Introduction: Building an infrastructure for equity in mathematics education

Abstract

The National Council of Teachers Mathematics (NCTM) has had the most profound influence on reform in mathematics education with the publications of its curriculum, professional teaching, and assessment documents in 1989, 1991, 1995, and 2000. The documents recommend standards for the mathematics curriculum in grades pre-K to12, professional standards for mathematics educators, and assessment standards for evaluating the quality of both student achievement and curriculum. The NCTM documents acknowledge that cultural experiences, social background, and gender of students have been ignored in mathematics education and that differences among students are not taken into account in the teaching and learning of mathematics. The Principles and Standards for School Mathematics (PSSM) (NCTM, 2000) highlighted equity by making it the first principle for reform of school mathematics: Excellence in mathematics education requires equity--... raising expectations for students' learning, developing effective methods of supporting the learning of mathematics by all students, and providing students and teachers the resources they need (p. 12). The PSSM offers a broad view of what it takes to accomplish equity that includes having high expectations for all students, accommodating for differences, and equitable allocation of human and material resources. The PSSM captures the essence of some conditions that lead to inequities in a school context by acknowledging that 1) low expectations negatively impact marginalized students in mathematics, 2) access to quality mathematics is not always equitable, and 3) allocation of material and human resources in not always equitable (NCTM, 2000). The PSSM addresses equity as it relates to curriculum, instruction, and assessment neither situates equity within the larger societal context nor offers suggestions for building an infrastructure for equity in mathematics education. Like the PSSM, other NCTM Standards documents the Assessment Standards for School Mathematics (NCTM, 1995), Professional Standards for Teaching Mathematics (NCTM, 1991), and Curriculum and Evaluation Standards for School Mathematics (NCTM, 1989) situates equity only within the context of curriculum, instruction, and assessment. These Standards documents also recognize that inequities exist in mathematics education but they fail to address the causes and roots of inequities. Martin (2003) criticizes NCTM for not taking a stronger position on equity. Martin's criticism focuses on the fact that the Equity Principle does not mention race, racism, and social justice. He states: the Standards contains no explicit or particular references to African American, Latino, Native American and poor students or the conditions they face in their lives outside of school, including the inequitable arrangement of mathematical opportunities in these out of school contexts. I would argue that blanket statements about all students signals an uneasiness or unwillingness to grapple with the complexities and particularities of race, minority/marginalized status, differential treatment, underachievement in deference to the assumption that teaching, curriculum, learning, and assessment are all that matter (p. 10). Martin's criticism provides the basis for examining the complexities that race, racism, and social justice have in mathematics education. According to PSSM (NCTM, 2000), equity is should be a goal for mathematics education. If equity is a goal in mathematics education, then mathematics educators must develop an infrastructure for equity comparable to the infrastructure developed that guided reform in curriculum materials, assessment, and pedagogy (Weissglass, 2000). Too often, race, racism, and social justice are relegated as issues not appropriate for mathematics education when actually these issues are central to the learning and teaching of mathematics for all students. …