I read the document from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and much of what it recommends appears unexceptional, frankly. The politics arises by the authors’ seizing what they see as the zeitgeist by mindlessly characterizing every listed defect in current pedagogical practice that they address as “white supremacy”. In a way, what is…
I read the document from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and much of what it recommends appears unexceptional, frankly. The politics arises by the authors’ seizing what they see as the zeitgeist by mindlessly characterizing every listed defect in current pedagogical practice that they address as “white supremacy”. In a way, what is again at play is the deplorable tendency to takes negative characteristics and ascribe them to entire groups as emblematic. The main target against which society-wide angst used to be projected was the Jews Now, it is the faceless social construct of “white supremacy” in which, it goes without saying, Jews are still given a large role.
However, if you ignore the rhetorical framing and look at the substance of the proposals, it seems to me that they are searching for a way to teach math to students they would find more compelling, less daunting and more friendly. It’s not at all on the order of “2+2= Whatever you feel is right”. Much of what they actually recommend is unexceptional, and one can argue about the specifics.
Perhaps the authors chose to clothe their observations in the language of critical ethnic studies because they felt using the in vogue academic jargon was necessary to be heard. If so, they did themselves a disservice by jumping into the culture wars. But the substance of their report bears consideration.
To give one example, the discussion of grades mixes serious insight (teaching to the test rather than understanding the concept taught) with a questionable premise (what grades show) to make a rather simple point (once able to wield the concept, the correct answer will follow).
“Grades are traditionally indicative of what students can’t do rather than what they can do, reinforcing perfectionism. In addition, math teachers also focus grades on what is more easily measurable, rather than the knowledge that we want students to have, reinforcing quantity over quality and often evaluating procedural or skills-based knowledge rather than conceptual knowledge.”
I downloaded and read the document. The word 'racist' appears 151 times. The word 'racism' appears no less than 98 times. The phrase 'white supremacy' appears 47 times. Given that 'white' only appears 50 times, 47 of the uses of 'white' are followed by 'supremacy'. This is a hard-code racist screen, funded by the Gates foundation of course. This is not 'woke veneer' to say the least.
Of course, the authors don't provide any evidence that 'racism' is a material influence on math instruction. Nor do they provide any evidence that 'white supremacy' is actually real. Indeed, they indirectly admit that these things are a matter of religious faith, not facts. Quote.
"We live in a toxic culture that affects us all; one dynamic of the culture is that we are discouraged from seeing it"
Of course, we should all 'see' something that does not exist.
My point is that, to me, the sections to which you refer are logically disconnected from the suggested “new” way of teaching the material. The “new” way amounts to little more than trying to make it relevant by using examples that might better resonate with the particular student body and make math more relevant to their daily life.
The framing of “racism” and “white supremacy” is not only a distraction but will end as a joke. You know how students of that age react to authority. It’s usually not with obeisance.
And, in the end, if everything is racist and white supremacist, if these things are everywhere you turn including in your math class, then the words will have been drained of their meaning and become hollowed out rhetoric that no one believes in.
As I said, I could be wrong or unduly optimistic, but that where I am on this issue.
I did some research into this. The words 'racist' and 'racism' and the phrase 'white supremacy' are rather uniformly distributed throughout the document. I can provide screen shots to show this. There is no separation between the crass (and very explicit) racism of the authors and the supposed 'new' way of teaching math.
This document reads like 'Mein Kamp' with Jew replaced by white. It is racist to the core.
CK, I will try to be nice, but you aren't troubling yourself with the truth. Over at https://equitablemath.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2020/11/1_STRIDE1.pdf you will find a PDF that is titled "Dismantling Racism in Mathematics Instruction". Over at https://equitablemath.org/ you will find "We also wish to thank the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation for their generous financial support of this project". The sad truth is that Gates is financing bigotry.
