California's Controversial Math Overhaul Focuses on Equity (latimes.com) 308
A plan to reimagine math instruction for 6 million California students has become ensnared in equity and fairness issues -- with critics saying proposed guidelines will hold back gifted students and supporters saying it will, over time, give all kindergartners through 12th-graders a better chance to excel. From a report: The proposed new guidelines aim to accelerate achievement while making mathematical understanding more accessible and valuable to as many students as possible, including those shut out from high-level math in the past because they had been "tracked" in lower level classes. The guidelines call on educators generally to keep all students in the same courses until their junior year in high school, when they can choose advanced subjects, including calculus, statistics and other forms of data science.
Although still a draft, the Mathematics Framework achieved a milestone Wednesday, earning approval from the state's Instructional Quality Commission. The members of that body moved the framework along, approving numerous recommendations that a writing team is expected to incorporate. The commission told writers to remove a document that had become a point of contention for critics. It described its goals as calling out systemic racism in mathematics, while helping educators create more inclusive, successful classrooms. Critics said it needlessly injected race into the study of math. The state Board of Education is scheduled to have the final say in November.
Although still a draft, the Mathematics Framework achieved a milestone Wednesday, earning approval from the state's Instructional Quality Commission. The members of that body moved the framework along, approving numerous recommendations that a writing team is expected to incorporate. The commission told writers to remove a document that had become a point of contention for critics. It described its goals as calling out systemic racism in mathematics, while helping educators create more inclusive, successful classrooms. Critics said it needlessly injected race into the study of math. The state Board of Education is scheduled to have the final say in November.
2+2=5 if we say it is (Score:5, Insightful)
People learn at different rates. Lowest common denominator serves no one.
Re: (Score:3)
And War is Peace, Freedom is Slavery, Ignorance is Strength.
Report to Room 101 for remedial math.
Re:2+2=5 if we say it is (Score:4, Insightful)
It's not lowest common denominator.
Sometimes kids don't get one particular aspect of maths, but are fine with other parts. They get held back, demoted to a remedial group. Some kids just need a bit of extra tuition to catch up. Sometimes there are temporary problems in their lives.
I was held back at school because I had an undiagnosed medical problem. Fortunately I overcame it, not least because when I moved from middle to secondary school they didn't send over all my details and there was a reset, slate wiped clean and put in the middle ranking group for everything.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Sometimes kids don't get one particular aspect of maths, but are fine with other parts.
And once they get past the part they find hard, they'll be slowed down to keep the kids who have trouble with every aspect of math from falling behind.
Re: (Score:2)
Some kids just need a bit of extra tuition to catch up.
They probably don't need to actually pay extra tuition but if the extra tuition comes along with extra tutoring I guess that might help. 8^)
Re:2+2=5 if we say it is (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm pretty sure the OP isn't from the US, and is thus using different terminology. The first clue was the term "maths."
Re: (Score:3)
Do whatever you want. But do not hold back advanced students.
It has been a complaint for 50 years that just a fraction of the money spent making sure every last student can count change, used to accellerate advanced students, would pay off big time.
The words change with education fad shifts, but the core idea remains.
There is nothing noble, and something suicidal on a societal level, that sacrifices excellence to raise up the mean just a tad.
Equity as in nukes equalizing cities (Score:3)
1+1 = YOU'RE A RACIST! (Score:5, Insightful)
And the square root of 144 is YOU HOMOPHOBE!
Five percent of 100 is WHITE SUPREMACY!
A squared times B squared = PATRIARCHY!
Yes. These insane bastards are hell-bent on turning the next generation into ignorant, non-functional sheep who depend on the government for everything.
And don't know any better because they weren't educated.
Re: (Score:3)
But how is the lowest common denominator calculated? Do you use the "old math" or the "new math" method? 8^)
A convoy moves at the pace of its slowest member (Score:3)
Slowing down the more interested or more talented serves no one also. That's the effect of putting everyone in one class.
How many people here had the experience of having to sit still and quietly while a "peer" failed even to stumble through reading something aloud, when all you wanted was to race to the end?
Some people do not have math brains. They should not be a millstone around the necks of people who do.
Re: (Score:2)
Answer: What is a politician, Alex?
