Is Math Racist?

Quote: terapined

The books are funny and bawdy.

Doctor Who playing the Porter from Macbeth (audio only)


It provokes the desire, but takes away the performance.

Ernest F. Hollings was a conservative Senator from South Carolina from 1966-2005. A staffer from his office went to see Macbeth and wrote an angry letter about the company inserting vulgar bits into Shakespeare. They assured her that Shakespeare himself wrote it that way.

Quote: Pacomartin

Doctor Who playing the Porter from Macbeth

In 1849, the Astor Place riot in NYC, where 22 people died, resulted when competing interpretations of Macbeth, became the flashpoint for class conflict.

well, a lot of things can be racist it appears. Buttigieg says highways are too

https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-agenda-behind-buttigiegs-claim-that-highways-are-racist-11618847867

Quote: odiousgambit

well, a lot of things can be racist it appears. Buttigieg says highways are too

https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-agenda-behind-buttigiegs-claim-that-highways-are-racist-11618847867

He's going to be on the left side of Liberal once Warren and Sanders are finally done. Have to start scoring those early points with the Millennial retards.

An article in the WSJ says a preliminary hurdle has been cleared, ie a commission's recommendation, and now needs only the state board approval in order to dismantle the state's current math programs. 

The proposal, which clearly has momentum now, would eliminate racist math teaching. 

Some article highlights: a white supremacy indicator is "addressing student's mistakes"
... making students "show their work" ... math "being purely objective" and " always right and wrong answers" is racist ... proposal rejects "ideas of natural gifts and talents" ... rejects "ability grouping" 

The article says the prior focus of California's math programs encouraged widespread introduction in Algebra by 8th grade and was producing very good results including for minorities. Gots to go because it should be social justice instruction instead. 

You can google the title "A pathway to equitable math instruction: dismantling racism in mathematics instruction", and get a pdf document of the manual that is recommended 'eight times' by this new proposal. 

WSJ article,

https://www.wsj.com/articles/california-leftists-try-to-cancel-math-class-11621355858?mod=searchresults_pos2&page=1

Quote: odiousgambit

Some article highlights: a white supremacy indicator is "addressing student's mistakes"
... making students "show their work" ... math "being purely objective" and " always right and wrong answers" is racist ... proposal rejects "ideas of natural gifts and talents" ... rejects "ability grouping=1

Are you sure it’s not satire?

Quote: odiousgambit

An article in the WSJ says a preliminary hurdle has been cleared, ie a commission's recommendation, and now needs only the state board approval in order to dismantle the state's current math programs. 

The proposal, which clearly has momentum now, would eliminate racist math teaching. 

Some article highlights: a white supremacy indicator is "addressing student's mistakes"
... making students "show their work" ... math "being purely objective" and " always right and wrong answers" is racist ... proposal rejects "ideas of natural gifts and talents" ... rejects "ability grouping" 

The article says the prior focus of California's math programs encouraged widespread introduction in Algebra by 8th grade and was producing very good results including for minorities. Gots to go because it should be social justice instruction instead. 

You can google the title "A pathway to equitable math instruction: dismantling racism in mathematics instruction", and get a pdf document of the manual that is recommended 'eight times' by this new proposal. 

WSJ article,

https://www.wsj.com/articles/california-leftists-try-to-cancel-math-class-11621355858?mod=searchresults_pos2&page=1

If there's one thing that Far Left Liberals in California have demonstrated with their policy preferences, it's that they don't really have a terrific grasp on how math works anyway.

Quote:

Some article highlights: a white supremacy indicator is "addressing student's mistakes"
... making students "show their work" ... math "being purely objective" and " always right and wrong answers" is racist ... proposal rejects "ideas of natural gifts and talents" ... rejects "ability grouping"

I can't even begin to address that.

It doesn't happen often, but sometimes, things are so ridiculous that you can just leave them to be read. Any counterargument I could give would, by the very fact that a counterargument is being offered, validate this idea more than any validation it can give to itself unopposed.

The PDF

Oh, Jesus Christ...fine, but I'm skimming it.

