sticking my toe in --

a problem people may have with usage of the term "white supremacy math" is that it is accusatory and reductionist

I think many people, very good willed, feel that adopting usage automatically connotes accepting premise

-- and they don't want to be allied with this particular idea set, not out of prejudice or a sense of holding others back, but because it feels unreliably moored in actuality

in other words they may feel that a formerly hidden agenda of racial supremacy isn't the root cause of the differential it points to

I’m popping in and out of this thread, but is all of this “white supremacy math” discussion being centered around a single instance (sure, document with multiple authors) of someone using that terminology?

This document is “getting around” according to John McWorter. “The latest is that state-level policy makers in Oregon are especially intrigued by this document. There is all reason to suppose that its influence will spread more widely.” Sorry John, no, no it does not. It may, but intrigue by one state most certainly does not give “reason to suppose” it will spread more widely. State education systems get intrigued by many things every single year. Sure, some ridiculous ideas like Common Core Math stick. As witnessed by the number of large scale curriculum changes in the last 50 years, it’s certainly not the norm.

This argument has similarities to thinking we are beginning to indoctrinate our young elementary age kids into the LBGTQ lifestyle because one small private school in NYC gave out an assignment that wasn’t well though-out. Trying to make a mountain out of a mole hill.

Exactly. Why do Filipinos do better than whites on the standardized tests while south Pacific islanders do much poorer (just to select two groups not that historically geographically far from one another).

What is the anti-racist kryptonite that Asians and Philipinos have to thrive when taught "white supremacy math" while other groups flounder?

Yeah, you are wrong. Based on your previous posts where you repeatedly post false claims and distort what others write I am not surprised at all.

Is there some point you are trying to make?

---

-----------------------------Baron Von Speedypants
-----------------------------RunTraining articles here:
http://forum.slowtwitch.com/...runtraining;#1612485

Again, all we have is your empty assertion to that effect.


It wouldn't be a Nutella post without a claim that someone was lying. You're the boy who cried "liar" once too often.

---

◼︎ We shall soon be in a world in which a man may be howled down for saying that two and two make four, in which people will persecute the heresy of calling a triangle a three-sided figure, and hang a man for maddening a mob with the news that grass is green. - Chesterton

I think you're not really paying attention if you don't think school boards and administrators aren't already implementing equity-based tools and programs, anti-racist teaching is pretty commonly discussed these days, at least from what I've been hearing and seeing.
https://www.google.com/search?safe=strict&rlz=1C1GCEB_enUS823US823&ei=y7M-YJybCYfj5NoPt8iKyAM&q=equity+in+teaching&oq=equity+teaching&gs_lcp=Cgdnd3Mtd2l6EAMYADIGCAAQBxAeMgYIABAHEB4yBggAEAcQHjICCAAyBggAEAcQHjIGCAAQBxAeMgYIABAHEB4yBggAEAcQHjICCAAyBggAEAcQHjoECAAQQ1CkswFY4bkBYJbMAWgAcAB4AIABWIgBlQSSAQE3mAEAoAEBqgEHZ3dzLXdpesABAQ&sclient=gws-wiz


Many .org, .edu, .gov items there to peruse. There's a sea change happening in education to promote equity over equality. 'White supremacy math' is, to me, interrelated to equity training insofar as it likely means multiple teaching styles and additional context to try to engage more students in the content being taught, which has to negatively impact the amount of material that can be covered in a given period of time. How does that impact long-term student outcomes? I can't say, obviously, but I can't imagine the average, above average and highest achieving students will still achieve the levels they have in the past with so much emphasis on multiplicity and contextualizing the material.


Maybe as a country we're better off with our best and brightest being a little less bright, if it means underachieving students being less underachieving, I really don't know. I tend to think we should promote meritocracy, success, individual achievement, hard work, etc, but it seems like that type of mindset is falling out of favor with more focus on collective success.

The bottom line is, we have to figure out exactly what is meant by "white supremacy math" or "equity teaching."

