Hacker News Reader

Comment by lurquer | Hacker News Reader

We’ve all encountered ambiguous poorly-written word problems.

That’s a problem with grammar and language; not math.

The agenda behind the pamphlet is obvious. I liked this gem from the page at issue:

>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?

These thing WERE highly valued? They are no longer? And weren’t they valued BEFORE the industrial revolution? Indeed, was not the Industrial Revolution possible in the first place due to the high value put on precision and accuracy?

View on HN

It is a problem of grammar and language! As others here have said, no one is claiming that the notion of math itself is racist, but that math education can be. The 'agenda' seems to be to make sure that marginalized groups are better able to learn math. Do you disagree?

As for the 'highly valued' bit; one could argue that mathematics built for problem solving creative issues (including in computer programming) is now valued more than it was then. That could lead to different curriculum than before.

No, you're missing the point. Why is valuing "precision and accuracy" inherently supporting systems of white supremacy?

You don't land a rocket on Mars by valuing anything other than precision and accuracy.

It didn't say that, though. I agree it could be clearer here, but it seems to be suggesting simply that other values should also be considered when thinking about math education. It never seems to say precision or accuracy are bad or racist.

This is the thing about the hard sciences, there is nothing else that matters. You can teach these principles more effectively, but unfortunately there are right answers and there are wrong answers.

The laws of the universe just don't care about anything else.

You're missing the point of equity in the education system. There are different ways to teach different students effectively.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com