4 ms·

Also check the anti-racist math (funded by the Gates Foundation) document here: https://equitablemath.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2020/11/1_STRIDE1.pdf https

Also check the anti-racist math (funded by the Gates Foundation) document here: https://equitablemath.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2020/11/1_STRIDE1.pdf https://equitablemath.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2020/11... This is the most racist document I have ever read. "The concept of mathematics being purely objective is unequivocally false" is on p. 65.

veridies 6y ago
That exact page specifies that while mathematical problems have right and wrong answers, word problems often have embedded assumptions, and that teachers should encourage students to identify those assumptions and pursue other possible answers. How is that wrong?
- b0sk 6y ago
  It's also the "most racist document he has ever read". That's kinda fantastic in itself.
- lurquer 6y ago
  We’ve all encountered ambiguous poorly-written word problems. That’s a problem with grammar and language; not math. The agenda behind the pamphlet is obvious. I liked this gem from the page at issue: >Schooling as we know it began during the industrial revolution, when precision and accuracy were highly valued. What are the myriad ways we can conceptualize mathematics in today’s world and beyond? These thing WERE highly valued? They are no longer? And weren’t they valued BEFORE the industrial revolution? Indeed, was not the Industrial Revolution possible in the first place due to the high value put on precision and accuracy?
  - veridies 6y ago
    It is a problem of grammar and language! As others here have said, no one is claiming that the notion of math itself is racist, but that math education can be. The 'agenda' seems to be to make sure that marginalized groups are better able to learn math. Do you disagree? As for the 'highly valued' bit; one could argue that mathematics built for problem solving creative issues (including in computer programming) is now valued more than it was then. That could lead to different curriculum than before.
    - qeternity 6y ago
      No, you're missing the point. Why is valuing "precision and accuracy" inherently supporting systems of white supremacy? You don't land a rocket on Mars by valuing anything other than precision and accuracy.
      - veridies 6y ago
        It didn't say that, though. I agree it could be clearer here, but it seems to be suggesting simply that other values should also be considered when thinking about math education. It never seems to say precision or accuracy are bad or racist.
        qeternity 6y ago
        This is the thing about the hard sciences, there is nothing else that matters. You can teach these principles more effectively, but unfortunately there are right answers and there are wrong answers. The laws of the universe just don't care about anything else.
        loopz 6y ago
        You're missing the point of equity in the education system. There are different ways to teach different students effectively.
- ed2021 6y ago
  Glad a few folks already posted this. I mean, this is just good teaching, /especially/ in a world of standardized tests. I don't think I can rephrase it better than the document already states: > And teaching math isn't just about solving specific problems. It's about helping students understand the deeper mathematical concepts so that they can apply them throughout their lives. Students can arrive at the right answer without grasping the bigger concept; or they can have an “aha” moment when they see why they got an answer wrong. Sometimes a wrong answer sheds more light than a right answer. It is hugely useful to be able to interrogate misleading paths to seemingly correct but ultimately incorrect answers. Half of standardized test answers seem to be written to intentionally capture such missteps.
Denvercoder9 6y ago
While that statement taken alone sounds stupid, the justification they give sounds more or less reasonable: > Of course, most math problems have correct answers, but sometimes there can be more than one way to interpret a problem, especially word problems, leading to more than one possible right answer. > And teaching math isn't just about solving specific problems. It's about helping students understand the deeper mathematical concepts so that they can apply them throughout their lives. Students can arrive at the right answer without grasping the bigger concept; or they can have an “aha” moment when they see why they got an answer wrong. Sometimes a wrong answer sheds more light than a right answer.
ketzo 6y ago
This document was also highlighted in the article, and to be honest, I'm having trouble identifying why anyone would call it "racist". It seems like a toolkit for identifying how seemingly innocuous ideas could support existing power structures in our society. Why should that be shunned?
- incrudible 6y ago
  Maybe it's the equivocation of "dominance" and "whiteness" in assertions like this: "Classrooms are often microcosms of the world around us and reinforce dominant (or white) ways of being." > It seems like a toolkit for identifying how seemingly innocuous ideas could support existing power structures in our society. Why should that be shunned? It lacks intellectual rigor and is unfalsifiable, yet the burden of proof rests on the accused. Perhaps the tools we use to teach math are suboptimal, but to assert that they are "racist" or "white" (in a harmful sense) is an extraordinary claim that needs extraordinary evidence. It should be possible to experimentally demonstrate that certain teaching methods improve the outcomes towards racial equity, then give recommendations based on those results. If this isn't possible, how could we achieve racial equity by making all these assertions, then requiring teachers to reflect upon them? Clearly, if the teachers are biased by white supremacy, all of their conclusions must be biased as well.
- thu2111 6y ago
  Innocuous ideas like "the focus is on getting the right answer" being the same thing as "white supremacy"? That "white supremacy culture" can show up when "expectations are not met" or when "teachers are teachers and students are learners"? The entire pamphlet is 100% crazy. I can't imagine how anyone could read this charitably, it's quite obviously the work of people who have totally lost their minds. The entire concept of labelling ordinary aspects of any imaginable education system as "white" is fundamentally racist.
Barrin92 6y ago
while the framing of every single issue as "white supremacist" is kind of cartoonish, if you replace it with "methods for more inclusive teaching", nothing in that document sounds particularly crazy or even new. Disagreeable sure, but nowhere does it claim that math isn't real or that 2 + 2 isn't 4. It talks about not being either/or in regards to succeeding, not dismissing students because they don't have a good grasp of mathematical language, not being super harsh about sticking to the curriculum. This just sounds like Waldorf or Montessori school stuff.
- jjoonathan 6y ago
  Yep, it's a Motte & Bailey. The specifics seem pretty uncontroversial and frankly a bit trite. Those are the motte. The framing is something else, though. It's so chock full of wokescold dog-whistles that I thank my lucky stars I'm not a teacher, let alone a white teacher. Yikes. It almost feels targeted: occupy the mathematicians' time with the modest specifics to divert their attention away from the, err, praxis in the framing.
  - veridies 6y ago
    I am a white teacher. It seems wholly innocuous to me, but I've only skimmed it.
    - jjoonathan 6y ago
      You aren't worried about page 6 that puts a number of innocuous points of math education philosophy and practice under the heading of "white supremacy?" Under a literal or charitable reading, it's not a problem. It's making the point that systemic racism can pop up in a number of places on a map of the educational landscape. That's fine. It's true. It's not saying that those places themselves inherently constitute white supremacy culture. However, this all hinges entirely on the reading being charitable or at the very least literal -- and if there's one life lesson that my interactions with others keep hammering home, it's that people are not generally literal or charitable. People are fuzzy association machines. Literal meanings can sometimes protect you in a court of law or court of academics. Charitability can protect you among friends. Absent those two narrow, tenuous exceptions, that paper gives wokescolds permission to label any of a dozen core aspects of teaching as "white supremacy culture," insofar as school administration allows it to do so, which by my estimation they absolutely will. I sincerely hope this fear is misplaced.
gerash 6y ago
"Culturally relevant curricula and practices designed to increase access for students of color". Wait what? What is "of color"? Why are there a bunch of photos of sad black kids. This was as dumb as it can get.
jfrankamp 6y ago
If you have a knee jerk reaction because you think math/science is pure, remember that it is always interpreted in a teaching context. Example from my life: We mentor a black girl in high school physics. The Physics teacher misinterpreted her age assuming she was a 3rd or 4th year (which is a common culturual/racial gap, not intentional but structural!) when she is a freshman. The teacher in consequence also misintepreted where she 'should' be at in her ability to manage school life, homework, comprehension etc. After he learned his mistake he reframed his perception of the students efforts at learning, and was able to teach her. She successfully passed that class trying again after narrowly failing the first time.

