4 ms·

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 suprem

by 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.

TimTheTinker 5y ago
See the list on page 5. Both of those terms are listed as "characteristic of white supremacy". I see your point about "either-or thinking". One could also call that "black and white thinking" (not referring to skin colors) -- an approach to a given situation that refuses to see nuance. However, mathematics is an area where either-or thinking has its place. Either a given mathematical statement or proposition is true, or it's not. The paper fails to acknowledge this important nuance... and in my opinion, falls into its own form of either-or thinking: anything that has been taught or learned by white people is suspect.
- kxyvr 5y ago
  I still believe that there is a misconception of what this document states. On page 5 of what you refer to, the authors state: The terms used in the engagement section of this resource are ideas presented in the dismantling Racism workbook (2016) notebook, grounded on the work of Jones and Okun (2001). It is important to read this article first to fully understand the terms that are identified as characteristics of white supremacy culture in organizations. We contextualize these ideas into the math classroom to make visible how white supremacy culture plays out in these spaces. It then lists a series of terms including Either/Or. The above quotation refers to a document found here: https://www.thc.texas.gov/public/upload/preserve/museums/files/White_Supremacy_Culture.pdf https://www.thc.texas.gov/public/upload/preserve/museums/fil... With respect to Either/Or thinking, it is defined on page 5: Either/Or Thinking • things are either/or, good/bad, right/wrong, with us/against us • closely linked to perfectionism in making it difficult to learn from mistakes or accommodate conflict • no sense that things can be both/and results in trying to simplify complex things, for example believing that poverty is simply a result of lack of education • creates conflict and increases sense of urgency, as people are felt they have to make decisions to do either this or that, with no time or encouragement to consider alternatives, particularly those which may require more time or resources antidotes: notice when people use either/or language and push to come up with more than two alternatives; notice when people are simplifying complex issues, particularly when the stakes seem high or an urgent decision needs to be made; slow it down and encourage people to do a deeper analysis; when people are faced with an urgent decision, take a break and give people some breathing room to think creatively; avoid making decisions under extreme pressure As far as whether or not Either/Or has a place in modern mathematical thinking, I will contend the answer is a resounding no, but it does certainly depend on what you or I believe that concept means. To me, and I believe to the authors, it means the false dichotomy fallacy. In this definition, it has no place because it would lead to false proofs. In many ways, it could be considered the incorrect application of the pigeonhole principle: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pigeonhole_principle https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pigeonhole_principle If we falsely assume that there are only two holes when there are more, proofs based on this assumption will not be true. I'll also contend that the concept of Either/Or does not refer to the logical disjunction, similar to a programming or. It's a different idea and not what these documents are referring to. But, really, you don't need to take my word for it. The authors do define what they mean by each of these terms in the above document. I will contend all of these documents need to be considered together in order to understand what California is proposing.

by kxyvr 5y ago

TimTheTinker 5y ago

See the list on page 5. Both of those terms are listed as "characteristic of white supremacy". I see your point about "either-or thinking". One could also call that "black and white thinking" (not referring to skin colors) -- an approach to a given situation that refuses to see nuance. However, mathematics is an area where either-or thinking has its place. Either a given mathematical statement or proposition is true, or it's not. The paper fails to acknowledge this important nuance... and in my opinion, falls into its own form of either-or thinking: anything that has been taught or learned by white people is suspect.

kxyvr 5y ago
I still believe that there is a misconception of what this document states. On page 5 of what you refer to, the authors state: The terms used in the engagement section of this resource are ideas presented in the dismantling Racism workbook (2016) notebook, grounded on the work of Jones and Okun (2001). It is important to read this article first to fully understand the terms that are identified as characteristics of white supremacy culture in organizations. We contextualize these ideas into the math classroom to make visible how white supremacy culture plays out in these spaces. It then lists a series of terms including Either/Or. The above quotation refers to a document found here: https://www.thc.texas.gov/public/upload/preserve/museums/files/White_Supremacy_Culture.pdf https://www.thc.texas.gov/public/upload/preserve/museums/fil... With respect to Either/Or thinking, it is defined on page 5: Either/Or Thinking • things are either/or, good/bad, right/wrong, with us/against us • closely linked to perfectionism in making it difficult to learn from mistakes or accommodate conflict • no sense that things can be both/and results in trying to simplify complex things, for example believing that poverty is simply a result of lack of education • creates conflict and increases sense of urgency, as people are felt they have to make decisions to do either this or that, with no time or encouragement to consider alternatives, particularly those which may require more time or resources antidotes: notice when people use either/or language and push to come up with more than two alternatives; notice when people are simplifying complex issues, particularly when the stakes seem high or an urgent decision needs to be made; slow it down and encourage people to do a deeper analysis; when people are faced with an urgent decision, take a break and give people some breathing room to think creatively; avoid making decisions under extreme pressure As far as whether or not Either/Or has a place in modern mathematical thinking, I will contend the answer is a resounding no, but it does certainly depend on what you or I believe that concept means. To me, and I believe to the authors, it means the false dichotomy fallacy. In this definition, it has no place because it would lead to false proofs. In many ways, it could be considered the incorrect application of the pigeonhole principle: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pigeonhole_principle https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pigeonhole_principle If we falsely assume that there are only two holes when there are more, proofs based on this assumption will not be true. I'll also contend that the concept of Either/Or does not refer to the logical disjunction, similar to a programming or. It's a different idea and not what these documents are referring to. But, really, you don't need to take my word for it. The authors do define what they mean by each of these terms in the above document. I will contend all of these documents need to be considered together in order to understand what California is proposing.