White privilege bolstered by teaching math

[JustWinBaby]

(10-27-2017, 05:23 PM)GMDino Wrote: https://education.illinois.edu/faculty/rg1

Probably because she's not just a "mathematics teacher"?

Does she even teach math?  She has no degree in mathematics, and doesn't appear to teach any course focused on actual mathematical theories and disciplines.  What she appears to be is an SJW seeking to create "institutional racism" from the history of mathematics and its language (who knew 2+2=4 was inherently racist?).

I wonder if she considers the US standard system of measurement to be xenophobic.


Sociopol Persp Math Science This course is for anyone interested in equity-related issues in mathematics and science education. It provides an overview of sociopolitical perspectives on mathematics and science education, including how issues of identity, power, and equity play out in teachings, learning, and research. Students will develop an understanding of how racism, classism, and the politics of language operate within mathematics and science classroom and in the practice of mathematics and science in society at large. An emphasis of the course is on solutions that address social justice.

[*TheLeonardLeap*]

(10-27-2017, 06:46 PM)JustWinBaby Wrote: Does she even teach math?  She has no degree in mathematics, and doesn't appear to teach any course focused on actual mathematical theories and disciplines.  What she appears to be is an SJW seeking to create "institutional racism" from the history of mathematics and its language (who knew 2+2=4 was inherently racist?).

I wonder if she considers the US standard system of measurement to be xenophobic.


Sociopol Persp Math Science This course is for anyone interested in equity-related issues in mathematics and science education. It provides an overview of sociopolitical perspectives on mathematics and science education, including how issues of identity, power, and equity play out in teachings, learning, and research. Students will develop an understanding of how racism, classism, and the politics of language operate within mathematics and science classroom and in the practice of mathematics and science in society at large. An emphasis of the course is on solutions that address social justice.

Her ability to keep employment is literally based upon being a race baiter.


https://education.illinois.edu/faculty/rg1

Quote:Dr. Gutierrez' scholarship focuses on equity issues in mathematics education, paying particular attention to how race, class, and language affect teaching and learning.

If she concluded "they need more 2-parent families, their parents need to work with them more at home when they're particularly young, and they need to try harder" then she'd be unemployed. The only way she keeps getting money is if she can keep focusing on "equity issues" in "race".

Note it doesn't say IF it is due to race. It says HOW it is due to race.

[Dill]

(10-27-2017, 04:30 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: I'm curious. Has anyone expressing an opinion, negative or positive, about Dr. Gutierrez' statements read the entirety of them in context? Have you read the supporting documentation and statistical information, if it exists? Can you explain your reasoning for agreeing or disagreeing with her statements in a manner that displays an understanding of the base sociological and anthropological concepts used to make these assertions?

I have not read Guitierrez newly published article, but the statements are pretty clearly an extension/repackaging of other work she has done. Funny this is presented as something new as she has been publishing and researching on these matters for well over a decade. I'll take a stab at "displaying" my understanding of the base sociological and anthropological concepts etc.  In my view her work fits in with the larger global project of resistance to neoliberalism, and not only in education.
 
Just limiting myself to US educators for the moment, across many fields they are concerned about how their disciplines are being shaped by forces external to schools and universities, especially government and what I will loosely call "market forces."

For most of those external forces--the ones with real power--knowledge is merely a value-neutral, instrumental means to an end, amenable to quantitative testing.  Social/Democratic/critical educational goals beyond vocational training are suspect or clash outright with the values of those who see themselves as the real "endusers" of public education--corporate employers.

Guitierrez is a university researcher who has traveled around the country researching schools and school programs in which traditionally underachieving populations have outperformed their peers. Her work is partly motivated by the numerous instances such model programs, rather than being studied and replicated, have been dismantled to conform with externally imposed testing/curricular standards.

Identity and power concerns enter this picture at several levels.  People's identities are constructed across time and multiple sites (e.g., home and family, church, workplace, the military), and the classroom is one of those sites. So how knowledge is presented to students, especially young ones, and how they perceive/receive it is critical. They may come to see that knowledge as remote from them (and people like them) or they may come to see it as pleasurable, mind-expanding, and full of opportunity. Hence the attention of educators like Gutierrez to student perceptions of knowledge as racialized (for "them", not me). There is understandable fear the testing regime is erasing recent progress in reducing education gaps in traditionally lower achieving demographics--progress made possible by educational materials tailored-for and addressed specifically to those groups--via standardization of subjects like math.

