Refusing to teach kids math will not improve equity • Hacker News Board

Re: Refusing to teach kids math will not improve equity

#601

Post by nobody9999 » Tue, Jul 18, 2023, 10:47 PM UTC

chongli wrote: post #175

altcognito wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One of the purposes of public education is also assimilating children into the shared values of society. In the US this has been forgotten despite guys like Jefferson talking about this exact thing. The free market can be good at optimizing for certain outcomes, but I don't think you're going to get a lot of buy in with the current political climate being what it is, and a lack of consensus around what kind of outcom…

assimilating children into the shared values of society The US no longer has universal shared values, it has many different sets of values that are all competing for survival. Schools have become the front line in this battlefield.

>The US no longer has universal shared values, it has many different sets of values that are all competing for survival. Schools have become the front line in this battlefield.

I disagree completely. Our shared values include belief in the rule of law, equality under that law, equality of opportunity and a whole bunch of other stuff that has always been the rhetoric, but much of which has only grudgingly been implemented for wider and wider swathes of Americans over the past 230+ years.

That some folks are at odds some issues most certainly does not mean we don't have shared values. It means that we don't share all the same values/ideas. Which is exactly how it's been here since well before the founding of the US.

Edit: Fixed prose.

Re: Refusing to teach kids math will not improve equity

#602

Post by cauch » Tue, Jul 18, 2023, 10:47 PM UTC

WillPostForFood wrote: post #583

cauch wrote: post #453

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thank you for bringing my attention to that. Looking closer, I'm even more confused: it was never question to drop "advanced math", but to replace "advanced algebra" by "advanced data science mathematics". The program was even claiming (maybe incorrectly, but it's not the point) that they wanted to replace the boring memorization of formula by real life problems more challenging for students. So, I'm now not even sur…

It is not a moral panic, it is legitimate dumbing down of the math curriculum. You have to look further back. They are blocking middle schoolers from taking Algebra. That means they won't haven't progressed enough to get to Calculus unless they skip ahead a grade level of math, either via summer school, or other outside study.

> They are blocking middle schoolers from taking Algebra.

By replacing it by another challenging mathematical content. How is that "dumbing down".

It's like saying "they are making students less musical because they are replacing piano lectures with guitar lectures".

And, yes, I get that Algebra is not the same as Data Science, and that Algebra may cover some foundation needed for a math specialization. But a lot of students don't end up doing a specialization in math: for them, Data Science may make them SMARTER than Algebra which give tools rather than train the brain to think differently.

I had a strong math cursus at uni, and I've observed that it takes a while for the "math point of view" to "click" and suddenly make sense. It is also the case in some comments here. I have never seen someone saying they have "clicked" before uni (I'm sure there is some, the point is that they are too rare to be the reason we waste all the other students' time). The reality is that teaching 1 year of something that you need 2-3 years before "clicking" means that it is just wasted on people who just do one year.

And, of course, Algebra is not limited to that. But it is also just true that a lot of it is learning formula by heart, which makes it difficult to pretend teaching a more challenging, engaging and practical math domain will make people somehow less smart.

Re: Refusing to teach kids math will not improve equity

#603

Post by nemo44x » Tue, Jul 18, 2023, 10:53 PM UTC

tootie wrote: post #581

marcusverus wrote: post #547

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In my opinion, much of this comes down to blind empathy. Folks are more worried about hurting people’s feelings than about their life outcomes. They would rather “lean in” and embrace the huge rise in single parent households than push back, even with the knowledge that these social changes have resulted in millions of children living in poverty who otherwise would not have! It’s absolutely bananas.

What the hell does pushing back on single-family homes look like? Christian fundamentalism? Think about this from a perspective of getting positive outcomes from the actual world that exists. Divorce happens. Unplanned pregnancy happens. Family planning is being actively dismantled by the same people who are pushing for increased privatization of schooling and decreases in social safety nets. I don't think that's a c…

Stop incentivizing single parenthood. This reestablishes social norms around staying together as they (the parents) need each other. Trying to approximate that via social engineering and creating clients of the state has failed for 50+ years.