Obvious Questions for $500, please.
final countdown (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:final countdown (Score:5, Informative)
Next step is mandatory lobotomies for smarter kids or something like it. Because they obviously violate the dumber ones by setting an example the dumber ones can never hope to reach. See also "Harrison Bergeron" by Kurt Vonnegut.
Blame The Students (Score:2)
Maybe the problem is the teachers. I know when I was in school some teachers knew how to teach math and some didn't. Taking the time to use basic concepts and tying it in with analogies helps but not all teachers know how to do that. They parrot crap out of some book and watch as the kids eyes glaze over from confusion.
Blaming the students for the teachers inequities sounds about right for this day and age.
Re: (Score:2)
Sounds like we should "blame the book" as well. Teachers, book, did I miss anything? Society?
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Sounds like we should "blame the book" as well. Teachers, book, did I miss anything? Society?
Mathematics itself needs to be examined through the prism of critical race theory. If you do that, you can see numerous cases of racism - for example a bunch of old white Greek people like Euclid have introduced "axioms", which you must take as granted. This is a clear attempt by the patriarchy to control the subjugated races and enslave them into thinking that geometry must conform to European cultural values. Don't even get me started on the "theorem - demonstration" pattern, pushed by such European colon
Re: Blame The Students (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
The problem is schools can't get rid of or discipline children who don't want to be there. So the teachers are teaching to the lowest common denominator and everyone suffers.
Re: (Score:3)
Children don't want to be in classes that run at the wrong speed, make assumptions about prior material learned or have teachers that cannot be understood.
You need classes for all groups not just one.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
So the teachers are teaching to the lowest common denominator and everyone suffers.
I am puzzled by this. Is every high school student taking the same program in the USA?
Where I live, the pupils who are strong at and interested in mathematics take a program with 8 or 9 hours of mathematics per week, and they know how to calculate integrals (including the difficult ones) at the end of high school. Others take programs with 6 or 4 or 2 hours of mathematics per week, depending on their insight and motivation, and have different objectives (e.g. accounting) to reach by the end of the progra
Re: (Score:3)
Why do supposedly smart, well educated people (like those, for instance, in a forum that's supposed to be dedicated to science and technology) not know how to spell "forum" reliably?
Yeah, typographical errors. Proof-reading....
I never claimed to be smart or well educated (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe the problem is the teachers. I know when I was in school some teachers knew how to teach math and some didn't. Taking the time to use basic concepts and tying it in with analogies helps but not all teachers know how to do that.
What you suggest is almost exactly what the new proposal suggests. They don't use the language of "blame," more of "this is how it is, and we can improve it."
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Not from my observations. Most people are just not smart enough to understand even simple mathematics. Very simple things can be drilled, but anything a bit more advanced, the effort to drill it becomes prohibitive. The problem is that most people are not able to follow the abstraction step involved where real-world problems are transformed into an abstract (mathematical) view and then transformed back after a mathematical operation. Hence they never understand what the idea behind the whole thing is. Quite
Re: (Score:2)
You are a moron. Unless and until you admit it to yourself, you will never be able to do anything about it.
Re: (Score:3)
Ever heard bout droplets? Apparently not. Stupid fuck.
Grade on a curve (Score:2)
What? (Score:3)
Call me shocked, but I thought schools worked this way all over the world. At least they did in Canada, when I was a kid.
Re:What? (Score:4, Insightful)
Thank goodness it's not! My oldest is a math genius (just scored 97th percentile on the 9th grade PSAT math test) - he was able due to his gifted status to take two math classes a year (one per semester) in 7th and 8th grade, and in 9th grade he's taking 12th grade precalc. If he'd been held back due to laws like this he would be completely disinterested in pursuing math as a career since he would come to hate school and math specifically. He kept complaining about the other classes, but math kept him interested, and now next year he'll be in 2 honors classes and one AP class (Calculus).
It's a GREAT thing that smart kids can excel beyond their classmates, and I think we have plenty of options for them to do so. Where we fall down is those students who are behind the curve - the ones who learn slowly, in "unusual" ways that teachers aren't familiar or comfortable with, or students who simply don't care. Those students we still need to figure out
Re: (Score:2)
From what I've read they can still have special options for very gifted students, it's more towards other side of the bell curve where they can't just jettison those students into a separate class and allow them to fall behind.