Thank you for your civil response. The point I was trying to make, which EB was able to restate better, is that I read the document you cited as representing more form than substance. The form is, I agree, objectionable for the reasons I mentioned in my comment. The proposal’s characterization of all that is bad in the way math is currently taught as “white supremacy” seems to me simply an unnecessary bow to current trends in academia - and that is the target audience apparently. But as to the specifics of the teaching methodology proposed, it seems to me properly focused on how to make the subject more appealing to all students.
You may still disagree with my view or feel that it is not worth the risk to change how math is currently taught, but I find it hard to believe that the surface political framing of the document would seep into the classroom itself. In fact, I could think of no better way to discredit this so-called Critical Race/Ethnic approach while at the same time confusing students than by explaining to them that what is supposedly discredited as “white supremacy” is then in the next breath presented as acceptable.
It’s math, after all, so the concepts themselves do not change. Were we discussing teaching history, for instance, my response would be different.
I downloaded and read the document. The word 'racist' appears 151 times. The word 'racism' appears no less than 98 times. The phrase 'white supremacy' appears 47 times. Given that 'white' only appears 50 times, 47 of the uses of 'white' are followed by 'supremacy'. This is a hard-code racist screen, funded by the Gates foundation of course. This is not 'woke veneer' to say the least.
Of course, the authors don't provide any evidence that 'racism' is a material influence on math instruction. Nor do they provide any evidence that 'white supremacy' is actually real. Indeed, they indirectly admit that these things are a matter of religious faith, not facts. Quote.
"We live in a toxic culture that affects us all; one dynamic of the culture is that we are discouraged from seeing it"
Of course, we should all 'see' something that does not exist.
First, let's be honest: it's probably the case that Bill and Melinda are now kinda prisoners to the wokesters that increasingly run the shop. It's a big operation and they're probably not focused on this level of detail. It's a cushy imprisonment. Also here on Common Sense, we're really running this stuff through the ontological and epistemological mill. The wheels are grinding mighty damn fine! And, yes, Bill and Melinda do bear some responsibility for allowing this stuff to propagate. Which leads to my next point.
I think there's merit to both perspectives here. Yeah, maybe this document is just paying lip service to critical race theory. But it's never that simple. Ultimately, woke veneer is the camel's nose under the tent (OMG, did he really just say that? Isn't that racist?). Whenever one applies woke veneer, one is either well on the rode to being a true believer, or just marking time until the purge removes the faithless. Even woke veneer is propaganda with the potential to influence people. The sheer ubiquity of this stuff is having a considerable effect on people. Woke veneer is never innocent.
Woke veneer is being slapped on everything. This stuff has crept into so many corners of the non-profit world that it can't be avoided. The only question is the level of cynicism of the individual spreading it.
I have a lot of sympathy for people trapped in this nightmare (I was, errr, am one). People don't want to be racists, but they don't realize that they've gotten on the train to totalitarianism. Maybe they're somewhat uncomfortable with the extreme positions taken by some colleagues, but who wants to be a racist? The wokesters mean well, maybe we can work with them? They're just a bit naive, right? And, at least superficially, the woke goals sound laudable--let's dismantle racism and white supremacy! So, you lead with empathy, try to ignore the most ridiculous nonsense, and put some woke veneer on the funding proposal or curriculum guide you're working on and forge ahead. Only too late do you realize what's really going on.
I've learned the hard way that woke veneer is really just capitulating to totalitarian ideology. Bari Weiss has nailed it: the hour is late. Now is the time for courage. Read your Orwell! Figure out who your allies are, and who your enemies are. Organize! Keep your friends close, and your enemies closer. All the Machiavellian things. To the battlements! And whatever you do, don't forget to look under your bed for a pod before going to sleep!
Thanks for that. You may be right that this is the camel’s sticking his nose in the tent (which I see as an allusion to the Gospels and so not racist in the least). I view this “woke” phenomenon as a passing fad that will eventually collapse from its own internal contradictions (to use Marxist-style rhetoric) and will do so if we focus our fire on its shaky intellectual foundations.