All quotes to follow are from the pdf:

Quote: Page 5 "Letter to Reader"

The framework for deconstructing racism in mathematics offers essential characteristics of antiracist math educators and critical approaches to dismantling white supremacy in math classrooms by making visible the toxic characteristics of white supremacy culture (Jones and Okun 2001; dismantlingRacism 2016) with respect to math.

Quote offered with no need for comment.

Quote: Page 6

Culture is powerful precisely because it is so present and at the same time so
very difficult to name or identify. The characteristics of white supremacy culture
are damaging because they are used as norms and standards without being
pro-actively named or chosen by the group. They are damaging to both people
of color and to white people. Organizations that are people of color-led or a
majority people of color can also demonstrate many damaging characteristics
of white supremacy culture.

This doesn't say anything. It doesn't express a thought.

Also, how is culture difficult to name? They just named it, "Culture," and then they identified that there is a, "White supremacy culture," which they have named. They also say that it must be, "Proactively named," even though they told us that it's very difficult to name and identify.

"Organizations that are people of color-led or a majority people of color can also demonstrate many damaging characteristics of white supremacy culture," is another sentence that doesn't mean anything. What does it even purport to mean? Does it mean that majority color-led groups are acting in a way that white supremacists would act?

Another thing worth mentioning is that, other than the occasional use of the word, 'Math,' this had yet to introduce even an outline of what we are supposed to be doing differently in the realm of math.

Anyway, I already know what this is leading to:

1.) "White supremacy culture," being difficult to name and define will be important because it will impart upon one the ability to call (or at least accuse) whatever the hell they want as being indicative of, "White supremacy culture."

It's the pronoun game and, "White supremacy culture," is being treated as a pronoun.

What is the pronoun game?

Mission: OdiousGambit, can you go over there and get me it?

OdiousGambit: Sure, but go where and get what?

Mission: The thing over there, I need it.

OdiousGambit: That's fine, but WHAT thing? Where is the thing at?

Mission: It's in the next room (imagine a separate room on both sides of us) and it's it. You know, it.

---Anyway, OG could proceed to bring me thing after thing after thing and I just say, "No, that's not it," until he eventually brings me everything that could be described as a thing from both rooms.

And, THAT is why it is, "Hard to name or define," because if words (or series' of words) have meaning, then you can decide whether or not a certain person or situation applies to that word.

For example, "Blonde," (referring to a person) has meaning. If someone were to look at me and say, "Mission146 is a blonde," someone would probably ask, "Are you color-blind? Mission146 has medium-brown hair and his beard is dark brown, if nothing else."

But, sometimes it is more convenient if words exist, but do not mean anything. This is one such case. We can hear, "White supremacy culture," and most people agree that, "White supremacy culture," is a very bad sounding thing. If we don't specifically categorize what qualities are necessary to make a culture one of, "White supremacy," then we can apply it to whatever we want people to think is a bad thing.

2.) This will inevitably turn into a discussion about, "Power," which is one characteristic that some people would agree that a, "White supremacy culture," might sometimes have. Any set of conditions by which one person has, "Power," over another.

We will come to find that teachers have, "Power," over students insofar as teachers can declare ideas/solutions to be either, "Right," or, "Wrong," so this power must be taken away lest school be a, "White supremacist culture."

Quote: Page 8

White supremacy culture infiltrates math classrooms in everyday teacher actions. Coupled with the beliefs that underlie
these actions, they perpetuate educational harm on Black, Latinx, and multilingual students, denying them full access to
the world of mathematics.

Wait a minute, I'm very confused.

Before this, they said that even organizations that are color-led or majority people of color led can also exhibit tendencies of White Supremacist Culture. Assuming for a second that this is even true, then couldn't those tendencies turned around against white students deny white students full access to the world of mathematics?

Honestly, the one thing that's going to deny people access to the world of mathematics is teaching mathematics in a way that is stupid. There ARE right answers and wrong answers in mathematics. That has nothing to do with, "White supremacist culture," it has to do with the fact that mathematics is a science that is rooted mainly in fact and, only rarely, in theory.

Here is an apple. Here are two other apples. If I gather the apples and give them all to you, then I have given you three apples.

