5 ms·

For anyone looking at this, please note that this is an editorial written by an educational activist and not a news article, nor a statement of fact. I will co

by kxyvr 5y ago

For anyone looking at this, please note that this is an editorial written by an educational activist and not a news article, nor a statement of fact. I will contend that what was written is deceptive and is more or less a gish gallop, which makes it difficult, time consuming, and tedious to refute point by point. The actual documents can be found here: https://www.cde.ca.gov/ci/ma/cf/index.asp https://www.cde.ca.gov/ci/ma/cf/index.asp As for some specific items that have come up and and elsewhere on the internet, no, California is not advocating for eliminating calculus from the curriculum. This is discussed in Chapter 8. This is an open discussion of whether or not students should be pushed to get into calculus by grade 12. Part of the thinking is that it's possible, but the students end up with some very shallow understanding of the material. Meaning, they can compute a u-substitution, but don't really understand what a derivative or integral means. They may be better off getting a better foundation and then taking calculus in college rather than just pushing for calculus. Other options are discussed on line 340. No, California is not advocating eliminating gifted programs. This is discussed in Chapter 1 starting around line 415 and intersects with comments about calculus. It does offer a discussion about whether or not tracking kids into gifted programs does them more harm than good in some situations because priority can often be given towards keeping up with advanced topics rather than deeper understanding. Other organizations such as the MAA also have opinions on this. And, look, I'm not contending that anyone here needs to agree or disagree with the proposals from California. However, I will strongly contend that there's a lot of anger against something that really does not exist in the form that is editorialized. The editorial freely picks and chooses quotes out of context and freely mixes them some with truths and some with lies, which makes it truly exhausting to dissect.

Balgair 5y ago
https://equitablemath.org/?emci=826b0dfc-e5f2-ea11-99c3-00155d039e74&emdi=635de139-eaf2-ea11-99c3-00155d039e74&ceid=308754 https://equitablemath.org/?emci=826b0dfc-e5f2-ea11-99c3-0015... Download Stride 1, go to page 66. That section, though a bit loopy, is not about basic math. It's about data science, stats, and word problems. Areas well open to interpretation. Other portions are like this too. I'd disagree with the headlines, but the foundational ideas and workbooks are okay to my eyes (I'm not a teacher, so I may be missing big stuff). On having many answers, consider an abacus instead of paper. That's the stuff they are talking about. They state this: "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." The authors have ~5 hours of videos explaining these workbooks. I've not watched them though. The parent article is 'clickbait'/fake-news (from what I can see before the pay-wall). The material and what the authors are saying seems, to my quick glance, to be as boring as the math classes I remember (though strangely worded).
TimTheTinker 5y ago
The editorial may or may not be a gish gallop; I won't venture there. The source material at https://equitablemath.org/ https://equitablemath.org/ is very much worth discussing, though. What about the contention in Stride 1 that "either-or thinking" and "objectivity" are tenets of white supremacy? That's an absurd assertion; if we accept it as true, that cuts the pillars from underneath pretty much all western philosophy. I suspect that's one of the goals of this organization; otherwise, why wouldn't they say otherwise? They don't specify what their philosophical foundation is, so I think we have to assume this assertion is both intentional and strongly indicative.
- kxyvr 5y ago
  I genuinely don't know what you're speaking about. I have stride 1 in front of me and it does not contend that "either/or" thinking is a tenant of white supremacy. In this document, either/or thinking is used synonymously to refer to the false dilemma or false dichotomy fallacy: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_dilemma https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_dilemma As an example, page 21 states: White supremacy culture shows up in math classrooms when... Language acquisition is equated with mathematical proficiency. Instead... A common misconception is that students who are negotiating language are unable to communicate their mathematical knowledge. This reinforces quantity over quality when teachers reduce math teaching to things that are more easily measurable, like literal math. This not only denies opportunities for more engagement with more rigorous math, but it also creates a dynamic of paternalism where teachers are deciding for students what math they should interact with, without true consideration of the student’s experience. The idea that mathematics instruction has to happen separately from language reinforces either/or thinking rather than considering how they interact with and build upon each other. Now, to me, this is stating that it is false to assume that language proficiency should be equated with mathematical ability. Further, it appears to contend that the idea that language can be studied or mathematics can be studied, but not together, is a false dichotomy or an example of either/or thinking. They can be studied together. I don't think that you or anyone else has to agree with this, but this particular example does not appear to equate something like either/or thinking as a tenet of white supremacy as you have stated.
  - 5y ago

by kxyvr 5y ago

Balgair 5y ago

https://equitablemath.org/?emci=826b0dfc-e5f2-ea11-99c3-00155d039e74&emdi=635de139-eaf2-ea11-99c3-00155d039e74&ceid=308754 https://equitablemath.org/?emci=826b0dfc-e5f2-ea11-99c3-0015... Download Stride 1, go to page 66. That section, though a bit loopy, is not about basic math. It's about data science, stats, and word problems. Areas well open to interpretation. Other portions are like this too. I'd disagree with the headlines, but the foundational ideas and workbooks are okay to my eyes (I'm not a teacher, so I may be missing big stuff). On having many answers, consider an abacus instead of paper. That's the stuff they are talking about. They state this: "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." The authors have ~5 hours of videos explaining these workbooks. I've not watched them though. The parent article is 'clickbait'/fake-news (from what I can see before the pay-wall). The material and what the authors are saying seems, to my quick glance, to be as boring as the math classes I remember (though strangely worded).

TimTheTinker 5y ago

The editorial may or may not be a gish gallop; I won't venture there. The source material at https://equitablemath.org/ https://equitablemath.org/ is very much worth discussing, though. What about the contention in Stride 1 that "either-or thinking" and "objectivity" are tenets of white supremacy? That's an absurd assertion; if we accept it as true, that cuts the pillars from underneath pretty much all western philosophy. I suspect that's one of the goals of this organization; otherwise, why wouldn't they say otherwise? They don't specify what their philosophical foundation is, so I think we have to assume this assertion is both intentional and strongly indicative.

kxyvr 5y ago
I genuinely don't know what you're speaking about. I have stride 1 in front of me and it does not contend that "either/or" thinking is a tenant of white supremacy. In this document, either/or thinking is used synonymously to refer to the false dilemma or false dichotomy fallacy: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_dilemma https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_dilemma As an example, page 21 states: White supremacy culture shows up in math classrooms when... Language acquisition is equated with mathematical proficiency. Instead... A common misconception is that students who are negotiating language are unable to communicate their mathematical knowledge. This reinforces quantity over quality when teachers reduce math teaching to things that are more easily measurable, like literal math. This not only denies opportunities for more engagement with more rigorous math, but it also creates a dynamic of paternalism where teachers are deciding for students what math they should interact with, without true consideration of the student’s experience. The idea that mathematics instruction has to happen separately from language reinforces either/or thinking rather than considering how they interact with and build upon each other. Now, to me, this is stating that it is false to assume that language proficiency should be equated with mathematical ability. Further, it appears to contend that the idea that language can be studied or mathematics can be studied, but not together, is a false dichotomy or an example of either/or thinking. They can be studied together. I don't think that you or anyone else has to agree with this, but this particular example does not appear to equate something like either/or thinking as a tenet of white supremacy as you have stated.
- 5y ago