California is Planning to 'De-Mathematize Math' | Hacker News Reader

California is Planning to 'De-Mathematize Math'

newsweek.com

Read the actual text of the plans here [1], instead of an op-ed from a partisan in the culture wars. The FAQ is at [2] and directly responds to these characterizations. They are not banning gifted & talented programs or advanced students taking accelerated courses. They are not taking calculus out of the curriculum.

What they are doing is breaking up the classic staged path where you learn algebra for a year, then geometry for a year, then back to algebra / pre-calc for a year, maybe take statistics as an elective, etc. Instead, all branches of math will be taught in an integrated approach focused around applied problems. In fact, I think HN would appreciate the shift from focusing on pure numbers and classic formulas to more applied uses of math, including algorithms, probability, data collected and analyzed in charts, etc. From the Q&A:

"To provide a more inclusive approach, the draft Mathematics Framework encourages the use of open, authentic, multi-dimensional tasks. This includes but is not limited to, learning mathematical ideas not only through numbers, but also through words, visuals, models, algorithms, multiple representations, tables, and graphs; from moving and touching; and from other representations. Studies show that when learning reflects the use of two or more of these means, the learning experience improves."

[1] https://www.cde.ca.gov/ci/ma/cf/

[2] https://www.cde.ca.gov/ci/ma/cf/mathfwfaqs.asp

> Instead, all branches of math will be taught in an integrated approach focused around applied problems.

This is how it was taught in the (European) country where I grew up. To be honest I was a bit surprised when I learnt about the approach taken in the US and some other countries.

The rebuttal letter is worth reading:

> "...We, the undersigned, disagree. Mathematics is a discipline whose language is universally accessible with good teaching. The claim that math is not accessible is an insult to the millennia of non-Western mathematicians and erases the contributions of cultures around the world to mathematics as we now know it. Large numbers of students in developing countries are currently succeeding in advanced mathematics, and American industries have been put in the position of having to encourage them to come to the United States to work... We believe infusing mathematics with political rhetoric is alien to mathematics as a discipline..." [1]

1. https://www.independent.org/news/article.asp?id=13658

I hope this works out, the number of people who are always like "lol I suck at math" is insane in the US. People are 30yo+ and using it as an excuse to not learn how to move a period to figure out how to get 10%. Smart people who were either discouraged as kids or had poor teachers run around math illiterate.

Luckily it's not very debilitating since we do all walk around with calculators in our pockets, but I feel like it's an important part of people's brain, closed off our underdeveloped simply because no one took the time to teach them math.

So, rather than figure out how to help the disadvantaged kids, they are going to disadvantage all kids - since that is an easier workaround to an otherwise very hard problem.

SAT was removed earlier from UC admissions, since inequality.

What is next? get rid of <, > and ≠ signs in Math, since inequality?

So rather than read the article, you're going to write about what the headline says -- since that is an easier workaround to an otherwise very long task.

What is next? A social media platform where headlines are the only allowable content?

I did read the article and also read the proposal and FAQ that was posted in a sibling comment, not sure why you thought I did not. Of course I've not looked at prepared textbooks since I don't think those are available yet.

But still, I fundamentally believe that we're solving the wrong problem by playing with curriculum that affects every kid in such a way, especially when it won't be evident till several years later how it impacted different kids. We should rather be thinking about how to help the kids who are lagging behind rather than change the curriculum for everyone. Not everyone will benefit with de-mathematized math. For some kids, direct teaching of concepts works better.

For example, there are English learners. The way I understand, the English learners are helped in English but they are still expected to continue with other courses in parallel. Why not take a few years with them to just focus on English to get them up to a certain level, at which point they can continue with the rest of the classwork. Perhaps have Charter schools just for that, which can become feeder schools to other schools. Yes, there would be disparity in having kids of different ages in the same class level, but that is an easier problem to solve.

NOTE: that is just one idea, and not sure if it will work. I'm not a trained educator, but I am a proponent of out of the box thinking. Changing curriculum which affects everyone is not the right approach IMHO. I still feel that changes should be made that benefit only those who need help. Across the board changes can be dangerous.

I had to look up the word mathematise / mathematize and it is not even a word in both Oxford or Cambridge Dictionary.

Collins had it and turns out it means something like "mathematically". So how can you "De-Mathematize" Maths? How can you teach maths and... not teach maths, so to speak?

So may be I have reading comprehension problem. Could someone explain to me or any non-americans here, what exactly is this nonsense?

And Please, speak as you might to a young child, or a golden retriever. It wasn't brains that brought me here I can assure you of that.