Guitierrez' perspective on math instruction also recognizes that the supposed neutrality of knowledge subjects often hides their interested deployment in actual institutions.  ("Disinterested" science research, for example, begins to take very interesting directions once public funding is replaced by corporate.) Gutierrez also mentions the imbalance in grants slanted towards math and math based subjects; one of those points where private interests powerfully shape publicly funded education. She is a researcher who questions this imbalance--others prefer the imbalance continue on as normal and unremarked. They want her to shut up.

Race also figures into assumptions of knowledge "neutrality," if one accepts that social background plays a role in receptivity to current public education, especially math education, and one accepts that some groups come from more educationally disadvantaged backgrounds than others, and further, that those backgrounds are embedded in a long history of racial and economic inequality. If you grant all that, then embedding math education in a larger social and historical context--i.e., beyond a history of largely white achievement--makes sense. Of course, it is very hard to do that without stepping on toes.

I have more to say but I am late for dinner.  Again, thanks to Vlad for posting the FOX version of Guitierrez's work. Maybe some substantive discussion can come of it if people adhere to forum standards of civility.

[JustWinBaby]

This thread is unbelievable to see how far gone some people are with respect to rational and objectivity when it comes to something they would like to believe.  These same people would have no problem summarily rejecting [the guy Berkley protested] someone who had some science behind and published/peer reviewed research on the inferiority of some races, because it's inherently ridiculous.

http://www.news-gazette.com/news/local/2017-10-26/ui-defends-professor-after-book-chapter-draws-attention.html
"The issues around equity and access in education are real — with significant implications to our entire educational system,"

- I don't think anyone debates that, nor is it strictly a math or science problem (but an education one, in general).

"Who gets credit for doing and developing mathematics, who is capable in mathematics and who is seen as part of the mathematical community is generally viewed as white," she said.
- utter garbage.


"Not only that, Gutierrez wrote, "currently mathematics operates as a proxy for intelligence."
- Ridiculous.  Math is a "universal language" in describing our world.  It's a basis for logic, reasoning and testable hypotheses, something that differentiates the hard sciences.

[JustWinBaby]

(10-27-2017, 07:55 PM)Dill Wrote: ... ("Disinterested" science research, for example, begins to take very interesting directions once public funding is replaced by corporate.) Gutierrez also mentions the imbalance in grants slanted towards math and math based subjects; one of those points where private interests powerfully shape publicly funded education. She is a researcher who questions this imbalance--others prefer the imbalance continue on as normal and unremarked. They want her to shut up.

Give me a break.  Plenty of "corruption" that stems from govt funding, as well.  

Math - not the soft sciences - builds cars, roads and bridges.  The soft sciences don't write code, either.  The soft sciences aren't going to cure cancer.  We can go on and on and on.  The economic and quality of life attributable to hard sciences are not just private interests, but public ones.

You honestly believe, for example, that funding on, say, gender studies should be equal to funding for diabetes research?

[JustWinBaby]

(10-27-2017, 06:51 PM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: Her ability to keep employment is literally based upon being a race baiter.

I don't know, seems more an attempt at shock value to draw attention.  Generally speaking, of course, making ridiculous statements is a GREAT way to establish authority and get people to listen.

[Dill]

(10-27-2017, 08:25 PM)JustWinBaby Wrote: Give me a break.  Plenty of "corruption" that stems from govt funding, as well.  

Math - not the soft sciences - builds cars, roads and bridges.  The soft sciences don't write code, either.  The soft sciences aren't going to cure cancer.  We can go on and on and on.  The economic and quality of life attributable to hard sciences are not just private interests, but public ones.

You honestly believe, for example, that funding on, say, gender studies should be equal to funding for diabetes research?

My point was not about "corruption," at least in the usual sense of individuals seeking graft. And did you notice that I included "government" under external forces? Walmart did not force NCLB on schools.

I am just curious. Why have you responded to my contextualization of Gutierrez' work as if I had posed a zero sum, binary choice between hard and "soft" sciences?  I certainly agree that the "economic and quality of life attributable to hard sciences are not just private interests, but public ones." And I add that most US research universities are publicly funded and used to be the world's primary resource for basic research. Perhaps they still are, but it is getting more difficult as Republican state legislatures steadily defund them.