Having said that, multiple methods doesn't have to mean less content. Lets assume, on the simplest scale, white boys learn best with method A, black girls learn best with method B, and asian transexuals learn best with method C. To be equitable doesn't have to mean to triple the methods. It could mean to incorporate some of A, some of B, and some of C, instead of exclusively method A.

As I've said before, I'm all for whatever leads to more people learning more math provided that that is actually happening. And I'm perfectly okay with, for example, white boys scores dropping 5% provided that other scores are actually coming up as a result (like, fewer baseball and hotrod oriented word problems....or something).

---

-----------------------------Baron Von Speedypants
-----------------------------RunTraining articles here:
http://forum.slowtwitch.com/...runtraining;#1612485

I hear you loud & clear. Some people definitely feel “white supremacy” is accusatory. It’s a very strong pair of words. If white supremacy is a handful of dog shit, then putting “white supremacy” next to anything is like rubbing the shit on it.

I still haven’t read what the phrase “white supremacy math” means, and I don’t plan on it. If someone I’m talking to uses the phrase, I could probably use context and questions to get an idea of their definition and just roll with it. I wouldn’t need to stop the conversation to object to the term or whatever.

Back in the OP, I asked “How comfortable are you letting someone else define a word or phrase?” I guess the answer from quite a few people is: very uncomfortable.

You know what’s weird? I like common core math. When my kids learned how to use sets of 10 to do everything, I learned it too. It made everything so easy. My mom-friends used to complain that it was hard. Finally, math was easy for me.

I think multiple methods are being taught now, and kids get to choose what works for them. At least that’s what I’ve seen where we’ve lived.

That's called an equivocation.

It would be like if I said, "Do you hate people?" and then list a bunch of people that you hate, you point out that you hate them, and then I say, "Looks like you hate people."


I think that most of us are perfectly fine with letting someone else define a word or phrase, or are very uncomfortable, depending entirely on what the words and phrases are, and what the intentions are.

---

-----------------------------Baron Von Speedypants
-----------------------------RunTraining articles here:
http://forum.slowtwitch.com/...runtraining;#1612485

Let me understand how comfortable you are with someone else defining a word or phrase.

Hypothetically, let's say in the future we scientifically determine that "white supremacy math" (whatever that turns out to be) is the most effective way to teach math to all races. (It begs the question why strict math instruction techniques would end up being skin color dependant anyway). Would you be content to recommend "white supremacy math" to all your friends, and/or come here in the LR and propose expanding "white supremacy math" instruction in all classrooms?

Would you be OK with defining all the best ways to teach specific skills as "white supremacy <skill name>"?

Well, to be fair, base sets of 10 has been the teaching method for quite a long time. The students who are typically good at math mastered that at a young age and their thought processes followed that base, adding to it a mastery of multiplication tables to make more complex problems relatively benign. What I do like about common core is the emphasis on being able to solve problems via multiple ways. Good math teachers have always had a habit of doing this in my experience (which is a nod to CC for officially incorporating this). I loved having multiple choice tests as there was zero need to study for them. I could always back my way into the answer one way or another.

I left education (non-math) the summer before the first year of Common Core so I was able to see some build-up and the teachers were not thrilled. These weren’t old, set in their way teachers either. Have no idea how it’s been panning out, but knowing them they’ve adapted and the kids have to. This wasn’t in an area where parents were going to watch their kids fall behind. It will still take some years before anyone knows how successful it has been.

I think most people would be uncomfortable with allowing someone to place their own definitions on words or phrases when definitions already exist.

If someone said that they don’t like “purple math,” and what they meant was that they don’t like trigonometry, I think most people would be “uncomfortable” with that definition.

Again, this is just how language works. The entire point is that we have common definitions so everyone understands what everyone else means. If people just make up the definitions for themselves, then communication falls apart.

---

Slowguy

(insert pithy phrase here...)

Meh.....I don't usually mind if new definitions are used that weren't used before. Language has always evolved.

Again, it depends entirely on what words we're using.