Whose prediction will come to pass is anyone’s guess at this point, but we shouldn’t give up our right to challenge the rhetorical framing of things.
I sometimes wonder what I would have done had I been in Europe with the clouds of WWII gathering. Looking back, we know all about the Shoah but in real time it was inconceivable that such a monumental tragedy could happen in the world’s most (at the risk of sounding exceptionalism) cultured and advanced countries. Would I have stayed because I decided this was a passing storm like those many the Jewish people had weathered or would I have fled having recognized the unique evil of this onrushing event. Being an optimist, I suspect I would have stayed - leaving the unanswerable question, would I have survived?
That said, I don’t see this “woke” phenomenon as at all comparable to the Nazis but that is not to say that the social and intellectual damage it might cause will not be substantial. I look at it this way: the pedagogic substance of the proposal makes sense, the packaging needs to be dispensed with - and that can be achieved by forcing its proponents to examine their assumptions. For starters, what is “white” about how math is taught today and what is “non-white” when the substance remains unchanged?
“Woke” is the self-righteous emperor without clothes. It’s lack of intellectually rigorous underpinning makes its eventual collapse inevitable. But I could be wrong.
You've made a useful distinction: there's woke veneer, and genuine woke. The Gates Foundation document sounds like an application of 'woke veneer,' which pretty much has to be applied to anything written by anyone working in a woke environment these days--if you know what's good for you. Then there's genuine woke; those are the people who will come for you if you cross them. So apply that woke veneer liberally!
EB, Go to the websites in question. This is just Gates funded bigotry. Take a look at https://equitablemath.org/. The very first webpage talks about "Dismantling Racism in Math Instruction".
Yeah, I've tried collaborating with them, hoping that the grown ups in the room could steer things in a useful direction, but at some point, you have to make hard choices, as it's a genuinely totalitarian ideology. I'm done with any attempts at collaboration, now actively organizing resistance.
I read the document from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and much of what it recommends appears unexceptional, frankly. The politics arises by the authors’ seizing what they see as the zeitgeist by mindlessly characterizing every listed defect in current pedagogical practice that they address as “white supremacy”. In a way, what is again at play is the deplorable tendency to takes negative characteristics and ascribe them to entire groups as emblematic. The main target against which society-wide angst used to be projected was the Jews Now, it is the faceless social construct of “white supremacy” in which, it goes without saying, Jews are still given a large role.
However, if you ignore the rhetorical framing and look at the substance of the proposals, it seems to me that they are searching for a way to teach math to students they would find more compelling, less daunting and more friendly. It’s not at all on the order of “2+2= Whatever you feel is right”. Much of what they actually recommend is unexceptional, and one can argue about the specifics.
Perhaps the authors chose to clothe their observations in the language of critical ethnic studies because they felt using the in vogue academic jargon was necessary to be heard. If so, they did themselves a disservice by jumping into the culture wars. But the substance of their report bears consideration.
To give one example, the discussion of grades mixes serious insight (teaching to the test rather than understanding the concept taught) with a questionable premise (what grades show) to make a rather simple point (once able to wield the concept, the correct answer will follow).
“Grades are traditionally indicative of what students can’t do rather than what they can do, reinforcing perfectionism. In addition, math teachers also focus grades on what is more easily measurable, rather than the knowledge that we want students to have, reinforcing quantity over quality and often evaluating procedural or skills-based knowledge rather than conceptual knowledge.”
I downloaded and read the document. The word 'racist' appears 151 times. The word 'racism' appears no less than 98 times. The phrase 'white supremacy' appears 47 times. Given that 'white' only appears 50 times, 47 of the uses of 'white' are followed by 'supremacy'. This is a hard-code racist screen, funded by the Gates foundation of course. This is not 'woke veneer' to say the least.