Philosophically speaking, the only thing really up for debate is perhaps the argument that we simply choose to call one, "One," and two, "Two," and those things are not absolute---or don't have to be. While that might be true, we have already agreed on the terminologies, so it's irrelevant...also, the same cas ecan be made about every word.

That's why, and again, Philosophically, it is generally agreed that, in order to discuss anything at all, we must agree to meanings and subscribe to a language that we are sharing.

This apple sits here. I am looking at this apple, for now, in isolation. This apple is one apple.

If you say that a single apple is, "Two apples," then you're wrong. If you cut the single apple in half, it does not become, "Two apples," it becomes two halves of one apple.

Because simple concepts can either be right or wrong in math that rely upon a shared language, more advanced concepts in math can also be right or wrong. Solutions can be right or wrong. The ways one attempts to arrive at a solution can be right or wrong.

So, what makes, 'Right,' or, 'Wrong,' in math?

Procedural issues aside, the answer is simple: You're not using what is the agreed upon mathematical language the same way that other people are. Again, in order for anything (written) to have meaning at all, humans must agree upon the language.

I challenge you thusly, prove this statement wrong:

Forcefully Coca-Cola a scissors thread lake outside picture frame rose bushes political coffee cup nineteen RadioShack.

The statement cannot be proven wrong because we recognize the statement as total nonsense. In addition to using words in a way that we have not agreed to use them, I am also ignoring the majority of grammar rules.

I am not demonstrating, "White supremacy culture," by calling the above, "Nonsense." It is nonsense because it doesn't convey anything that you and I can agree to. There are no context clues whatsoever that would even indicate what I am using the words to mean. You cannot prove the statement wrong because, in order to do so, the statement would at least have to attempt to convey a shared meaning.

A science, such as mathematics, DEMANDS shared meanings of concepts. It does not do this because it is racist. It does this simply because math must convey something, and in order to do that reliably from one person to the next, people must agree on terms/meanings.

***We will get into some of the specific problems, "White supremacy culture teaching," that they allege later.

Quote: Page 9

These common practices that perpetuate white supremacy
culture create and sustain institutional and systemic barriers
to equity for Black, Latinx, and Multilingual students.

How do they do that and why? That's nonsense.

The supposition that what is quoted above has any remote chance of even being true is akin to saying, "Math is taught in a way that only white English speakers can be expected to easily learn."

And, I'm sorry, but that's kind of a racist thing to say. Speaking English does help a lot, of course, if that is the language in which it is taught.

****Pages 10-13 say absolutely nothing.****

Quote: Page 14

White supremacy culture shows up in math classrooms when...

Preconceived expectations are steeped in the dominant culture.

This is a classic example of either/or thinking. If parents don’t show the characteristics of what I think a good parent
is, then that parent is bad. If students don’t show the characteristics of what I think is a good student, then that
student is bad. This thinking creates meritocracy in the classroom: Students have to pull themselves up by their
bootstraps, and if they fail it is their fault. It does not give room for the systemic reasons students fail, which often
lie in problematic expectations.

The first few sentences have nothing to do with, "White supremacist culture;" they just have to do with making assumptions that would make a person a, "Bad," teacher. Of course, maybe calling a teacher a, "Bad," one who would make assumptions as to who is or is not a good student (absent evidence) is an example of, "White Supremacist Culture." According to them, it probably is.

But, as I have already submitted, "White supremacist culture," doesn't actually have a concrete meaning in this view of education---and it's quite intentional that it doesn't.

Classrooms should have what they are calling, "Meritocracy," assuming all that means is that some students demonstrate more ability than do other students.

Quite simply, some people are smarter than other people---or, in the case of math, more disposed with the spectrum of their intelligence to be good at math.

Once again, to assume that anything about that has anything to do with race or, "White supremacy culture," is itself about as racist as it gets.

One student is not more skilled than another student because of race. Pick two students----one is probably better (overall) at math than the other, and race is irrelevant. When it comes to specific mathematical concepts, then it's even more likely that one student might grasp concepts A, B and C better whereas the other less mathematically-gifted student might only be better at concept D.