There have been studies that show this works, for a variety of reasons. The students don't feel like there is an expectation of low achievement, and their classmates who are doing a bit better help them out. Meanwhile it has minimal effect on the very gifted ones, who aren't about to
Re: (Score:3)
I usually hate to invoke Jon Katz here. But it's actually appropriate in this case. There's another advantage to advanced/gifted/honors/AP/IB/etc. classes. They give the kids who are actually interested in learning, getting into a good college, and preparing for it, the opportunity to separate themselves out from the bullies and burnouts who are only there because the truancy laws say they have to be. And it's probably even more of a benefit than the "advanced" course material itself. Because... let's
Re:What? (Score:5, Interesting)
This isn't going to hold your son back.
Yes it will. It's going to mix kids of all abilities in the same classroom. Then that classroom will only be able to move as fast as the average student. The whole point of streaming is to let the kids who learn faster cover more of the material by grouping them with the other fast learners.
Moves this like in California, changes to the specialized high schools in New York, and the changes to the Ontario streaming system are all pushing for the same thing: a narrowing the bell curve by holding back the fast learners so they don't get ahead of the slow learners. It a disgrace.
Re: (Score:2)
You think the answer to advancing civilization is pulling people back from excelling like that, instead of trying to get more people to succeed like that? For shame. You'
Re: (Score:3)
Call me shocked, but I thought schools worked this way all over the world. At least they did in Canada, when I was a kid.
That's not how it worked for me in Ontario. First year of high school (Grade 9) we had to choose between Academic (university stream) and Applied (college / workforce stream). What California is proposing is not streaming kids until their "junior year" which is our Grade 11.
Sadly Ontario is starting down same road [ctvnews.ca] for the same BS reasons: "The practice has been a subject of much debate, with critics arguing that the streaming process has disproportionately impacted racialized and low-income students, resu
Equality of Access not of Approach (Score:2)
Call me shocked, but I thought schools worked this way all over the world. At least they did in Canada, when I was a kid.
They didn't use to work that way in the UK. Starting at age 11, when you entered Secondary School, you were "streamed" by ability. Everyone did the same subjects up to age 14 but the streams covered different amounts of material in different depths. You reduced your subjects slightly to 9 or 10 for the exams taken at 16 years old which also had different difficulty tiers. Those taking the top tiers and getting good grades went on to take A' level exams.
The huge benefit of this system was that we did cal
Re: (Score:2)
Knowing Better (former history teacher) just released a video about this (tracking), and all of the other stuff it's entangled with in U.S. educational policy history on YouTube. It's long, but informative.
But no, it's not universal. In Belgium, for instance, you essentially select a major at the beginning of middle school and take a collection of courses related to it. During my year as an exchange student there as a sophomore I was in "Sciences-maths-langues" (science-math-language), and took a very set o
Re: (Score:2)
And even in the US, if you go to a rural or low-funded school, this may not be true until you get to Calculus. For example, my tiny school (we had about 450 kids 7th-12th grade in total), we had basically everyone had to take Geometry and Algebra I. That was that base. The Vocational School kids (tradesmen, Future Farmers of America, etc) only need that level of math to do their measurements and all that, the girls had the "Home Economics" version of that where they learned how to cook, sew, and all that st
Re: (Score:3)
US schools have had a tendency to divide students up and give them different instruction.
Here's my experience. When I was a wee lad, back in the '70s, we got separated into tracks around seventh grade (that's as 13 year olds). We had tracks for math, science, English, and maybe a few other subjects.
I don't remember if and when my kids got into tracks. Probably about the same time, maybe a year earlier. In elementary school (grades K-5), you tend to be in a single classroom with the same students for all subjects. That makes it difficult to teach different kids at different levels. In middle sch
There's only one way to learn math (Score:2)
The only way to learn math is through practice. Kids need to be taught and drilled the basic rules. Leaving it up to them to "discover" patterns is disastrous. "Investigating, connecting, and reasoning" for kids in K through 5 is ridiculous.
Worse, each new math concept builds on what was learned previously, so if your foundation is shaky, you're really screwed at the more advanced levels.
Unfortunately, rote teaching, practice and drilling are un-sexy. The USA is going to continue to slide in world r
Re: (Score:2)
There's only one way to learn math
That's silly. There's *plenty* of ways to learn math: by induction, by deduction, verbally, visually, by practical example, by analogy...
The only way to learn math is through practice.