I reread my post and cannot find where I said gender studies funding should be equal to diabetes funding. Guitierrez, so far as I know, is not asking that gender or other "soft" studies should get the SAME percentage of funding as other groups, some of which inherently require more money to practice. 

"Math" and "code writers" don't determine where, when or whether bridges are built. They don't explain why EPA regulations  are enforced or repealed, or why climate science is funded or defunded. They don't decide value questions--like who gets to vote and who doesn't--which are also central to quality of life.  Some may want us to believe that "math" decided to unplug the educational programs Guitierrez champions and skews funding away from further research into what already works, but she's having none of it.

[JustWinBaby]

(10-27-2017, 10:06 PM)Dill Wrote: I reread my post and cannot find where I said gender studies funding should be equal to diabetes funding. Guitierrez, so far as I know, is not asking that gender or other "soft" studies should get the SAME percentage of funding as other groups, some of which inherently require more money to practice. 

Read what I quoted in #25.  I don't know, the implication seemed pretty clear to me, but perhaps you were attempting to say something else.

[JustWinBaby]

[Dill]

(10-27-2017, 10:31 PM)JustWinBaby Wrote: Read what I quoted in #25.  I don't know, the implication seemed pretty clear to me, but perhaps you were attempting to say something else.

Don't need to read it. I wrote it. I recognize my unqualified reference to "imbalance" may have mislead you. I took it for granted that everyone understands that hard science funding, basic and applied, federal and corporate, is enormous compared to  humanities funding. Figure 300-400 BILLION dollars a year. Federal humanities funding was around 140 MILLION in 2014.Down from around 400 million in 1979. Gender studies would be a tiny fraction of that. And Trump now wants to eliminate the National Endowment for the Humanities. So we can expect further reductions in federal support for social/critical studies of the sort Gutierrez carries out. (Trump's proposed 2018 budget, by the way, would also mean significant cuts to basic research funding in hard sciences as well https://www.aaas.org/news/first-trump-budget-proposes-massive-cuts-several-science-agencies. The Trump anti-science base will be pleased.)

So Guitierrez' complaints about the funding imbalance in research are related to this overall state of affairs. No one is imagining parity between gender studies and diabetes research.

As far as what I was attempting to say, my response to Matt's query was to provide some sense of the larger research paradigm in which she and other critical scholars work.  She is adapting critical race theory to math teaching in the wake of a decades long shift in control of education away from educational professionals and towards people who have never themselves taught, but demand "accountability" by their (corporate) metrics, both from teachers and students. Some of the former, and many administrators, are all on board with this shift.

This shift is driven in part by uncritical conceptions of education and basic knowledge which, as I said above, assume the neutrality of disciplinary knowledge, especially math. Guitierrez challenges this.

Perhaps now we are at point now where we can actually examine the arguments/research behind claims like --

"Who gets credit for doing and developing mathematics, who is capable in mathematics and who is seen as part of the mathematical community is generally viewed as white"

This is hardly new and she is hardly the only one making such claims.

[Dill]

(10-27-2017, 04:16 PM)GMDino Wrote: Dill you just don't understand how kept down white people have been!

They can't get credit for anything. They get blamed for things done by OTHER white people. They can't get hold power.

They have it hard.  We should stop making fun of them....

Vlad's OP certainly touched a nerve amongst the Fox fans.

The resulting Rorshach blottery (starting with the thread title) is fascinating.  LOL all the stuff that math researcher DOESN'T KNOW about math! 

[Aquapod770]

(10-27-2017, 02:08 PM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: Apparently Asians didn't get the memo.


A bit ago...
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/sats/etc/gap.html

More recently...
https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2015/09/03/sat-scores-drop-and-racial-gaps-remain-large

Asians are basically white to these people. They only care about the brown ones! How dare you!!! 

[*bfine32*]

(10-28-2017, 11:02 AM)Aquapod770 Wrote: Asians are basically white to these people. They only care about the brown ones! How dare you!!! 

In my time on these boards I have learned that Race is fluid and folks generally adjust it to fit their stance. But there generally is a common theme within this forum: "Whitey is bad". 

Luckily this forum is a leftist slant of reality and in general the vast majority of the population goes about their day to day without trying to relate everything to the pigment of skin. Admittedly when I see race-baiter such as the OP and those that champion such stances I cringe and hope that society in general is more open-minded. The OP makes a good living looking for racism in society and exploits it when it is and is not their. There are those that eat that shit up.