veridies 6y ago

That exact page specifies that while mathematical problems have right and wrong answers, word problems often have embedded assumptions, and that teachers should encourage students to identify those assumptions and pursue other possible answers. How is that wrong?

b0sk 6y ago
It's also the "most racist document he has ever read". That's kinda fantastic in itself.
lurquer 6y ago
We’ve all encountered ambiguous poorly-written word problems. That’s a problem with grammar and language; not math. The agenda behind the pamphlet is obvious. I liked this gem from the page at issue: >Schooling as we know it began during the industrial revolution, when precision and accuracy were highly valued. What are the myriad ways we can conceptualize mathematics in today’s world and beyond? These thing WERE highly valued? They are no longer? And weren’t they valued BEFORE the industrial revolution? Indeed, was not the Industrial Revolution possible in the first place due to the high value put on precision and accuracy?
- veridies 6y ago
  It is a problem of grammar and language! As others here have said, no one is claiming that the notion of math itself is racist, but that math education can be. The 'agenda' seems to be to make sure that marginalized groups are better able to learn math. Do you disagree? As for the 'highly valued' bit; one could argue that mathematics built for problem solving creative issues (including in computer programming) is now valued more than it was then. That could lead to different curriculum than before.
  - qeternity 6y ago
    No, you're missing the point. Why is valuing "precision and accuracy" inherently supporting systems of white supremacy? You don't land a rocket on Mars by valuing anything other than precision and accuracy.
    - veridies 6y ago
      It didn't say that, though. I agree it could be clearer here, but it seems to be suggesting simply that other values should also be considered when thinking about math education. It never seems to say precision or accuracy are bad or racist.
      - qeternity 6y ago
        This is the thing about the hard sciences, there is nothing else that matters. You can teach these principles more effectively, but unfortunately there are right answers and there are wrong answers. The laws of the universe just don't care about anything else.
        loopz 6y ago
        You're missing the point of equity in the education system. There are different ways to teach different students effectively.
ed2021 6y ago
Glad a few folks already posted this. I mean, this is just good teaching, /especially/ in a world of standardized tests. I don't think I can rephrase it better than the document already states: > And teaching math isn't just about solving specific problems. It's about helping students understand the deeper mathematical concepts so that they can apply them throughout their lives. Students can arrive at the right answer without grasping the bigger concept; or they can have an “aha” moment when they see why they got an answer wrong. Sometimes a wrong answer sheds more light than a right answer. It is hugely useful to be able to interrogate misleading paths to seemingly correct but ultimately incorrect answers. Half of standardized test answers seem to be written to intentionally capture such missteps.