Of course, the authors don't provide any evidence that 'racism' is a material influence on math instruction. Nor do they provide any evidence that 'white supremacy' is actually real. Indeed, they indirectly admit that these things are a matter of religious faith, not facts. Quote.
"We live in a toxic culture that affects us all; one dynamic of the culture is that we are discouraged from seeing it"
Of course, we should all 'see' something that does not exist.
My point is that, to me, the sections to which you refer are logically disconnected from the suggested “new” way of teaching the material. The “new” way amounts to little more than trying to make it relevant by using examples that might better resonate with the particular student body and make math more relevant to their daily life.
The framing of “racism” and “white supremacy” is not only a distraction but will end as a joke. You know how students of that age react to authority. It’s usually not with obeisance.
And, in the end, if everything is racist and white supremacist, if these things are everywhere you turn including in your math class, then the words will have been drained of their meaning and become hollowed out rhetoric that no one believes in.
As I said, I could be wrong or unduly optimistic, but that where I am on this issue.
I did some research into this. The words 'racist' and 'racism' and the phrase 'white supremacy' are rather uniformly distributed throughout the document. I can provide screen shots to show this. There is no separation between the crass (and very explicit) racism of the authors and the supposed 'new' way of teaching math.
This document reads like 'Mein Kamp' with Jew replaced by white. It is racist to the core.
CK, I will try to be nice, but you aren't troubling yourself with the truth. Over at https://equitablemath.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2020/11/1_STRIDE1.pdf you will find a PDF that is titled "Dismantling Racism in Mathematics Instruction". Over at https://equitablemath.org/ you will find "We also wish to thank the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation for their generous financial support of this project". The sad truth is that Gates is financing bigotry.
Thank you for your civil response. The point I was trying to make, which EB was able to restate better, is that I read the document you cited as representing more form than substance. The form is, I agree, objectionable for the reasons I mentioned in my comment. The proposal’s characterization of all that is bad in the way math is currently taught as “white supremacy” seems to me simply an unnecessary bow to current trends in academia - and that is the target audience apparently. But as to the specifics of the teaching methodology proposed, it seems to me properly focused on how to make the subject more appealing to all students.
You may still disagree with my view or feel that it is not worth the risk to change how math is currently taught, but I find it hard to believe that the surface political framing of the document would seep into the classroom itself. In fact, I could think of no better way to discredit this so-called Critical Race/Ethnic approach while at the same time confusing students than by explaining to them that what is supposedly discredited as “white supremacy” is then in the next breath presented as acceptable.
It’s math, after all, so the concepts themselves do not change. Were we discussing teaching history, for instance, my response would be different.
I downloaded and read the document. The word 'racist' appears 151 times. The word 'racism' appears no less than 98 times. The phrase 'white supremacy' appears 47 times. Given that 'white' only appears 50 times, 47 of the uses of 'white' are followed by 'supremacy'. This is a hard-code racist screen, funded by the Gates foundation of course. This is not 'woke veneer' to say the least.
Of course, the authors don't provide any evidence that 'racism' is a material influence on math instruction. Nor do they provide any evidence that 'white supremacy' is actually real. Indeed, they indirectly admit that these things are a matter of religious faith, not facts. Quote.
"We live in a toxic culture that affects us all; one dynamic of the culture is that we are discouraged from seeing it"
Of course, we should all 'see' something that does not exist.
First, let's be honest: it's probably the case that Bill and Melinda are now kinda prisoners to the wokesters that increasingly run the shop. It's a big operation and they're probably not focused on this level of detail. It's a cushy imprisonment. Also here on Common Sense, we're really running this stuff through the ontological and epistemological mill. The wheels are grinding mighty damn fine! And, yes, Bill and Melinda do bear some responsibility for allowing this stuff to propagate. Which leads to my next point.
