5 ms·

Math 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 ri

Math 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 ago
Are 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 ago
  When 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 ago
    Since 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 ago
      What 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 ago
        I'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 ago
I really want to know what the end game for this and CRT is
- harpiaharpyja 5y ago
  Loss of critical thinking skills most likely. Especially in younger people as the emphasis in education on teaching critical thinking is undermined.
  - smegger001 5y ago
    remember 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 ago
  Destruction 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 ago
Screenshots 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.

quercusa 5y ago

Are 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 ago
When 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 ago
  Since 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 ago
    What 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 ago
      I'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 ago

I really want to know what the end game for this and CRT is

harpiaharpyja 5y ago
Loss of critical thinking skills most likely. Especially in younger people as the emphasis in education on teaching critical thinking is undermined.
- smegger001 5y ago
  remember 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 ago
Destruction 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 ago

Screenshots 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.