That's as silly as saying "the only way to fly is to not hit the ground" - it's a category error that ignores things like flapping wings, jet engines, helium balloons etc...
You can't learn *anything* without practice of some kind, but "practice" isn't a method for learning math. People are talking about *what* kids should practice. Nobody is dumb enough to believe people a
Re: (Score:2)
We could always get them a copy of Math Blaster [wikipedia.org] for their Commodores.
Re: (Score:2)
OK, OK, if you want to be picky... There's one thing required for young kids to learn math (practice and learning of the basics until they're second-nature) that this curriculum seems to ignore.
Nobody is dumb enough to believe people are talking about teaching math without practice of any kind!
Having had three kids who've all graduated from high school, I can tell you that there is a serious lack of drill and practice in the math curriculum where I live.
They just need to tailor the curriculum (Score:2)
This has nothing to do with racial equality (Score:5, Interesting)
In short this is a good thing supported by research and skilled educators. But I'm sure the culture Warriors will come out the woodwork to turn this into a political issue.
could be a surprise (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Same for me here in the US - with 4th grade came long division by hand, etc. and 5th grade introduced real basic algebra, then 6th was more real basic algebra. Then in 7th on, it started differentiating. How different it could get depended on if you selected into the then-new (at least for us) IB program, in which case up thru calc2 was possible, for most schools in my county it topped out at college level algebra and geometry
diffeing experiences (Score:2)
this is a system which I have been going through in Switzerland and which seems to work pretty well.
Maybe it's because I went through at a different time (I grew up in the 80s) or maybe it's because of cantons' differences (GE). But I didn't like the way maths was taugh in Switzerland: I found it stupidly boring.
An excessively large amount time was spent on some "new maths" bullshit (imported straight from failed ioditic concept in the US - I learned later while reading Feynman's biographies) like insisting on weird bases. Yes, I get it: there are other numerical systems. That's something that somebody sh
Re: (Score:2)
And I'd still disagree. I'm very thankful to the teach who saw how bored and unchallenged I was and got me tested for the gifted program in grades 4-5, that class was so m
Won't fly in Silicon Valley (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Works for the leaders, not those they depend on (Score:2)
Exactly. California will be a bonanza for very expensive private schools and "learning pods" for the talented kids of rich people, while everyone else will go to garbage school for future servants. Hooray for equity!
OK, the CTO will put his kids there, but what about the entire team below him? Sorry, tell a programmer earning 300k a year he can spend 80k per kid in California or take a 250k a year job in MA, OR, WA or CO and they'll just go elsewhere.
Can Silicon Valley thrive if they're having to pay engineers a half a million or hire no one over 30? There are many jokes and tropes about ageism and how they're already doing that, but it's exaggerated. Those 30-50 year olds in big tech are keeping the place afloat
Educational Research has the Answers People! (Score:2)
Education is one of the most researched topics on planet earth and guess what, "We already have the answer to this math conundrum."
Here is the list of meta-analysis
https://visible-learning.org/h... [visible-learning.org]
Assuming we have a normal child from a non-shattered home the #1 lessons from the meta-analysis is "Piagetian Programs" which yields an effect size of 1.28 which is 3.2 years of growth in one year. The effect size of .4 is one years of grown for the uninitiated.
So what is Piaget? Better yet, who is Piaget?
Piag
This is not new (Score:2)
The attempt to equalize outcomes is not new. People should re-acquaint themselves with the short story from Kurt Vonnegut, called Harrison Bergeron [tnellen.com] (1961).
These things are couched in very feel-good terms. And we should let as many people have second chances, and third chances, and definitely have a system that lets anyone and everyone achieve their potential, because that is good for society. Societies which exclude would-be achievers due to gender, ethnicity, whatever, are harming themselves.
This however
Bah. Give me the old days. (Score:5, Interesting)
Let the smart kids skip grades. Let the middle ones plod along. Relegate the dumb kids to their own classes.
Then we get scientists, engineers, doctors, a whole middle layer devoted to keeping complicated things working properly, and a bunch of people that feed and clothe the whole society.
If everybody thinks they can be a computer programmer, a whole bunch of people are failing in slow motion, and nobody's picking fruit or making kickass hamburgers.
May lead to _more_ "inequity" (Score:2)
Eliminating tracking seems likely to lead to more "inequity" in math.