---

-----------------------------Baron Von Speedypants
-----------------------------RunTraining articles here:
http://forum.slowtwitch.com/...runtraining;#1612485

I’d say there’s a difference between natural evolution of language, and people who just choose to use words or phrases in a misleading manner.

If you look at how math is taught, and you think that students should have more options for how to solve a problem, but you choose to characterize that as “white supremacy,” that’s not natural language evolution.

---

Slowguy

(insert pithy phrase here...)

agreed

---

-----------------------------Baron Von Speedypants
-----------------------------RunTraining articles here:
http://forum.slowtwitch.com/...runtraining;#1612485

In my OP, I mentioned someone who said black people cannot be expected to continue to put up with disrespect. I understood his use of “disrespect” to be synonymous with racism, white supremacy, violation of human dignity, inequality. It was a serious conversation so I gave the word “disrespect “ a very serious meaning.

Conversation is a give and take. Someone says something and you interpret it. You might respond in a way to either establish the meaning more firmly or you introduce a new idea to explore within the context of the conversation. Fruitful conversations have that back and forth exploration of meaning.

Slowguy says, “I’d say there’s a difference between natural evolution of language, and people who just choose to use words or phrases in a misleading manner.”

Yes, language evolves, but it evolves within the power structures of our lives. It is undeniable that American English is evolving within a society that favors 30% of the population.

S few people here object to woke language on the grounds that it is woke. Woke is partially defined by NOT being subservient to the 30% of society who have an outsized share of power. Woke language might also be defined in part by a deliberate creation of new words, phrases and concepts. Google defines woke as “alert to injustice in society, especially racism.”

It sounds like Slowguy has doubts about the intentions or motivations of people who use woke language.

I am too woke for Slowguy. He doesn’t respond to my posts, which invariably have a question for him. In the same way he rejects woke language generally, he rejects my efforts to discuss issues. It’s an interesting tactic or use of power. By rejecting wokeness, I think you might be trying to hold on to power.

Not only do I see evidence that woke language is unacceptable because of its wokeness, I get the distinct impression that a few people here don’t believe that racial biases are a real problem in math classrooms. Or it’s not too big a problem.

BarryP, you said, “Whoever coined the phrase "white supremacy math" was just so woke that they felt bad that math was being left out of the discussion of racism.” Your statement suggests the phrase was coined for invalid reasons or bad intent.

Slowguy said, “Some of the complaints that lead to these teaching initiatives are motivated by not much more than parents who don't like that their kid didn't pass or get an A plus, and they're looking for somewhere to place the blame.”

Remember TMI said, “I stated that my experience throughout life was that almost none of my teachers used “teaching styles disrespectful to human dignity.” And I stated that my experience was likely the experience of most people.”

ThisIsIt said, “ I guess my issue is that I really doubt those biases are against minorities per se. My guess is they are biased against kids who aren't good at math, which probably has more to do with an impoverished home.” This reminds me of someone who kept arguing in the Georgia Jogger (Ahmaud Arbery) thread that the problem with police brutality wasn’t so much race as poverty. Well, yes and no. We have a hierarchy where POC and poor people are treated with contempt far more often than whites and middle class people. All the same, we’re still going to need to acknowledge and deal with the racial component.

Bottom line; y’all are fucked up. Just kidding. If you’ve spoken a foreign language, you know how being loosey goosey with words and open to other’s weird turns of phrases is actually fun. You can have conversations like never before.

My takeaway:

The trumpists are serious snowflakes, that's why they are too scared to reply to you. And conservative sensitive people have a tough, tough time with change. The only problem is, due to worldwide upheaval, change is not going to slow down, instead it's going to massively accelerate. Ain't no way around it.

---

Advanced Aero TopTube Storage for Road, Gravel, & Tri...ZeroSlip & Direct-mount, made in the USA.
DarkSpeedWorks.com.....Reviews.....Insta.....Facebook
--

You may want to read up a bit more on how languages evolve, because this "difference" does not exist.

