5 ms·
I read this extraordinary quote: > When California’s Instructional Quality Commission adopted a new mathematics framework in 2021 that urged schools to do awa
by zzzeek 5y ago
I read this extraordinary quote:
> When California’s Instructional Quality Commission adopted a new mathematics framework in 2021 that urged schools to do away with accelerated math in grades one through 10, it explained the move this way: “We reject ideas of natural gifts and talents.”
I clicked the link and could find no such language or even any suggestion that high achieving students don't exist, and it had a lot of verbiage discussing the need for "high achieving" students to be challenged more than others. How a student became "high achieving", like if they were somehow born that way or otherwise gained such skills in early development, was not discussed, nor does it make much difference.
therefore I dont understand the point of this article if it's going to start out with claims that dont seem to be true.
- FanaHOVA 5y agoIt's right in the introduction [0]: "All students deserve powerful mathematics; we reject ideas of natural gifts and talents (Cimpian et al, 2015; Boaler, 2019) and the “cult of the genius” (Ellenberg, 2015)." [0] https://www.cde.ca.gov/ci/ma/cf/documents/mathfwchapter1.docx https://www.cde.ca.gov/ci/ma/cf/documents/mathfwchapter1.doc...
- zzzeek 5y agothanks for that! the link that was in the article's paragraph was https://www.cde.ca.gov/ci/ma/cf/mathfwfaqs.asp https://www.cde.ca.gov/ci/ma/cf/mathfwfaqs.asp where I still can't find the link, but clearly same organization. but in any case, now I can see the context, and my point stands, the author quoted this entirely out of context in order to conclude erroneously that the authors of this document don't believe that some students are more capable than others. they of course don't believe that.