The less math inclined (or interested or motivated) kids will get lost very early - by fourth grade they will be be lost and lack the tools to learn the more advanced concepts being taught in the "average" math class. These students will be horribly disserved and usually severely "math handicapped" for life. They would be much better served by actually learning at least the basics -- even though they might still be doing "third grade math"
The bias is in thinking academics top priority (Score:3)
Will actually increase the divide (Score:2)
Currently a poor but hard working student can get ahead in life in a public school. Yes, I know it is rare, but it is possible. The more effort you put in your studies, the better you get.
However with the proposal, only those families who can afford private tutors, private schools, or have resources for home schooling will have the same luxury. And excelling at public schools as a poor student will be an even rarer achievement.
We need to make sure "diamonds in the rough" are discovered early, and get the be
Feewingz (Score:3)
While the US rides the crazy train, Asia took charge of the 21st century.
Will China nuke us? Never. A country filled with blubbering crybaby morons is no threat to them.
Show real world applications (Score:2)
Nations that compete with the USA rate this (Score:2)
Re:I can't believe this white supremacy (Score:5, Informative)
When news of this proposed standard came out, I read the actual standard because I wanted to see if it really was that bad. Things were reported like, "Saying an answer is 'wrong' is racist. There is no right and wrong in math, just shades of truth." These kinds of things are worrisome.
So I read a good chunk of the proposal, and I couldn't find anything like that. Instead, I found their point was that anyone has the capability of learning math, and so we should be teaching it to everyone. If people aren't learning it, then that's a problem with our teaching methods.
I also found that instead of getting rid of calculus, they are suggesting that you learn calculus as a Junior or Senior in high school. This seems fine to me.
The only thing I wish they'd put more emphasis on is statistics, because if you don't understand statistics, the modern world is a very confusing place.
Re: (Score:3)
I also found that instead of getting rid of calculus, they are suggesting that you learn calculus as a Junior or Senior in high school. This seems fine to me.
Does the curriculum for grades 1-10 have the appropriate foundational education for kids in grades 11-12 to actually succeed in a calculus class? Because if not, then the notion that any significant portion of juniors and seniors will be able take a calculus class is just a fantasy.
Re: (Score:2)
Does the curriculum for grades 1-10 have the appropriate foundational education for kids in grades 11-12 to actually succeed in a calculus class?
That is the goal, but I am not enough of an expert to know whether they reached their goal or not.
Re: (Score:2)
That is the goal, but I am not enough of an expert to know whether they reached their goal or not.
Reading (mostly skimming) through chapter 8 (about grades 9-12), a couple things stick out:
First off, they define three different possible "pathways" for grades 9-10, which seems completely in opposition to goal of a "common ninth- and tenth- grade experience." It sounds like they envision that some high schools will only provide a single pathway while others will provide multiple ones -- but it seems incredibly obvious that that's going to put students on different tracks.
I did not dig into what was inclu
In Australia, the course hasn't changed ... (Score:3)
in 40 years since I did it. (I have been helping my kids.)
Which is a problem, because the world has changed with the advent of computers.
So they work on quite difficult symbolic integrations. But absolutely nothing on numerical methods (and getting the rounding errors correct) which is far more useful in the modern world.
For non-specialist students, there is almost nothing on how to really build a spreadsheet model. That again is a far more useful skill than any calculus or more advanced algebra.
And then
Re: In Australia, the course hasn't changed ... (Score:2)
I'm not sure numerical approximation and error estimation for calculus is really suited to a comprehensive high school curriculum. You need to grasp the analytical approach first.
Re: I can't believe this white supremacy (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Not just painful, but it frustrates the shit out of them. If your class cannot match a student's pace they start to get miserable and angry, and when kids are miserable and angry they act out, which disrupts it for everyone.
Kumon (Score:2)
Re:I can't believe this white supremacy (Score:5, Insightful)
Which planet did you go to school on?
Here on Earth, here's how "everyone learns calculus in 11th grade" works:
The entire class has to stop and wait for the kids who are genuinely overwhelmed - be it because they're smart-but-poor-and-hungry or, you know, because they're just fucking dumb, both types exist, it doesn't matter - to catch up, because the teacher's job rests on whether 79% or 80% of their students score a passing grade on the statewide achiev^H^H^H^H^H^H (whoops, can't have achievements, that's ableist) "performance" tests. The teacher, being a rational creature who understands how to make sure their family's bread remains buttered, spends the bulk of their time helping along little Jethro and Barbie.
