presenting, and coaching skills, especially if they desire to venture into full-time writing and consulting in later years.
Creatively & wisely yours
© Yan Kow Cheong, July 21, 2025.