Re: Refusing to teach kids math will not improve equity

#604

Post by eftychis » Tue, Jul 18, 2023, 10:55 PM UTC

s1artibartfast wrote: post #372

tomsmeding wrote: post #295

Disclaimer: European. Is it not strange how in an article arguing from otherwise a very egalitarian, leftist viewpoint, when it discusses how students perform given more or less difficult classes, it somehow thinks the most relevant statistic is the race of the students? (Approximately, even, because American race designation is kinda weird anyway.) Sure, socio-economic circumstances are correlated with race. (Unfort…

The USA is currently obsessed with race, and this influences all discussions. I agree that this topic could be more accurately and inclusively framed as how to improve outcomes for low income students, or children with absentee/incarcerated parents, or children of addicts. Unfortunately, some people care much more about racial outcomes than they do about any of those I mentioned. The point of the racial framing IS to…

To give a bit of context to all the sibling comments:

We are talking about a history where: a) A decision to not occupy a defeated country was made because they were impure/non-white (Mexico)... [I don't think I have encountered a similar historical example. I will spend some time looking/reviewing just in case I am forgetting some similar situation.] b) Called Germans and Finnish immigrants "non-white":

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Definitions_of_whiteness_in_th....

Italians and Greeks faced the same treatment. Everything and everyone had to be assigned at some class/color. The wikipedia article goes even more in depth about the issue that also posed for Asians in the U.S. which is a whole lot different rabbit hole, and which I am still confused about.

c) Gun control and argumentation started because of racism. NRA actually did support gun control at one point: when the Black Panthers tried to exercise their right to bear arms. And when Reagan introduced the Mulford Act in response, evidence shows it was enforced based on race.

https://www.history.com/news/black-panthers-gun-control-nra-...

https://www.mintpressnews.com/the-mulford-act-and-americas-r...

And going way back: Black Codes were a big part of Jim Crow measure: everyone could have a gun; unless you were "black." (Or other undesirable.)

And to place the final nail: https://www.npr.org/2021/06/02/1002107670/historian-uncovers...

There is the claim that the 2nd amendment was enacted to ensure slaves wouldn't revolt. Not sure yet how much weight one should place to that claim; but the world history supports such considerations. [Review cf. Spartans for instance or the Japanese class system.]

Re: Refusing to teach kids math will not improve equity

#605

Post by nobody9999 » Tue, Jul 18, 2023, 10:55 PM UTC

bluGill wrote: post #455

autoexec wrote: post #388

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd bet that the school she went to would let a girl into shop class today (assuming the school and class are still around). Change is possible, but it's slow. It also matters if there's one girl who wants to take shop class vs many girls who are asking for it. Parents and students can work to change the ways their schools are run. They may have to campaign for and promote their causes so that "one vote" grows into m…

Sure, but it was too late for my mom. My mom would have been better off finding a different district that would let her in (this may not have been possible), instead of fighting a system that ultimately failed her.

>Sure, but it was too late for my mom. My mom would have been better off finding a different district that would let her in (this may not have been possible), instead of fighting a system that ultimately failed her.

An interesting and important anecdote. But rather than focusing on your mom's inability to take shop class, perhaps you might reflect on the fact that your mom (and many other women/girls) fought for such changes and, eventually (albeit too late for your mom), won.

That's how change happens. If you just throw up your hands and say "well, I/my mom/whoever couldn't have something that was good and important. So there's no reason to ever fight for change," seems incredibly reductive and doesn't reflect how change has been wrought throughout history.

Please understand, I'm not poking at you or your mom (in fact, I don't know her, but I think she's fabulous!). Rather, I'm taking issue with the idea that we "can't win, so don't try." That's a recipe for those who understand how change is made to create the world in their image, whether you like it or not.

Re: Refusing to teach kids math will not improve equity

#606

Post by htfu » Tue, Jul 18, 2023, 10:55 PM UTC

dumpsterdiver wrote: post #580

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #240

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For those who think this is hyperbole, see [1] for a mathematician taking down the framework. California's new standards were written by folks without a background in math nor neuroscience. They misquote neuroscience papers [2] while making mathematical mistakes in their policy paper. [1] https://sites.google.com/view/publiccommentsonthecmf/?ref=st... [2] https://drive.google.com/file/d/17O123ENTxvZOjXTnOMNRDtHQAOj..…

Oh my, I read your first link in its entirety and, "Yikes." The Public comment #5 section regarding chapter 12 (which covers homework and assessments) was especially shocking. Chapter 12 in the 2005 version of the CMF was 5 pages long. The same chapter in the current draft is 70 pages long, almost entirely due to a slew of opinions against homework and other testing practices. The entire CMF draft was (and still is e…

> To be clear, the specific policy I just mentioned really is part of the document - allowing students to always redo work for a better grade.

