Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Refusing to teach kids math will not improve equity

noahpinion.blog

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

531–540 of 816 posts

Re: Refusing to teach kids math will not improve equity

#531

Post by hospitalJail »

gnicholas wrote: post #13
crop_rotation wrote: post #2

In the age of Zoom, won't even slightly well to do parents get tutors from a remote country for a reasonable price for their kids if the school stops teaching math. The only kids who will suffer are the kids where parents are not so much focused on education, thus increasing the disparity.

You can get remote tutors to teach your kid skills, yes. However, if your goal is to have your kid advance to higher math classes, it isn't enough to just know the skills. Schools erect extreme barriers to advancement (Palo Alto USD has been successfully sued on this point [1]), so what students really need is to enroll in outside courses that are certified replacements in order to get credit. Finding out about which…

Go straight to college.

I had a somewhat similar issue in high school and 1 summer class got me more advanced than anyone else, I was able to duel enroll after that.

Re: Refusing to teach kids math will not improve equity

#532

Post by recursive »

ryandamm wrote: post #390
achates wrote: post #377

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Does putting marginal students in advanced classes actually help them?

The results cited in the article suggest that either the answer is yes, or in fact "marginal students" are perfectly capable students who were being passed over. The text of the article further suggests that many of the students who scored well on qualifying exams weren't taking the classes because they didn't have the parental involvement or default assumption that they would take it. (Note that the opt-out group wa…

Am I meant to believe that all students are equally capable? That's a tough sell.

Re: Refusing to teach kids math will not improve equity

#533

Post by zztop44 »

bamfly wrote: post #516
ghaff wrote: post #442

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's hard to keep my attention for almost 8 hours. And generally a lot less and that's with coffee and generally being able to get up and stretch my legs. And, while the situation is much different, I've become a fan of shorter presentations, meetings, etc. ADDED: I often think I couldn't handle high school today.

Looking back on high school, no wonder I was so damn bad at it and hated it so much. And depressed all the time. And probably picked up SAD that took me a decade beyond it to shake. I'd quit a job as soon as I could find another, if it demanded of me what high school did. Hell, I'd quit based on the consistent 10+ hour days and constant due-tomorrow deadlines, let alone the rest of it like the before-the-sun's-up sta…

Glad you found your place. High school wasn’t quite as bad for me but I was constantly sick and battled migraines that stopped as soon as I left. Now I work hard, work long hours, but I’m happy and feel healthy and strong. It’s very different.

Re: Refusing to teach kids math will not improve equity

#534

Post by netbioserror »

sergiogjr wrote: post #511

In the name of progressivism, epistemology in humanities has been dismantled, and business schools soon after were captured by the DIE (diversity, inclusion, equity) religion. Finally the demented Paulo Freire idolaters are coming for stem fields. Let's see if the push back is too little, too late, or if there's hope. Otherwise, do tutoring or homeschool your children. Edit: and of course, the result of those last 2…

The content and curriculum that has been excised from public education in past decades should draw the attention of anyone wanting to learn the mechanics of power. When control of childrens' upbringing (for 7 hours a day) is up for grabs, what is and isn't taught is critically important to understanding motive and intent.

Re: Refusing to teach kids math will not improve equity

#535

Post by csa »

feoren wrote: post #505
csa wrote: post #345

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Citation needed. Why wouldn't they be, unless there's a disability? They come from a sub-culture (mostly based on social-economic status) that is aggressively anti-intellectualism. Being bullied, shunned, etc. for being able to do things like read, do “basic” math, and/or speak anything outside of the local vernacular (e.g., something like a more neutral sounding “TV English”) is a thing. This type of research is a…

So if a kid is being bullied for learning to read, the answer is to stop teaching them to read? Is that really your suggestion? And by the way, the statement "Some kids are educatable. Some are not." also comes from a sub-culture that is aggressively anti-intellectual.

> So if a kid is being bullied for learning to read, the answer is to stop teaching them to read? Is that really your suggestion?

Definitely not. Quite the contrary, actually.

My point is that folks shouldn’t be surprised that some kids in these types of environments have low or negative motivation to learn.

> And by the way, the statement "Some kids are educatable. Some are not." also comes from a sub-culture that is aggressively anti-intellectual.