Looking into this, it seems that the phrase "de-mathematize" was invented by the critics of the reforms and in fact doesn't really mean anything. What the proposed reforms would do is

1) Eliminate "tracking" which separates high achievers into advanced classes where they can't help the poorer students. 2) Add social context to math classes, such as how biased statistics led to Blacks being denied home loans while whites of similar income received them.

I'm not saying the reforms would be a good idea, especially 1), which would be terrible for kids good at math, but they aren't as silly as an attempt to "de-mathematize" the classes.

Isn't this.... against the goal of trying to bring out the best ability of each individual?

And I assumed that was the goal in the first place.

The argument (whether or not it is convincing) is that having no tracking would pull up the lower achievers and that tracking basically is giving up on them. Both sides want the same thing, it's how they want to get there.

My daughter (10 years old) barely missed the cutoff for her advanced math classes this year. She's been helping "less gifted" students in class, and I would say is substantially better off than if she's been doing slightly more difficult math problems. This is forcing her to think about math in a different way in order to try to help other kids bridge their gaps. I wonder what schools would look like if this was the norm.

> 1) Eliminate "tracking" which separates high achievers into advanced classes where they can't help the poorer students.

I'm not familiar with US school teaching methods, but is it not normally the teachers job to help the poorer [less able] students?

It's just a fancy way of saying taking the precision and clarity out of math education. I.e., all the properties of math as a field that make it uniquely valuable among school subjects.

https://starecat.com/content/wp-content/uploads/equity-in-th...

>The framework also rejects the idea of natural or innate giftedness among children and discourages allowing students to be placed into accelerated courses even if they have mastered the material covered in the course.

How far are these people willing to go to deny reality? This is crabs in a bucket. Handicapping the capable in the name of equity...absolutely nothing good can come from such petty, selfish, science denying politics.

0. http://www.tnellen.com/cybereng/harrison.html

The woke will soon realise that the only way to make education "equitable" (an euphemism for "equal outcome") is to remove education entirely.

This, again, draws a funny parallel between the woke and the Umbridge character from Harry Potter.

What does “woke” mean?

Do you not know? Are you unfamiliar with how it is used?

> Do you not know? Are you unfamiliar with how it is used?

In this case those seem to be two different things. At least I hope.

Do you agree with the Oxford definition?

> alert to injustice in society, especially racism.

> "we need to stay angry, and stay woke"

the use is often ironic. Referring more to political affiliation with people who, perhaps, consider themselves to be alert to injustice and such.

Like calling someone self-righteous.

Also, I don't think the "especially racism" is accurate anymore (at least among the ironic use, which, in my experience, is the more common one). The stronger association nowadays is with like, positions about minorities among sexualities and gender identity, not primarily around race.

Was this really unclear to you?

Are you not exposed to this kind of use frequently?

> What does “woke” mean?

This is a very important question.

Oxford says:

> alert to injustice in society, especially racism.

> "we need to stay angry, and stay woke"

I would love to learn the exact definition which the grandparent uses internally.

Other terms which have one English definition and yet widely disparate meanings depending on political indoctrination in the USA:

- Capitalism

- Communism

- Socialism

- Social Democracy

- I'm sure many others

If we could at least start by having the same meanings for very important words like this, then maybe I would have more hope for US stability.

Hacking this basic issue seems like the most disruptive and positive move possible in US civil discourse.

It comes from the black community in the 70s, who in turn may have gotten the concept from Gurdjieff, who famously said "man is asleep" and therefore unaware of "the terror of the situation". "Stay woke" in the 70s meant "be aware of the actual social situation around you; Whitey is still not your friend".

Anyone who uses "woke" as a pejorative is promoting sleep -- personal and social unawareness. And thus the terror continues...

I'd define "woke" as identity fundamentalism. It's all about identity - black vs white, male vs female, gender conformant vs non-conformamt; and it's fundamentalism because it doesn't admit a middle ground - you either blindly join them, or become their enemy. CRT is a good summary of their views.

Blindly join them in what, exactly?

You could also try to skim some of the original material instead of taking an article obviously written with a propaganda level of bias hook line and sinker.

Stop blindly trusting people because they use some of the same political buzzwords you like.

They aren't proposing any reduction in math education, it's actually a proposal to try to teach more students, more math.

Most schools in the us start in b early middle school a set "advanced" math course. And if for some reason you weren't accepted in 6th grade, it is totally very difficult to get into the advanced math tract as it is taught and assumed that you need every year of math perfectly in order or you will be "lost".

No other subject is taught like this. I had many people move in and out of honors classes from 6-12th grade. But very rarely people move into the honors math classes from non honors. Kinda a big sign the current system is stifling

Why is this flagged?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com