If you've learned the material and fulfill the requirements, and the course is still ongoing, why should it matter you were late? Are you teaching the subject, or is [literally every course all the time] really mostly a study in time management? (hint: it's not for the student's sake, it's about managing teacher time and resources. Which is obviously necessary, but not otherwise positive)

> That reinforces that idea that it's okay to do a half-ass job because you can always "fix it later".

I'd say it might equally mean not pointlessly throwing in the towel and phoning the rest in just because you performed poorly early on and (rightly) feel like it doesn't matter anymore.

> In the real world however, poor decisions can have devastating effects the very first time, and there might not be a chance for a "do-over".

Sure. Exceedingly rarely though, compared to school.

> Homework also normalizes the idea that things will be expected from you in this world if you are to be employed.

Most jobs don't involve additional work after you've finished work. Nor constant artificial deadlines that never let you truly relax. Constant stress is bad for humans, it's not something that hardens you, and pointlessly subjecting people to it "just because" is not just useless but counter productive, because you get blunted. It's important to have something extra to tap into when shit truly hits the fan and it's time to step up, but the contrast gets lost if it's a neverending blur.

Re: Refusing to teach kids math will not improve equity

#607

Post by cmh89 » Tue, Jul 18, 2023, 10:57 PM UTC

alephnerd wrote: post #493

cmh89 wrote: post #481

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have friends who are/were teachers. I can't imagine why anyone would subject themselves to that. Low pay, spoiled out of control children, their evn worse parents, active shooter drills/real active shooters, fucking TikTok. I wouldn't do that job if it paid double what I make now.

Hot take, but parents don't parent anymore. I've seen antisocial behavior rise in both kids from well off backgrounds as well as from kids from less well off backgrounds. In both cases, the parents aren't an active participant in their kid's lives. The kids (both rich and poor) with present parents always ended up well established and this was irrespective of race. The only benefit that money had was it could open so…

I know that older people complaining about younger people is literally ancient, but I can't help but feel that cell phones + social media is doing some real damage. It hurts adults, I can't imagine experiencing it with a developing mind.

Re: Refusing to teach kids math will not improve equity

#608

Post by disambiguation » Tue, Jul 18, 2023, 10:57 PM UTC

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…

Very interesting, I didn't realize there was a recent sharp increase in spending.

I think you're right, the census is out of date. However, given spending likely has a lagging effect, the historically low budget - coupled with harsh covid lockdowns - does begin to explain why CA ranks low among public schools.

Re: Refusing to teach kids math will not improve equity

#609

Post by gnicholas » Tue, Jul 18, 2023, 11:00 PM UTC

guidoism wrote: post #599

lotu wrote: post #356

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe true but that won't get them a calculus credit on their transcript. > The reality is for these students, "standard" middle and high school math is mind-numbingly boring. >The best outcome would be that the best schools and teachers use the surplus time to teach stuff that's off-curriculum like logic, discrete math, stats, programming, etc. This is also true I was one of these students. My middle school did almo…

As far as I can tell you don't need an official transcript from an accredited school to get into college. We are homeschooling our kids and what I've read is that homeschoolers write their own transcript, the kids themselves write it, and they describe what they've accomplished and learned during their schooling career and admission depts in colleges tend to favor these kids over traditionally schooled kids. I'm gues…

I'd be interested to learn more about this. Where can I find data on how admissions depts view homeschooled kids versus other kids?

Re: Refusing to teach kids math will not improve equity

#610

Post by rayiner » Tue, Jul 18, 2023, 11:02 PM UTC

gnicholas wrote: post #391

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #343

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> with the goal of improving opportunity for all I'm chatting with some friends who are parents in the Bay Area. Their admittedly very Californian response is that at least this should reduce competition for college spots. (Their kids are obviously going to get tutoring.)

I'm not sure it will — there are still plenty of schools elsewhere that offer advanced coursework, and their graduates can more than fill the freshman class of elite colleges. For example, I grew up in Sacramento, and our public schools had a tracked program from 2nd grade. Pretty much all of us took algebra/geometry in middle school, and those who were advanced were taking precalc or calc by 9th grade. It has been a…

Move somewhere cheaper and invest in private schools and a private tutor. (Folks who were “engineer back in old country” are not that expensive.)