The bright kids are left bored out of their minds, and the "solution" presented by these absolute shitstains is to suggest the bright kids do after-school activities if they want to actually learn. Like, that's great for the 1% who genuinely love math the way some kids love music or acting or sports, but what about the 25% or so who are really gifted at math and would like to do more with it, but aren't so passionate about it that they want to give up more of their precious dwindling free time to pursue it? What about the 50% who aren't necessarily great at math but could certainly learn a lot more if the class wasn't being stopped every two minutes to re-re-remind little Goobclot that "x" was actually a number, not just a letter?
Look, I absolutely agree that it's bad to write kids off as dumb. But Harrison Bergeron is not included in the "Utopian Literature of the 20th Century" curriculum for a reason. There's a flipside, and none of these "one size fits all" proposals does anything to convince me that the proponents have actually seriously considered the other side of the coin.
Re: (Score:2)
In high school I was given the opportunity to test out of a few courses and work on other projects instead. These were overseen by the teacher for the course I tested out of, and required little work on their part (student submits proposal, agrees with teacher on goals and deadlines, turns in completed work). If students were given this opportunity starting in middle school, I think it'd be to everyone's benefit. Bored students wouldn't be in class to disrupt it, freeing up time for the teacher to focus on
Re: (Score:3)
The teacher, being a rational creature who understands how to make sure their family's bread remains buttered, spends the bulk of their time helping along little Jethro and Barbie.
We wouldn't even be doing this if it were for little Jethro and Barbie. It's for little D'Andre and Jaleesha. They basically come right out and say so (all the blather about "white supremacy").
I mean, it's a terrible idea no matter who it's supposedly for, but let's be honest.
The Royal Road of Euclid of Alexandria (Score:2)
There is your problem, right there - this is a false premise, which leads to a poor outcome.
Ptolemy 1st Soter, first king of Egypt after the death of Alexander the Great, personally sponsored Euclid, but found Euclid's seminal work, the Elements, too difficult to study, so he asked Euclid to show him an easier way to master it. According to the philosopher Proclus, Euclid famously quipped: "S
Re: (Score:3)
There is your problem, right there - this is a false premise, which leads to a poor outcome.
I don't think it is a false premise, you are wrong. Going through algebra and geometry truly takes work, but it's not particularly difficult. The proposal cites some research on the topic, if you click through to the introduction [ca.gov]:
"The research is overwhelmingly clear that powerful mathematics classrooms thrive when students feel a sense of agency (a willingness to engage in the discipline, based in a belief in progress through engagement) and an understanding that the intellectual authority in mathematics rests in mathematical reasoning itself (in other words, that mathematics makes sense) (Boaler, 2019 a, b; Boaler, Cordero & Dieckmann, 2019; Anderson, Boaler & Dieckmann, 2018; Schoenfeld, 2014)...Research is also clear that all students are capable of becoming powerful mathematics learners and users (Boaler, 2019a, c). This notion runs counter to many students’ ideas about school mathematics. "
Re: (Score:2)
Thanks for the very interesting citation. Nevertheless, I find it hard to believe "that ALL students are capable of becoming powerful mathematics learners and users." [emphasis mine] I hope I am wrong.
The question then becomes, how to create "powerful mathematics classrooms"? My opinion is that it is 90% the teacher, and 10% the Mathematics Framework. Rewriting guidelines and frameworks is a distraction which only gives an illusion of progress.
The real work is finding and retaining good teachers, and g
Re:I can't believe this white supremacy (Score:4, Insightful)
My local school district is removing all AP math courses because they believe a disparity in race in the students represents racism, and/or they just don't want to have to look at the situation. I know the precursors to this sort of racist policy when I see it, and documents that espouse a trifecta of equity, inclusivity, and diversity are fully intended to pull crabs back down into the boiling bucket.
Re: (Score:2)
Instead, I found their point was that anyone has the capability of learning math, and so we should be teaching it to everyone. If people aren't learning it, then that's a problem with our teaching methods.
That's a fascinating assertion. Maybe it's even true. It seems unlikely to me that everyone learns all aspects of math at the same rate. Did the standard cite any evidence to support their proposal that everyone can learn all the same set of math concepts in the same 11 years?