[Vlad]

(10-27-2017, 04:03 PM)Dill Wrote: Seems like Guiterrez is making sensible, well-grounded points about both the history of mathematics and present day teaching of the subject.  Thanks for posting that, Vlad.

You're welcome...be sure to tell all your liberal friends!

[GMDino]

(10-28-2017, 11:20 AM)bfine32 Wrote: In my time on these boards I have learned that Race is fluid and folks generally adjust it to fit their stance. But there generally is a common theme within this forum: "Whitey is bad". 

That might be an oversimplification of pointing out that in the history of the US (and probably the world) white people have had power most of the time and can be held accountable for most of the problems because of that. Naturally they did good things too. But it's our nature (I think) to look at the bad and try to fix those or stop them from happening again.

(10-28-2017, 11:20 AM)bfine32 Wrote: Luckily this forum is a leftist slant of reality and in general the vast majority of the population goes about their day to day without trying to relate everything to the pigment of skin. Admittedly when I see race-baiter such as the OP and those that champion such stances I cringe and hope that society in general is more open-minded. The OP makes a good living looking for racism in society and exploits it when it is and is not their. There are those that eat that shit up.

Again, I think if we looked at the regular posters you'd see a more fair representation across the political spectrum than you want to give it credit for.

I'd argue that there are better discussions here than in the "general public" (in general) because of the diversity of posters. Sure there is the occasional outburst and the one or two who want to follow each other around and troll but overall it's a good place for discussion.

Maybe that's just the way I see it.

[Dill]

(10-30-2017, 10:20 AM)GMDino Wrote: Again, I think if we looked at the regular posters you'd see a more fair representation across the political spectrum than you want to give it credit for.

I'd argue that there are better discussions here than in the "general public" (in general) because of the diversity of posters.  Sure there is the occasional outburst and the one or two who want to follow each other around and troll but overall it's a good place for discussion.

Maybe that's just the way I see it.

On this thread, at least, I count 7 conservatives/rightists and 3 liberal/leftists. The latter may present their views more effectively, thus creating the impression greater "slant."

I agree that there are good discussions here. Nowdays there are few places where liberals and conservatives actually speak to one another, or at least air their views next to one another.

[Benton]

(10-27-2017, 04:45 PM)PhilHos Wrote: Honestly, who the f*** cares who gets credit for creating or developing mathematics? Does it matter if it was largely developed by white people or black people or brown people or whatever? I mean, if it turns out that mathematics was created by a race of green aliens, does that mean that we all don't have to do math now? Seriously? Who CARES? Well, besides this ... professor, that is.


 

You know what still bugs me the most about losing to Walsh? When people talk about the West Coast Offense, they talked about the 49ers and how successful it was.

**** that. We made it successful. We made WCO. **** the 49ers, and playbook stealing Walsh. 

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(10-30-2017, 10:39 AM)Dill Wrote: On this thread, at least, I count 7 conservatives/rightists and 3 liberal/leftists.

Exactly who would those people be?  I'm interested in the labels you have chosen to apply to people.

 

Quote:The latter may present their views more effectively, thus creating the impression greater "slant."

William Shatner called, he wants to take arrogance classes from you.  He thought he was good but is literally in awe of how much more full of himself he could get.

Quote:I agree that there are good discussions here. Nowdays there are few places where liberals and conservatives actually speak to one another, or at least air their views next to one another.

An interesting choice of words.  I tend to view your posts as talking at people, not to/with them.  Belsnickel, Benton, Leonard, Zona, those are people who I view as actually engaging in discussion (apologies to any I missed, this list is by no means exhaustive).  Just a friendly piece of advice, near non-stop condescension isn't a very effective way of communicating.

[Millhouse]

In all the years I was a math whiz, I never thought of it as some sort of white privilege. I just thought of it as I was smarter than 99% of society when it came to math.

[Vlad]

(10-30-2017, 10:20 AM)GMDino Wrote: That might be an oversimplification of pointing out that in the history of the US (and probably the world) white people have had power most of the time and can be held accountable for most of the problems because of that.  Naturally they did good things too.  But it's our nature (I think) to look at the bad and try to fix those or stop them from happening again.