---

Advanced Aero TopTube Storage for Road, Gravel, & Tri...ZeroSlip & Direct-mount, made in the USA.
DarkSpeedWorks.com.....Reviews.....Insta.....Facebook
--

I don't think the problem is being "woke." The problem is being "too woke."

There's a difference.

And FWIW, I don't believe we've yet to figure out what white supremacy math is.


Again, words mean things. I agree with you that it is the intended meaning that is more important than the literal meaning, but that's my point. When someone calls something "white supremacy math," I have a hard time accepting that they are trying to simply communicate the idea that "kids learn differently" and that "some minorities have fallen behind in math."

"White supremacy" is a pretty charged term with a strong meaning. I would think the same thing if someone called it "abortion math," or "spousal abuse math," or "terrorist math," or "ghetto gang banger welfare math," etc.

---

-----------------------------Baron Von Speedypants
-----------------------------RunTraining articles here:
http://forum.slowtwitch.com/...runtraining;#1612485

I don't know that the issue really has anything to do with being woke, although "woke" is a pretty dumb term. The issue is deliberate use of charged language to mislead people about what's happening. It's frequently an effective tactic because some percentage of people are willing to be misled, and don't dig much deeper past their initial emotional reaction to hearing something described in that kind of language. Label something as racist, sexist, white supremacist, etc, and that's enough for a lot of people to condemn whatever it is without really looking too hard to see if those charges are actually true.

Despite what DarkSpeed might think, that's not natural language evolution. That's lying.

---

Slowguy

(insert pithy phrase here...)

Full disclosure, I'm a white, middle-aged, man so I have not on a regular basis been knowingly or unknowingly subject to discrimination. With that being said, this "white supremacy math" is being used just to piss someone off. As Barry P and Slowguy have said multiple times, in essence, math is math regardless of color.

---

_____
TEAM HD
Each day is what you make of it so make it the best day possible.

I think systemic racism that has helped to foster poverty and an impoverished home environment for a lot of minorities probably explains a lot of difference in performance across different racial groups in math scores. The fix for that is to address the systemic racism and impoverished home life, not to tell them that the reason they do so poorly at math is because of the racist way it's taught and so the fix is to teach it a different way.

Although I'm beating a dead horse at this point, there are minorities that do more than fine being taught math the traditional way so it's hard to believe that the cause of other minorities doing so poorly is the racist way math is taught. Unless we are to believe that systematically throughout CA, math teachers are hurting South Pacific Islanders with white supremacy math while favoring Filipinos with the same.

I think you raise a good point about various minorities doing better or worse than others. That’s why it’s important to think of biases that we have for everyone.

Truth be told— I’m biased against white males who look like they come from wealthy families. When I recall the people who have harmed me most in life— it’s that group. I recognize this bias in myself and try to watch my facial expressions, language, and behavior carefully when I’m around white boys because it’s unfair to to act out that bias. Every kid is lovable. Some adults are less lovable.

Biases can be in favor of kids, too. Every kid starts out wanting to do their best and win approval and success. So I have a bias in favor of quiet, sullen kids who look marginalized. When I think of kids who need safety, encouragement and a path to success, it’s the kids who have given up trying that really tug at my heart.

Asian kids might experience biases if teachers have expectations that they are high performers in math. This might have positive and negative consequences. Asian kids might experience biases against them by people who blame them for Covid.

You say, “The fix for that [poor performance in math] is to address the systemic racism and impoverished home life, not to tell them that the reason they do so poorly at math is because of the racist way it's taught and so the fix is to teach it a different way.”

I’m not advocating telling kids anything. The racial equity plans are to be used exclusively for teacher training, as far as I know, in order to teach without biases or (realistically) minimize biases.

It sounds like you want to work on fixing systemic racism without fixing the teaching of math? Are there other areas of society that you think are also hands-off? What about medical care? Should we address systemic racism in ob-gyn but not pediatrics? I don’t understand why you might want to exclude certain classes in school or areas of life from examination.