To be honest, this seems ludicrous to me. There are some things, like math and physics, which I learn quickly. There are other things, like writing and languages, which I learn much slower. I'm so stereotypically male. My wife and two
Re: (Score:2)
Did the standard cite any evidence to support their proposal that everyone can learn all the same set of math concepts in the same 11 years?
Yes, quite a bit.
Let's be honest, math isn't that hard.
Re: (Score:2)
When news of this proposed standard came out, I read the actual standard because I wanted to see if it really was that bad. Things were reported like, "Saying an answer is 'wrong' is racist. There is no right and wrong in math, just shades of truth."
Are you sure you didn't accidentally stumble across the "Equitable Math" website?
(And if you didn't, and want something to really get fuming about, go look it up.)
Re: (Score:3)
>" If people aren't learning it, then that's a problem with our teaching methods."
But that's the canard isn't it. Let me preface this by saying that the California public schools are amongst the most segregated in the country. The above statement supposes that all kids are at a baseline learning capacity, and it's just not true. There's a reason why suburban white children read at a higher level than inner-city black children for example. The suburban kids parents have been reading to them for years even
They want to be good to minority students? (Score:3)
Then for heaven's sake teach about Katherine Johnson.
Absolute agreement about statistics. Every citizen needs a basic knowledge. Only people going to STEM careers need calculus.
Re: (Score:2)
"5+5=10. Darn racist answer."
And numbers on both sides of the equation invented by non-whites, who cares?
Math is not science, math is procedure.
Re:Just the facts. (Score:5, Informative)
Did you read the article? Some of this program's advocate are heavily insinuating that the poor performance of some students is the result of "white supremacy culture".
Some of the opposition has focused on a document cited in the framework: A Pathway to Equitable Math Instruction. In an opinion piece for the Wall Street Journal, Williamson Evers, a former U.S. assistant secretary of Education, said the document was representative of a move toward subjective answers to math problems, watering down the curriculum and needlessly racializing the science of math.
“This program is quite a comedown for math, from an objective academic discipline to a tool for political activism,” he wrote.
In their work, the Pathway authors wrote, “Teachers must engage in critical praxis that interrogates the ways in which they perpetuate white supremacy culture in their own classrooms, and develop a plan toward antiracist math education.”
This is the sort of race-oriented thinking injected into these plans, and frankly, I think the insinuation it's pretty insulting to teachers. In fairness, reading on:
The commission ultimately followed the advice of the analysts from the state Department of Education, who counseled that they remove references to the Pathway tool kit.
The reason, they said, was that the Pathway material was still being revised close to the time of the meeting and the department had lacked sufficient time to fully vet the tool kit in its final form.
So they say. My guess is someone realized how this sort of language would act as a lightning rod to less radical elements in society, who don't believe that everything that goes wrong can be blamed by racist agendas.
I'm all for looking for ways of helping more students, especially in under-performing racial groups, to improve in math, but I don't think removing early fast-track programs for the more mathematically gifted is the way to go about it. Inevitably, teachers are going to have to spend all their time trying to keep those at the back of the class up to speed. Not everyone learns these things at the same time. I was never very good at math, so I was glad I didn't have to keep up with the fast-track kids.
Han Supremacy Culture (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
Because when it comes to racial equity issues, they're completely left out of the conversation. When people look at statistics to find things to complain about, they're a part of the pie chart that isn't even considered or discussed. (And if it is, then its folded into the "white" category.)
Re: (Score:3)
There are people who consider east Asians to be "honorary whites", these are the same people that scream all day about the patriarchy and misogyny over the most benign of things. This is no different from when Hitler's regime had "honorary aryans".
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Did you read the article? Some of this program's advocate are heavily insinuating that the poor performance of some students is the result of "white supremacy culture".
No, I didn't, I read the actual proposal. I don't care about the article.
Worth mentioning that a lot of people have talked about "A Pathway to Equitable Math Instruction" which is different than the actual proposal.
Re:Just the facts. (Score:4, Insightful)
Worth mentioning that a lot of people have talked about "A Pathway to Equitable Math Instruction" which is different than the actual proposal.
Correct, and I did note that. But it's also fair to mention it WAS referenced in earlier drafts of the proposal, but was subsequently removed. Thus, I also think one should consider the influence of Pathways on the proposal.