Some people would consider me, "Gifted," when it comes to math. I'm certainly above average. But, guess what, when it comes to understanding geometry---most twelve-year olds could draw and plot circles around me.

Anyway, students are not, "Expected to pull themselves up by the bootstraps." That's a nonsensical statement. If that statement were true, then you wouldn't have teachers at all. You would have administrators who simply plop books in front of students and say, "Learn this."

As far as, "Systemic reasons students fail," are teachers supposed to grade math based on a socio-economical curve?

Billy and Jackson, you both scored 62% on this...but Billy's family is of middle income and white---Jackson, you come from a single-parent household, your Mom is unemployed and you are African-American and live in the projects. Jackson is also a direct descendant of a man who was a slave 170 years ago. Therefore, Billy gets an F and you get an A.

Quote: Page 17

“[A critical centering on dynamic community languages, valued practices, and knowledges] means that educators don't see students’ languages (e.g., Navajo, African-American Language, Spanish, ‘standard’ English),
literacies (e.g., Hip Hop, poetry, social media, street art) or ways of being (e.g., spiritual beliefs,
ways of relating to adults and elders) as somehow marginal or to simply be added to the existing curriculum. Rather, these facets of students' selves and communities must be centered meaningfully in classroom
learning, across units and projects.”

Um...Dos más dos es igual a cuatro?

I mean, yeah, I guess it would technically be ideal if it were somehow possible to teach every student in every school in one of the more than 6,000 languages that exist in the world if that would be the language of the student's preference, but that's not feasible.

More than that, it sounds like they want race/culture to be the ONLY thing that is really being considered when it comes to education which, again, is kind of racist.

Also, we are so far removed from anything that even remotely concerns math that I don't even know what to do.

Quote: Page 18

Too often students are tracked based on the notion that adults know what the right thing is for them, which does
not allow room for student agency, reinforcing paternalism and powerhoarding. Often, placement into different tracks
reflect subjective metrics of innate ability without acknowledging prior opportunities or experiences. Following the
same vein, leadership often decides which teacher is right for which course without allowing input from the teachers, students, or parents.

Oh, so it is a power thing. I saw that coming.

Start with teachers don't HAVE much in the way of power, or authority, anymore. That's kind of one of the problems. Teachers are supposed to know what is the best thing (academically) for their students---because that's what makes them teachers.

Furthermore, there is a certain, "Paternalism," to teaching. Prior to formal education, parents taught their children what they could---now we have teachers who specialize in the ability to teach certain subjects, at least, ideally they have a specialty.

Saying that this is somehow, "Paternalistic," conveys nothing other than the teacher is in charge and is directing the student because the teacher, generally, knows more about the subject than the student does. If the teacher didn't, then it can be assumed that they would not be teaching it.

The two things that I don't understand are these:

1.) What makes, "Paternalism," even inherently bad in the educational context?

2.) How can you eliminate the, "Paternalistic," component, even if you wanted to?

"Paternalism," in this context, basically means, "Superiority." Okay, well, if the teacher is not superior on the subject being taught to the student, then what the hell is that teacher even doing in the classroom?

Quote: Page 18

Professional Development: Challenge the notion that
if a student did not pass one course they will not be
“successful” in the next course. See math is taught
in a linear fashion and skills are taught sequentially,
without consideration of prerequisite knowledge

I really enjoy this paragraph. It's hilarious.

Okay, so if a student fails Basic Arithmetic, then I would err to suggest that the student probably wouldn't do well in Calculus?

Math is taught in a linear fashion and skills are taught sequentially simply because you have to understand certain mathematical concepts before you can have any chance of understanding others. If you don't know how to multiply and divide, then you can't do probability math.

Quote: Page 21

Classroom Strategies: Color-coding ideas, learning
vocabulary in student languages, visual and
kinesthetic learning, representations of learning
without words.

Oh...they did mean that they think teachers should be able to speak every language.

How many hours in a day do these planners think is devoted to math class?

Quote: Page 24

Universal access to the content standards requires that educators apply a strong equity lens as they plan
their instruction. This requires intentional focus on crafting teaching methods that are not only aligned
to the standards, but that are designed with students – their identities, cultures, assets, and needs – at
the center.“

So, treat the students differently based on their races and backgrounds. I think there's a word for that.

