7 ms·
Scientific American Goes Woke
- 1cvmask 5y agoMath suffers from white supremacy according to the Education Trust that created the Equitable Math curriculum funded in part by Bill Gates. Trying to get the right answer is white supremacy. https://www.newsweek.com/math-suffers-white-supremacy-according-bill-gates-funded-course-1571511 https://www.newsweek.com/math-suffers-white-supremacy-accord... "The screenshot making the rounds on Twitter is an image of the EquitableMath.org website that begins with: "White supremacy culture shows up in math classrooms when... The focus is on getting the 'right' answer."
- quercusa 5y agoAre there any parents who want their kids being taught that? It seems to be preparing them for a lifetime of innumeracy and being the patsies of those who do know math.
- ttyprintk 5y agoWhen I bring this up with some of my coworkers who are also mothers, they prefer to teach math their own way, at home. I’m willing to rename things attributed to Pythagoras, but I don’t think it benefits underprivileged kids to confuse the objective of a mathematical proof with the subjective of a strong understanding of social studies.
- eesmith 5y agoSince you mention it, consider the Pythagoras theorem. There are many different ways to prove it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pythagorean_theorem#Other_proofs_of_the_theorem https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pythagorean_theorem#Other_proo... lists a few of the 370+ known proofs. If a math class preferentially teaches one approach, and does not accept other solutions because they are not the "right" one taught in class, then it's 1) a disservice to the students, and 2) likely discriminates against children from immigrant families, where the parents (who help the kids with their education) might have themselves learned an alternative approach in their schools, and passed it on to their kids. Lots of math can be taught in multiple ways. Do you teach long division, or counting-intersections? Which of several ways do you use to solve the quadratic equation? If your student uses a way you didn't teach, is that wrong? In the context of the source document that Newsweek was commenting about, it does not "confuse the objective of a mathematical proof", and you can double-check my assertion because you can read what EquitableMath itself says on the topic, at https://equitablemath.org/ https://equitablemath.org/ , rather than diluted through culture war partisan readings. Here's the relevant quote: > 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 Also, concerning my earlier point: > The point should be to have a dialogue about their process and their learning, not require every student to follow the exact same path to the right answer. ... The child of immigrants might have learned a different way to solve a problem because that’s how their parents were taught where they grew up. If we just tell that student their way is the wrong way, we risk turning them off to math for life." When you write "their own way", you should also know that math curriculum in the US, taught as algebra, geometry, trig, calculus, is a post-war construct because "the end-users of mathematics studies were at that time mostly in the physical sciences and engineering" (quoting https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Math https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Math ), while statistics and discrete mathematics are de-prioritized. Quoting again from EquitableMath: > While some mathematical skills and concepts build off each other, the forced construct of linear teaching reinforces objectivity. A prime example is how matrices is considered a precalculus standard, even though the only math skill needed as a prerequisite is arithmetic. This is highly detrimental to students because they are systematically deprived of knowledge they could access due to false constructs. Math teachers have internalized the sequences that have been predetermined by standards and textbooks, rather than sequencing learning based on (pre)requisite knowledge. In general, teachers teach math like a ladder rather than a web.
- temp8964 5y agoWhat you said has nothing to do with the discussion. I think 100% of readers here understand math problems can be solved in different ways and math teaching should not choosing only one approach as the "right" one. But it is obvious that this is not the point in the discussion of the statements like "White supremacy culture shows up in math classrooms when... The focus is on getting the 'right' answer."
- eesmith 5y agoI'm referencing the source material in the Newsweek article. How can it not relevant? You can read https://equitablemath.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2020/11/1_STRIDE1.pdf https://equitablemath.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2020/11... yourself and see the full current context. I say "current" because it was updated in May 2021. The Newsweek article cites the original publication, which is at https://web.archive.org/web/20210212170440/https://equitablemath.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2020/11/1_STRIDE1.pdf https://web.archive.org/web/20210212170440/https://equitable... . The current document says: "There is a greater focus on getting the "right" answer than understanding concepts and reasoning." This is immediately followed by the explanation: > Upholding the idea that there are always right and wrong answers perpetuate objectivity as well as fear of open conflict. Some math problems may have more than one right answer and some may not have a solution at all, depending on the content and the context. And when the focus is only on getting the right answer, the complexity of the mathematical concepts and reasoning may be underdeveloped, missing opportunities for deep learning. There's also (on a search for the word 'focus'): > And when the focus is only on getting the right answer, the complexity of the mathematical concepts and reasoning may be underdeveloped, missing opportunities for deep learning. ... NOTE! In the 2020 document, the quote is indeed "The focus is on getting the “right” answer. / The concept of mathematics being purely objective is unequivocally false, and teaching it is even much less so. Up-holding the idea that there are always right and wrong answers perpetuate objectivity as well as fear of open conflict." The original document asks teachers that instead of emphasizing questions with only one "right" answer to instead: > - Choose problems that have complex, competing, or multiple answers > Verbal Example: Come up with at least two answers that might solve this problem > Classroom Activity: Challenge standardized test questions by getting the “right” answer, but justify other answers by unpacking the assumptions that are made in the problem. > Classroom Activity: Deconstructed Multiple Choice - given a set of multiple choice answers, students discuss why these answers may have been included (can also be used to highlight common mistakes). > Professional Development: Study the purpose of math education, and re-envision it. 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? > - Engage with true problem solving > Verbal Example: What are some strategies we can use to engage with this problem? > Classroom Activity: Using a set of data, analyze it in multiple ways to draw different conclusions. > Professional Development: Study the art of problem solving by engaging in rich, complex mathematical problems. Consider whether your own content knowledge is sufficient to allow you to problem solve through math without the strategies you typically use. Do you interpret this 2020 document as arguing "Trying to get the right answer is white supremacy"? I don't. It's all about how "right" is a tricky concept, and influenced by the dominant culture. Nor does it come across like encouraging a "lifetime of innumeracy and being the patsies of those who do know math." And I don't see how someone could draw that conclusion after reading the source material. I can understand how someone can draw that conclusion after reading cherry-picked quotes. But that's why I think it's important to reference the original material. The points in the updated document are along the same lines as the original document, so it's not like the authors did a 180, but rather clarified their intent.
