@no1marauder saidI'm saying hardly any researching mathematician, which one could broadly define as anyone who has done at least a PhD dissertation on some original topic of a mathematical nature, would say this Vanderbilt character is a mathematician. Being a mathematician, I wish to separate myself from any association with the guy, and make clear that mathematicians are not remotely in the business of hosting a session at a national conference on "Undergraduate Mathematics Education as a White, Cisheteropatriarchal Space and Opportunities for Structural Disruption to Advance Queer of Color Justice."
So what? I thought this diversion was about teaching mathematics, specifically to students in K-12, which he has done. He also teaches undergrads how to teach mathematics.
What is missing from his qualifications IYO as regards this issue at hand?
EDIT: I'm dropping the "professor" issue since many mathematicians work outside of academia.
- Joined
- 05 Nov 06
- Moves
- 142564
01 Feb 23
@no1marauder said“" ...... Leyva draws on his professional experience as a certified K-12 mathematics teacher .........."
I didn't, you idiot.
”
02 Feb 23
@soothfast saidWell played, soothfast.
Teachers would love nothing better than to give each kid an individualized education in each subject. That will probably never be achievable in the real world, but we might come closer to the ideal if Republicans would just quit slashing education spending to pay for Mark Zuckerberg's tax cuts.
I had no idea that my discussing this Vanderbilt Prof's accusing the traditional math teachers of being racists
would be a segue to your discussing the republicans cutting back educational funds.
Woooosh
02 Feb 23
@earl-of-trumps saidThe point is germane. You bitch and moan about the education system treating everyone the same, but that is more due to budgetary constraints than anything else. If you want individualization, and the option for kids to take slower or faster courses according to their interest or ability, say, then you got to hire more teachers and build more classrooms. Simple as that.
Well played, soothfast.
I had no idea that my discussing this Vanderbilt Prof's accusing the traditional math teachers of being racists
would be a segue to your discussing the republicans cutting back educational funds.
Woooosh
02 Feb 23
@soothfast saidI'm sure most mathematicians don't want to hear about research which indicates that their bias is adversely effecting the education of certain groups of undergraduates just like most police don't want to hear about the effects of systemic racism on police violence toward civilians.
I'm saying hardly any researching mathematician, which one could broadly define as anyone who has done at least a PhD dissertation on some original topic of a mathematical nature, would say this Vanderbilt character is a mathematician. Being a mathematician, I wish to separate myself from any association with the guy, and make clear that mathematicians are not remotely in ...[text shortened]... e."
EDIT: I'm dropping the "professor" issue since many mathematicians work outside of academia.
That doesn't mean such research isn't uncovering problems which need to be addressed and if valid, corrected to the largest extent possible.
@no1marauder saidIt is generally accepted that anyone who belongs to a marginalized cohort in society has a statistically higher chance of struggling in subjects that a dominant cohort can handle with comparative ease. The problem is that whatever may be done to improve the lot of one cohort (autistic students, say) could adversely impact the ability of other cohorts—or even the great majority—to master a lesson. Even absent this consideration, the prescription for helping out just one minority faction is usually fraught. The doctor of education geniuses were already looking toward the next pedagogical fad when, in the middle of the last century, their "revolutionary" New Math laid waste to the mathematical sanity of a generation of schoolchildren. Be assured none of them lost their jobs.
I'm sure most mathematicians don't want to hear about research which indicates that their bias is adversely effecting the education of certain groups of undergraduates just like most police don't want to hear about the effects of systemic racism on police violence toward civilians.
That doesn't mean such research isn't uncovering problems which need to be addressed and if valid, corrected to the largest extent possible.
I am aware of many problems with undergraduate mathematics education that I'd love to change, had I the power. Being "neurodiverse" myself, I'm informed of some of these problems by my own wiring and first-hand experience. The rest I've gathered from my own teaching experiences.
The travails of minority cohorts in mathematics classes stem from biases in society at large, and will not be fixed by dubious atomistic tinkering with established curricula. Owing to their structured nature, there is little latitude to pitch algebra and geometry in different ways, or to inject sociopolitical agendas into lessons without a net loss in mathematical understanding. The holistic approach is needed: speed change in society as a whole, but recognize that pushing too hard may only accomplish putting Republicans in office. Yes, there's politics to ponder as well.
Women are coming into their own incrementally in the mathematical sciences as society evolves, and it had little to nothing to do with featuring more women in word problems or making the mathematics curriculum less "patriarchal." What has worked and is working are three things: the aforementioned change in societal attitudes, community outreach, and the retention efforts of extracurricular support groups. Changing or "disrupting" (using the Vanderbilt prof's term) the mathematics curriculum itself, or how mathematics is taught, was not done to boost women in mathematical fields to any extent that I am aware of. And as go women, so will other historically marginalized groups go in time.