All kids are able to learn — in fact, they are sponges.

The issue at hand is what do they learn and in what contexts.

Formal school-based learning is a tough sell in some contexts.

People continue to be shocked that throwing money at low SES students doesn’t meaningfully improve education outcomes, despite decades of data showing that it doesn’t.

The interventions that have been shown to work over and over again are:

1. Early interventions like the (old?) Head Start.

2. Increasing engagement at the community level, specifically with parental buy in. This is very hard to do, but can be done.

Once a community has embraced anti-intellectualism, all the school can really do is create a safe space in at least part of the school for those who want to learn.

You seem to be offended by my ideas. The ideas I present here are based on actual research. I encourage you to look into the literature and (if possible) talk to researchers and practitioners in environments that you are not native to (low SES rural, urban, and non-native speaker communities are good places to start).

Re: Refusing to teach kids math will not improve equity

#536

Post by Nasrudith »

feoren wrote: post #518
AlanYx wrote: post #487

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure if you're being sarcastic or not, but the objections are not typically phrased in the type of language you're using. A typical example is something like this, from Louie (J.Res.Math.Ed. 2017): >Through the lens of the culture of exclusion, students who appear mathematically gifted are viewed as intelligent, whereas others are myopically perceived as “slow,” “remedial,” and “special needs.” These perceive…

Okay, have these guys seen how people who are really good at football are treated? And all those guys who are great at guitar keep getting all the chicks, goddammit! There's no reason to think that mathematics has any more of a "culture of exclusion" than any other field of study, vocation, or sport.

Sounds like a classic case of bullying tactics in picking soft targets.

Re: Refusing to teach kids math will not improve equity

#537

Post by VK538FY »

bamfly wrote: post #516
ghaff wrote: post #442

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's hard to keep my attention for almost 8 hours. And generally a lot less and that's with coffee and generally being able to get up and stretch my legs. And, while the situation is much different, I've become a fan of shorter presentations, meetings, etc. ADDED: I often think I couldn't handle high school today.

Looking back on high school, no wonder I was so damn bad at it and hated it so much. And depressed all the time. And probably picked up SAD that took me a decade beyond it to shake. I'd quit a job as soon as I could find another, if it demanded of me what high school did. Hell, I'd quit based on the consistent 10+ hour days and constant due-tomorrow deadlines, let alone the rest of it like the before-the-sun's-up sta…

I thought that I was the only one to feel this way! Not anymore.

Re: Refusing to teach kids math will not improve equity

#539

Post by Nasrudith »

s1artibartfast wrote: post #441
disambiguation wrote: post #387

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not sure what you mean by "best funded" but California spending is fairly middle-of-the-pack compared to all U.S. states. ~14k per pupil, compared to most North East states spending over 20k per pupil. [1] https://www.census.gov/newsroom/press-releases/2021/public-s... But if you take these rankings at face value [2] it does seem there's more than spending at play here. Though perhaps spending simply has to be normal…

Im having trouble reconciling these numbers with with total spending in California. Does it include local and federal funding? The California department of education puts[1] per pupil k-12 spending at 23K, almost double that listed in the census. >The total overall funding (federal, state, and local) for all K–12 education programs is $124.3 billion, with per-pupil spending of $21,596 in 2021–22. For 2020–21, per-pup…

Perhaps it is a cost disease issue with high cost of living driving up expense of mostly labor expensed fields with little automation fields like education?

Re: Refusing to teach kids math will not improve equity

#540

Post by Dig1t »

nancyhn wrote: post #529
btilly wrote: post #519

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't worry. DEI programs have this covered as well. Stop using standardized tests to get in. And then just aim for the perfect "socially desirable" mix. Regardless of ability.

Can someone explain how DEI programs got so embeded despite being flagrantly regressive?

I personally am afraid to speak out against such things. I did in college and was viciously flamed by people who thought it was a good idea. You can shut down the entire conversation by just calling someone “racist” or “bigot”.

I don’t want to lose my job or be ostracized.

To be clear, my opinions are only that it seems wrong to me to discriminate against someone based on their immutable characteristics (like race).

Post reply on HN