- orangepurple 5y agoI really want to know what the end game for this and CRT is
- harpiaharpyja 5y agoLoss of critical thinking skills most likely. Especially in younger people as the emphasis in education on teaching critical thinking is undermined.
- smegger001 5y agoremember the good old days when it was just the far right trying to stop young people from learning critical thinking. (https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answer-sheet/post/texas-gop-rejects-critical-thinking-skills-really/2012/07/08/gJQAHNpFXW_blog.html https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answer-sheet/post/texas...) evidentially no one wants people to think rationally anymore.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- bronzeage 5y agoDestruction and confusion of western values, leading to a population more open to authoritarian and illiberal policies. The goal is to confuse uneducated people (or rather, educate new people) about what being liberal means. Before the propaganda, it used to come from liberty, freedom. Today being liberal means giving up personal freedoms like choosing whether to take medical treatments, and freedom to do whatever you want without government intervention. Equality as a value used to mean to treat people equally without discrimination, but the value was distorted to mean you should intentionally discriminate in favor of the supposedly victimized and weak races and women. Propaganda has successfully and silently distorted and redefined the entire ideological foundations of liberal democracy. There's people on the left that call themselves democratic and liberal very loudly but their versions of democracy and liberty are completely different words, only sharing the same letters. With the current trajectory, I'll be surprised if anyone will even know their real meaning in 40 years. Words are just letters, the semantics come from usage. They don't come from the dictionary. Just like AI is trained on input, so are humans. They can be trained to have different semantic meaning in their head for whatever word you want, as long as their inputs are flooded with that usage of the word. You can continuously transform a liberal democracy into an authoritarian state, while in every point in the process people will still call it liberal democracy. It's all about the internal semantics in people's heads.
- ttyprintk 5y agoScreenshots like that are unfortunate. EquitableMath updated their material after its controversial 2019 (edit, or earlier 2020) release. Before people judge it, please hold them to their FAQ: https://equitablemath.org/faq/ https://equitablemath.org/faq/ If they violate their FAQ, then the ire is warranted as we try to fix the damage.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- jimmydorry 5y agoThis post got flagged and went dead. I vouched for it, as I hope others may see it, and I don't believe it broke any of the site's rules.
- WalterGR 5y agoIt’s a dupe and hence the flagging is to be expected.
- stickfigure 5y agoThe original was also flagged, so I don't think this is the answer.
- smegger001 5y agoalso many comments in both are being flagged dead.
- WalterGR 5y agoYou can comment and reply on the original article, so what’s the distinction other than a text label?
- smegger001 5y agoflagged dead posts don't get seen. so commenting on them is just shouting into the void. both are now flagged dead. someone is purposefully killing discussion of this article.
- grzm 5y agoFlagged and flagged dead are two different things: flagged dead doesn’t mean “strenuously flagged”. If the post is dead, no one can comment on it.
- Borrible 5y agometoo
- Borrible 5y agoSigh, no sooner you think you've escaped the helots of various annoying religious or political sects, Mao's Red Guards come around the corner for their purges. Archimedes is probably still spinning in his grave.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- WalterGR 5y agoDupe. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29259849 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29259849
- 1vuio0pswjnm7 5y agoHere is the short column that the author implies got him fired. Hard to believe. I must be missing something. Limiting online time to two hours per day makes lots of sense. https://web.archive.org/web/20191025202655if_/https://michaelshermer.com/2018/12/kids-these-days-how-to-avert-looming-crisis/ https://web.archive.org/web/20191025202655if_/https://michae...