I think there's merit to both perspectives here. Yeah, maybe this document is just paying lip service to critical race theory. But it's never that simple. Ultimately, woke veneer is the camel's nose under the tent (OMG, did he really just say that? Isn't that racist?). Whenever one applies woke veneer, one is either well on the rode to being a true believer, or just marking time until the purge removes the faithless. Even woke veneer is propaganda with the potential to influence people. The sheer ubiquity of this stuff is having a considerable effect on people. Woke veneer is never innocent.
Woke veneer is being slapped on everything. This stuff has crept into so many corners of the non-profit world that it can't be avoided. The only question is the level of cynicism of the individual spreading it.
I have a lot of sympathy for people trapped in this nightmare (I was, errr, am one). People don't want to be racists, but they don't realize that they've gotten on the train to totalitarianism. Maybe they're somewhat uncomfortable with the extreme positions taken by some colleagues, but who wants to be a racist? The wokesters mean well, maybe we can work with them? They're just a bit naive, right? And, at least superficially, the woke goals sound laudable--let's dismantle racism and white supremacy! So, you lead with empathy, try to ignore the most ridiculous nonsense, and put some woke veneer on the funding proposal or curriculum guide you're working on and forge ahead. Only too late do you realize what's really going on.
I've learned the hard way that woke veneer is really just capitulating to totalitarian ideology. Bari Weiss has nailed it: the hour is late. Now is the time for courage. Read your Orwell! Figure out who your allies are, and who your enemies are. Organize! Keep your friends close, and your enemies closer. All the Machiavellian things. To the battlements! And whatever you do, don't forget to look under your bed for a pod before going to sleep!
References to the "Camel's nose" are anti-Camel. Bigotry against Camels is just the first step towards universal bigotry.
My smile for the day!
Thanks for that. You may be right that this is the camel’s sticking his nose in the tent (which I see as an allusion to the Gospels and so not racist in the least). I view this “woke” phenomenon as a passing fad that will eventually collapse from its own internal contradictions (to use Marxist-style rhetoric) and will do so if we focus our fire on its shaky intellectual foundations.
Whose prediction will come to pass is anyone’s guess at this point, but we shouldn’t give up our right to challenge the rhetorical framing of things.
I sometimes wonder what I would have done had I been in Europe with the clouds of WWII gathering. Looking back, we know all about the Shoah but in real time it was inconceivable that such a monumental tragedy could happen in the world’s most (at the risk of sounding exceptionalism) cultured and advanced countries. Would I have stayed because I decided this was a passing storm like those many the Jewish people had weathered or would I have fled having recognized the unique evil of this onrushing event. Being an optimist, I suspect I would have stayed - leaving the unanswerable question, would I have survived?
That said, I don’t see this “woke” phenomenon as at all comparable to the Nazis but that is not to say that the social and intellectual damage it might cause will not be substantial. I look at it this way: the pedagogic substance of the proposal makes sense, the packaging needs to be dispensed with - and that can be achieved by forcing its proponents to examine their assumptions. For starters, what is “white” about how math is taught today and what is “non-white” when the substance remains unchanged?
“Woke” is the self-righteous emperor without clothes. It’s lack of intellectually rigorous underpinning makes its eventual collapse inevitable. But I could be wrong.
You've made a useful distinction: there's woke veneer, and genuine woke. The Gates Foundation document sounds like an application of 'woke veneer,' which pretty much has to be applied to anything written by anyone working in a woke environment these days--if you know what's good for you. Then there's genuine woke; those are the people who will come for you if you cross them. So apply that woke veneer liberally!
EB, Go to the websites in question. This is just Gates funded bigotry. Take a look at https://equitablemath.org/. The very first webpage talks about "Dismantling Racism in Math Instruction".
Woke is a take over ideology. The veneer will simply be swallowed up.
Yeah, I've tried collaborating with them, hoping that the grown ups in the room could steer things in a useful direction, but at some point, you have to make hard choices, as it's a genuinely totalitarian ideology. I'm done with any attempts at collaboration, now actively organizing resistance.