More to the point, that's really not my main problem with that proposal - just a worrisome insight into the minds of its advocates. I mostly think it's a bad idea to eliminate the fast-track math courses for more gifted students. I simply don't think it will help students struggling in math, and it seems to have a high likelihood of harming those gifted in math.
To me, this feels like they're eliminating merit-based bifurcation of math classes to avoid the perception that some races are being favored over others, but I fear this will just treat the symptoms, not the root of the problem.
Re: (Score:2)
And banning tracking until the last 2 years of K-12 is addressing kids falling behind by making sure nobody gets too far ahead.
Re: Just the facts. (Score:2)
I'm reminded of the Japanese proverb:
"The tallest nail gets the hammer"
Re: (Score:2)
I did find race mentioned in that some races are falling behind, and that if we improve our teaching methods, we will be able to reach people in these races. I find that unobjectionable.
Intentionally addressing the "soft racism of low expectations" seems a fine thing. IIRC, it's well documented there's a soft sexism too, where teachers behave as if girls are not as good at math as boys, regardless of any objective evidence about the students in question.
I wouldn't, however, go so far as to assert all kids are capable of learning the same amount of math by 11th grade. That's too much of a generalization.
Re: (Score:2)
I wouldn't, however, go so far as to assert all kids are capable of learning the same amount of math by 11th grade.
The proposal doesn't say that. It has a set of things to be learned, and says that all kids are capable of learning those things by 11th grade.
Re:Just the facts. (Score:5, Insightful)
I read through a good chunk of the proposed new guidelines
I haven't read the California proposal, as I don't live there; however, I did check out the discussions in other places - for example, this newsletter [govdelivery.com] from the government of Oregon, which recommends teachers to take this course [equitablemath.org]. The course's premise is that mathematics is subjective and determined by other factors. Indeed, they say so in the course's description:
"The concept of mathematics being purely objective is unequivocally false, and teaching it is even much less so. Upholding the idea that there are always right and wrong answers perpetuate objectivity as well as fear of open conflict."
The reason why they insist math is not objective is explained by other quotes from the course's description. It is, of course, the white man's fault:
"White supremacy culture infiltrates math classrooms in everyday teacher actions. Coupled with the beliefs that underlie these actions, they perpetuate educational harm on Black, Latinx, and multilingual students, denying them full access to the world of mathematics."
Or, again, "This reinforces the idea that there is only one right way to do math. The history of mathematics, its colonization, and what is deemed as 'acceptable' knowledge is rich and complex, therefore, the way that mathematics is taught in the United States needs to be interrogated because it currently centers Western, Eurocentric ways of processing and knowing information. When students are required to learn in this way, they either have to unlearn their learned native traditions to meet teacher expectations, or they are deprived of learning math in their ancestral history. For teachers, teaching the way they learned also reinforces the right to comfort for teachers because to conform is easier than to challenge themselves to teach math differently."
To me, at least, this sounds like complete kookery and a good reason to be wary of the out of control "progressive" thought.
Re: (Score:3)
When I first saw the whole "Equitable Math" website and looked through its content, this was my takeaway...
Some woke extremist went and found a document with a bunch of reasonable and otherwise uninteresting ideas about how to change math education, then slathered their own agenda all over it by injecting unrelated paragraphs of social commentary into every section. The combined work was then published under this banner.
Re:Just the facts. (Score:4, Insightful)
Ultimately family culture decides a lot of what kids excel at. Asian-American kids in the USA hardly ever make it to NFL or NBA. Its not because they dont have the potential - after all China gets most medals in the Olympic - but most of the Asians who immigrated were from families who put emphasis on academics.
What I am saying is you cannot create equality where it doesnt exist naturally- if you could the NFL would have a bunch of Asian-American players and Math teams would have more non Asian-Americans on it.
Re: Just the facts. (Score:3)
It stems from this:
https://equitablemath.org/wp-c... [equitablemath.org]
Re: (Score:2)
When "improve our teaching methods" means "leave the smart kids bored and deny them access to a faster-moving version of the class," I find that objectionable.
If that isn't what this amounts to, then that's fine. But from what I have read, that is the practical takeaway: they aren't actually using better teaching techniques to make the slow kids into fast kids, they are just ignoring the needs of the fast kids and making the whole class move at the pace of the slow kids.
We owe it to our bright children to