- parsimo2010 5y agoYou are missing something. You linked to the article that was accepted. The author mentions that his previous article for December 2018 saying that life for minorities is the best it’s ever been, and the editor required him to revise one article prior that that challenged some views on child sexual abuse. I’m sure there was some energetic discussion between them and he didn’t just quietly take the editor’s notes.
- 1vuio0pswjnm7 5y agoAh, that explains it.
- jgb1984 5y agoWhy does the article get flagged twice in a row? The author seems to have a point. It pains me to see the direction that the woke hysteria is heading us all in, contaminating newspapers, literature, Hollywood, politics and now even math education.
- rich_sasha 5y agoWoke as an intellectual trend reminds me of the Soviet Communist mainstream thought process, in two ways in fact: one, its base assumptions are very noble, and are about creating a better world (I'm talking here about rank-and-file Soviet believers, not the criminals at the top and throughout the management structure). But also, it was a monster who devoured everyone: believers and non-believers. One day you could be delivering a fiery speech on the evils of exploitative Capitalism, how Communism is the only way forward, and how you bow to the Proletariat. The next day you could be on a one-way trip to a Siberian labour camp. Maybe your speech wasn't vigorous enough. Maybe you made a joke that was ill-received. Maybe you didn't make a joke, but someone in the audience did. Or none of the above really, and you were just unlucky. I don't yet see this so much with Woke; right now, the enemies are the Unwoke, and bear the brunt of the criticism. But as and when Woke grows (which I'm not actually sure is happening), the in-fighting is bound to begin. One person is for Equitable Science but maybe not Equitable PE lessons, let's cancel them. Another is for all things Equitable, but not quite in the right way, woe to them. The thing about such ideologies is that statement-driven movements favour making more and more extreme statements, because simply repeating the message doesn't drive the movement forward. But then inevitably some people get left behind.
- CodeGlitch 5y ago> right now, the enemies are the Unwoke I think the enemies are the "not the right kind of woke". Just look at the treatment of JK Rowling, someone who has been on the left for decades and who was considered pretty progressive in the past. If she didn't make so much money for her publisher she would have been cancelled. The comparison with communism is absolutely true.
- bluewhale9 5y agoSocial justice involves almost no thinking, whereas Maths and Science are hard. It could be that many of these institutions and magazines are dumbing down to reach a larger audience.
- WithinReason 5y agoScientific American [0]: The Jedi are inappropriate mascots for social justice. Although they’re ostensibly heroes within the Star Wars universe, the Jedi are inappropriate symbols for justice work. They are a religious order of intergalactic police-monks, prone to (white) saviorism and toxically masculine approaches to conflict resolution (violent duels with phallic lightsabers, gaslighting by means of “Jedi mind tricks,” etc.) [0]: https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/why-the-term-jedi-is-problematic-for-describing-programs-that-promote-justice-equity-diversity-and-inclusion/ https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/why-the-term-jedi...
- krapp 5y ago> They are a religious order of intergalactic police-monks, prone to (white) saviorism and toxically masculine approaches to conflict resolution (violent duels with phallic lightsabers, gaslighting by means of “Jedi mind tricks,” etc.) As far as the plot of Star Wars is concerned, that's true. The corruption and zealotry of the Jedi and their contribution to the fall of the Republic and the creation of Darth Vader was one of the primary themes of the prequel trilogy, that unfortunately got lost in the awkwardness of the prequels' execution.
- aiscapehumanity 5y agoWoke this, antiwoke that. Both of these groups are awful.
- aiscapehumanity 5y agoWoke this, antiwoke that. Both of these groups are awful.
- todd8 5y agoI believe that my significant success in life is due in part to Scientific American. I clearly remember being asked the what I enjoyed reading at my interview/visit to MIT in 1969. I explained that I read Scientific American every month, virtually cover-to-cover. I had been doing that since seventh grade after school in a neighborhood public library. The public schools I attended in Detroit back then were rough and dangerous; the walks home after school were especially perilous. So I hung out in the large public library close by and read until dinner time when the streets were safer to walk home. I started with magazines and discovered Scientific American. I read every recent copy and then started going to the bound years of past issues so I wouldn't miss a single month's column by Martin Gardner or the amazing monthly Amateur Scientist column. This lead to me reading every math book and every science book I could understand in that library. I eventually started spending 10 cents on weekends to ride the bus downtown to the main library to browse their stacks and read more about math and science. My parents grew up on farms and, while educated, knew little about math or science. My schools, until we moved from Detroit, were of little value. However, I ended up getting a Math degree and then an EE degree from MIT--it wouldn't have happened without Scientific American's influence. I was an unusual, nerdy kid, but I'm so happy with my life now. It's sad to me that Scientific American is no longer like the one I grew up reading.
- systemvoltage 5y agoThank you Todd for such an inpsiring story. I think agencies in United States need to get back to focus and avoid tilting politically in one way or the other.
- GoodJokes 5y agoYou all really are triggered when someone criticizes one of your holy idols, like math.
- France_is_bacon 5y agoMurder, rape, perjury, theft, graft, assault, battery - all white supremacist ideas.