Denvercoder9 6y ago

While that statement taken alone sounds stupid, the justification they give sounds more or less reasonable: > Of course, most math problems have correct answers, but sometimes there can be more than one way to interpret a problem, especially word problems, leading to more than one possible right answer. > And teaching math isn't just about solving specific problems. It's about helping students understand the deeper mathematical concepts so that they can apply them throughout their lives. Students can arrive at the right answer without grasping the bigger concept; or they can have an “aha” moment when they see why they got an answer wrong. Sometimes a wrong answer sheds more light than a right answer.

ketzo 6y ago

This document was also highlighted in the article, and to be honest, I'm having trouble identifying why anyone would call it "racist". It seems like a toolkit for identifying how seemingly innocuous ideas could support existing power structures in our society. Why should that be shunned?

incrudible 6y ago
Maybe it's the equivocation of "dominance" and "whiteness" in assertions like this: "Classrooms are often microcosms of the world around us and reinforce dominant (or white) ways of being." > It seems like a toolkit for identifying how seemingly innocuous ideas could support existing power structures in our society. Why should that be shunned? It lacks intellectual rigor and is unfalsifiable, yet the burden of proof rests on the accused. Perhaps the tools we use to teach math are suboptimal, but to assert that they are "racist" or "white" (in a harmful sense) is an extraordinary claim that needs extraordinary evidence. It should be possible to experimentally demonstrate that certain teaching methods improve the outcomes towards racial equity, then give recommendations based on those results. If this isn't possible, how could we achieve racial equity by making all these assertions, then requiring teachers to reflect upon them? Clearly, if the teachers are biased by white supremacy, all of their conclusions must be biased as well.
thu2111 6y ago
Innocuous ideas like "the focus is on getting the right answer" being the same thing as "white supremacy"? That "white supremacy culture" can show up when "expectations are not met" or when "teachers are teachers and students are learners"? The entire pamphlet is 100% crazy. I can't imagine how anyone could read this charitably, it's quite obviously the work of people who have totally lost their minds. The entire concept of labelling ordinary aspects of any imaginable education system as "white" is fundamentally racist.

Barrin92 6y ago

while the framing of every single issue as "white supremacist" is kind of cartoonish, if you replace it with "methods for more inclusive teaching", nothing in that document sounds particularly crazy or even new. Disagreeable sure, but nowhere does it claim that math isn't real or that 2 + 2 isn't 4. It talks about not being either/or in regards to succeeding, not dismissing students because they don't have a good grasp of mathematical language, not being super harsh about sticking to the curriculum. This just sounds like Waldorf or Montessori school stuff.

jjoonathan 6y ago
Yep, it's a Motte & Bailey. The specifics seem pretty uncontroversial and frankly a bit trite. Those are the motte. The framing is something else, though. It's so chock full of wokescold dog-whistles that I thank my lucky stars I'm not a teacher, let alone a white teacher. Yikes. It almost feels targeted: occupy the mathematicians' time with the modest specifics to divert their attention away from the, err, praxis in the framing.
- veridies 6y ago
  I am a white teacher. It seems wholly innocuous to me, but I've only skimmed it.
  - jjoonathan 6y ago
    You aren't worried about page 6 that puts a number of innocuous points of math education philosophy and practice under the heading of "white supremacy?" Under a literal or charitable reading, it's not a problem. It's making the point that systemic racism can pop up in a number of places on a map of the educational landscape. That's fine. It's true. It's not saying that those places themselves inherently constitute white supremacy culture. However, this all hinges entirely on the reading being charitable or at the very least literal -- and if there's one life lesson that my interactions with others keep hammering home, it's that people are not generally literal or charitable. People are fuzzy association machines. Literal meanings can sometimes protect you in a court of law or court of academics. Charitability can protect you among friends. Absent those two narrow, tenuous exceptions, that paper gives wokescolds permission to label any of a dozen core aspects of teaching as "white supremacy culture," insofar as school administration allows it to do so, which by my estimation they absolutely will. I sincerely hope this fear is misplaced.

gerash 6y ago

"Culturally relevant curricula and practices designed to increase access for students of color". Wait what? What is "of color"? Why are there a bunch of photos of sad black kids. This was as dumb as it can get.

jfrankamp 6y ago

If you have a knee jerk reaction because you think math/science is pure, remember that it is always interpreted in a teaching context. Example from my life: We mentor a black girl in high school physics. The Physics teacher misinterpreted her age assuming she was a 3rd or 4th year (which is a common culturual/racial gap, not intentional but structural!) when she is a freshman. The teacher in consequence also misintepreted where she 'should' be at in her ability to manage school life, homework, comprehension etc. After he learned his mistake he reframed his perception of the students efforts at learning, and was able to teach her. She successfully passed that class trying again after narrowly failing the first time.