Teaching and Learning Mathematics for Social …

1 Teaching and Learning Mathematicsfor Social justice in an Urban, Latino SchoolEric Gutstein, University of Illinois ChicagoThis article reports on a 2-year study about Teaching and Learning Mathematics forsocial justice in an urban, Latino classroom and about the role of an NCTM Standards-based curriculum. I was the teacher in the study and moved with the class from seventhto eighth grade. Using qualitative, practitioner-research methodology, I learned thatstudents began to read the world(understand complex issues involving justice andequity) using Mathematics , to develop mathematical power, and to change theirorientation toward Mathematics . A series of real-world projects was fundamental tothis change, but the Standards-based curriculum was also important; such curriculacan theoreticallypromote equity, but certain conditions may need to exist.

2 Socialjustice pedagogy broadens the concept of equity work in Mathematics classrooms andmay help promote a more just Words:Attitudes; Beliefs; Critical theory; Equity/diversity; Middle grades, 5 8;Qualitative methods; Race/ethnicity/SES; Social and cultural issuesWith every single thing about math that I learned came something else. Sometimes Ilearned more of other things instead of math. I learned to think of fairness, injusticesand so forth everywhere I see numbers distorted in the world. Now my mind is openedto so many new things. I m more independent and aware. I have learned to be strongin every way you can think of it. (Lupe, Grade 8)Lupe wrote the above after almost 2 years in a Mathematics class where a prin-cipal focus was on Teaching and Learning Mathematics for Social justice .

3 But whatdoes it mean to teach and learn Mathematics for Social justice ? How might this takeshape in the classroom? What is the relationship to a curriculum based on theNational Council of Teachers of Mathematics [NCTM] Principles and Standardsfor School Mathematics (2000)? In this article I address these questions anddescribe a research project in which I was a middle-school Mathematics teacher inan urban, Latino school. I have two purposes here: (a) to uncover and concretizecomponents of Teaching and Learning Mathematics for Social justice and (b) to under-stand the relationship of a Standards-based curriculum to that process. I situate thisJournal for Research in Mathematics Education2003, Vol.

4 34, No. 1, 37 73 This research was partially funded by a University Research Council grant fromDePaul University. I would like to acknowledge the appreciable help on earlierdrafts of this article from Pauline Lipman and the JRME editorial staff as well asfrom the anonymous reviewers and I want to thank the students of Diego RiveraSchool for their help as alongside NCTM s positions on equity and extend them, and I examinestudents Learning from the perspective of Teaching for Social justice and throughthe lens of the vision for school Mathematics described in the NCTM s also discuss students changed dispositions toward Mathematics and raise furtherresearch published the initial Curriculum and Evaluation Standards for SchoolMathematics over 10 years ago (NCTM, 1989)

5 And declared equity to be an aimof Mathematics education reform. The authors specified certain new societal goalsfor education (p. 3) and incorporated equity into the goal of opportunity for the Curriculum Standardsdid not explicitly define equity, it stated, thesocial injustices of past schooling practices can no longer be tolerated..Creating a just society in which women and various ethnic minorities enjoy equalopportunities and equitable treatment is no longer an issue (p. 4). The authorsalso took a strong position against tracking: we believe that current tracking proce-dures often are inequitable, and we challenge all to develop instructional activi-ties and programs to address this issue directly (p.)

6 253). The CurriculumStandardsembraced democratic citizenship with mathematical literacy as a keycomponent. One can, however, critique the Curriculum Standards equity frameworkbecause the document was also largely about economic competitiveness andworkforce preparation in a global context. One of the new societal goals of theCurriculum Standards(NCTM, 1989) was to develop mathematically literateworkers (p. 3), situating equity within the context of economic productivity: theeducational system of the industrial age does not meet the economic needs oftoday (p. 3) and equity has become an economic necessity (p. 4, my emphasis).It is not surprising that the document reflects multiple perspectives on equity,because it was developed and written by consensus.

7 But to discuss equity fromthe perspective of economic competition is to diminish its moral imperativeand the revised Principles and Standards (NCTM, 2000), equity had a moreprominent focus and was not tied to economics. Of the six unifying principles inthe document, equity is the first, thus demonstrating a deeper concern than in theoriginal document. The revision reiterates the strong stand against tracking and otherforms of differential curriculum and insists that all students have access to high-quality curriculum and technology and to highly qualified teachers with adequateresources and subject-matter knowledge. The point is made clearly that uniformlyhigh expectations of students and strong supports are necessary to achieve , the document does not address what else might be necessary to attainequity, nor does it propose how to transform inequitable Mathematics classroomsinto equitable ones.

8 In his analysis of the 1989 Curriculum Standards,Apple (1992) raised severalissues. He acknowledged the Curriculum Standards primary intent literacy fordemocratic citizenship but pointed out that the intentions of its creators do notdetermine how others might use it. Apple placed the document within its socio-38 Teaching and Learning Mathematics for Social Justicepolitical context, that of unequal relations of power in society, and questionedwhether literacy in the Curriculum Standardsmeant functional literacy ( , beingable to read and do Mathematics ) or critical literacy( , approaching knowledgecritically, seeing Social events in the interrelationships of their historical and polit-ical contexts, and acting in one s own interest as a conscious agent in and on theworld [Freire, 1992; Macedo, 1994]).

9 Apple raised questions of how to achieve theprincipal purpose outlined and implied in both Standards documents a justsociety and what are the specific roles that Mathematics education can play inreaching that goal. Apple is not alone in raising these questions. Both Secada (1996)and Tate (1996) ask whether the Curriculum Standardsmight in fact exacerbateexisting inequalities because students in schools with more opportunity to learn more resources, more access to better qualified teachers and better curricula mightbenefit more from the document than students in poorer communities and schools(Oakes, 1985, 1990).Clearly these are complicated questions, and neither the Standardsdocumentsnor any other such document has the sole responsibility for answering them.

10 Butthe documents further the struggle for equity by openly discussing these issues. Overthe past 15 years, many Mathematics educators have worked for equity in varioustheoretic and programmatic ways ( , Campbell, 1996; Frankenstein, 1995;Guti rrez, in press; Khisty, 1995; Moses & Cobb, 2001; Secada, 1991, 1996;Silver, Smith, & Nelson, 1995; Tate, 1995; Weissglass, 2000). Unfortunately, weare not much closer to achieving full equity in Mathematics (nor anywhere else insociety), despite important advances such as the reduction (but not elimination) ofgender disparities. Some may argue about the size of, and trends in, the gaps, butthe travesty of unequal experiences, opportunities, and outcomes between rich andpoor and between whites and students of color is unarguable equity is not Mathematics educators have worked in various ways to promoteequity, little literature exists that documents efforts to teach Mathematics as aspecific tool for equity and Social justice .