Quote: Page 29

White supremacy culture shows up in math classrooms when...

Procedural fluency is preferred over conceptual knowledge.

Though many educators value conceptual knowledge, we often assess and test skills rather than concepts, solidifying the notion that skills are more important. Too often this occurs because our systems expect math teachers
to prepare students for what is more easily measurable, reinforcing both quantity over quality and sense of urgency.
Also, many teachers prefer to teach procedural fluency so students engage with more complex problem solving because they believe that they have to do the basic, or computation, skills before they can apply the mathematics. But
that idea also reinforces objectivity by requiring a singular path for learning, which is oftentimes not necessary. This
is related to sequential thinking, without interrogating the need for that particular sequence of learning. In addition,
many teachers are more comfortable teaching skills-based work, and if they do that more often, they are reinforcing
their own right to comfort.

This has absolutely nothing to do with white supremacy.

The only thing that this gets right, which has nothing to do with white supremacy, is that procedural skills and the understanding of concepts are both important in mathematics and should both be a focus in teaching math.

Concept---Question

Procedure---Answer

The first thing that happens is that you are presented with something that you want to figure out, or alternatively, you decide for yourself that there is something that you want to figure out. This is often presented in the form of, "Word problems," which have a conceptual component to them.

Conceptual---I want to figure x thing out. What procedure do I need to put in place that would enable me to go about doing that? What sort of question do I need to ask, and furthermore, how should that question be framed? What data in this question is fixed? What data in this question is variable? What data in this question is completely unknown?

How can what I know about this problem and what I do not know work together within a certain procedure to give me my answer?

Procedure---Actually doing it.

Of course, the procedure is the first thing that needs to be learned. In the alternative, some procedures can be self-taught or self-modified, but you would still need to know how to figure out how to use your new procedure properly.

Actually, with your own procedure, you'd have an added conceptual concern---does this procedure actually apply to what I am trying to figure out?

Anyway, both concept and procedure are important things. That being said, if you could grasp concepts but did not know the procedure (or did not know how to create your own procedure) it would be like knowing how to build something in shop class, except your shop class doesn't have any actual tools.

Conclusion

I'm sorry, but I'm done. I can't read this anymore because it is patently ridiculous. I read almost every word of 29 pages, so I feel like I have a pretty good grasp of what is...well, there's nothing going on. None of this is going to improve the way that math is taught.

In fact, every second spent thinking about what answers administration wants to see on these, "Work sheets," is a second that is taken away that might actually be otherwise used to teach people math.

First thing: Race, culture and religion are completely irrelevant.

Second thing: Upbringing and home situations can be relevant, but to make the assumption that this specifically relates to race is itself racist. Any child of any race, culture and religion can have a negative home environment.

Third thing: Language barriers definitely CAN BE relevant, but not every teacher is going to know all 6,000+ languages that exist. You can maybe have a math class that is taught in Spanish, in certain districts, but I don't see how that wouldn't reinforce or suppose a difference between white students and Hispanic ones.

If there is a language barrier, then one predictor of success in math is probably going to be how involved the parents are in either teaching the child any missed concepts in the preferred language directly, or, finding some other means by which they might be taught in that language. In this regard, the teachers simply can't do everything.

You have anywhere from 45 minutes to three hours for a math class, depending on whether/how a school does block classes. America, in the majority, is a first-language English country. If a teacher is forced to teach math in three different languages, then each student will only get approximately one-third of the information that they otherwise might have.

That might make some of the students, "More equal," when it comes to math...but it's going to do so by making the majority of them worse at it than they otherwise might have been.

Quote: rxwine

Are you sure it’s not satire?

It's not. Look up the PDF.

Quote: Mission146

It's not. Look up the PDF.

Spoof papers have occasionally got into serious publications, because editors/reviewers got lazy. I was thinking along those lines.

Quote: rxwine

Spoof papers have occasionally got into serious publications, because editors/reviewers got lazy. I was thinking along those lines.

Unfortunately, that is not the case here. I wish it were.