02 Feb 23
During the autopsy, it was discovered that one of the reasons the New Math failed outside the "laboratory" was that the teachers who were teaching in real-world schools didn't understand it themselves. There were other issues, but this is one problem that recurs with each brain fart the Ed.D. people let rip in their ivory towers.
- Joined
- 05 Nov 06
- Moves
- 142564
02 Feb 23
@soothfast saidso you are eliminating the fact that different races (cohorts) (minorities) are more intelligent than others?
It is generally accepted that anyone who belongs to a marginalized cohort in society has a statistically higher chance of struggling in subjects that a dominant cohort can handle with comparative ease. The problem is that whatever may be done to improve the lot of one cohort (autistic students, say) could adversely impact the ability of other cohorts—or even the great majo ...[text shortened]... ent that I am aware of. And as go women, so will other historically marginalized groups go in time.
02 Feb 23
@mott-the-hoople saidProbably on the basis that intelligence is a subjective term, I’m guessing an Inuit knows more about snow but less about trees than a European.
so you are eliminating the fact that different races (cohorts) (minorities) are more intelligent than others?
If your talking about Africans ( and you usually are in this context ) then post the comparative figures regarding them rather than the ones for the average African Americans trying to compete in a racist system that keeps them in a broken and grossly underfunded education system.
- Joined
- 05 Nov 06
- Moves
- 142564
02 Feb 23
2 edits
@kevcvs57 said"Probably on the basis that intelligence is a subjective term, I’m guessing an Inuit knows more about snow but less about trees than a European. '
Probably on the basis that intelligence is a subjective term, I’m guessing an Inuit knows more about snow but less about trees than a European.
If your talking about Africans ( and you usually are in this context ) then post the comparative figures regarding them rather than the ones for the average African Americans trying to compete in a racist system that keeps them in a broken and grossly underfunded education system.
that has nothing to do with intelligence. you can teach an animal how to do tricks.
"If your talking about Africans ( and you usually are in this context ) then post the comparative figures regarding them rather than the ones for the average African Americans trying to compete in a racist system that keeps them in a broken and grossly underfunded education system."
"But the example he then gives is malnourishment producing differences in height. When speaking about IQ, Murray’s position eventually becomes clear: Genes play a role in the average difference between the IQs of blacks and whites, and public policy is not going to be able to do much to change levels of cognitive skills."
https://www.vox.com/the-big-idea/2017/6/15/15797120/race-black-white-iq-response-critics
I dont see why you libs have such a problem with this. And why do you consider it racist to simply state established facts?
As I said before, the only way to close the gap with the OP issue is to dumb down the teaching/testing. That is not a cure, it will hinder the progression of those that are capable.
02 Feb 23
@mott-the-hoople saidIt's the very definition of "racist" to believe one "race" is inferior to another "race". So if you believe such nonsense don't object when someone correctly describes you as a racist.
"Probably on the basis that intelligence is a subjective term, I’m guessing an Inuit knows more about snow but less about trees than a European. '
that has nothing to do with intelligence. you can teach an animal how to do tricks.
"If your talking about Africans ( and you usually are in this context ) then post the comparative figures regarding them rathe ...[text shortened]... teaching/testing. That is not a cure, it will hinder the progression of those that are capable. [/b]
Murray's work is considered a joke by the vast majority of scientists in relevant fields.
- Joined
- 05 Nov 06
- Moves
- 142564
02 Feb 23
@no1marauder saidI just provide the facts...The very definition of racism is affirmative action.
It's the very definition of "racist" to believe one "race" is inferior to another "race". So if you believe such nonsense don't object when someone correctly describes you as a racist.
Murray's work is considered a joke by the vast majority of scientists in relevant fields.
02 Feb 23
@mott-the-hoople saidOnly right wing idiots believe that. There are no facts supporting the idea that one "race" is inferior to another "race"; in reality the accepted fact among scientists in the relevant fields is that there are no races in humans.
I just provide the facts...The very definition of racism is affirmative action.
- Joined
- 05 Nov 06
- Moves
- 142564
02 Feb 23
@no1marauder saidwelll stfu then
Only right wing idiots believe that. There are no facts supporting the idea that one "race" is inferior to another "race"; in reality the accepted fact among scientists in the relevant fields is that there are no races in humans.
02 Feb 23
@mott-the-hoople saidThere is no credible evidence that I'm aware of that any one race is more intelligent than another. But there is no point in discussing the issue with you, because your mind is made up. Having clearly never bothered to cultivate your own intellect, thinking of yourself as a member of the "master race" is too important to your self-esteem to entertain other ideas.
so you are eliminating the fact that different races (cohorts) (minorities) are more intelligent than others?