One Point of View: What Is Mathematics Equity?Author(s): Jean Kerr StenmarkSource: The Arithmetic Teacher, Vol. 36, No. 5 (January 1989), p. 3Published by: National Council of Teachers of MathematicsStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/41194409 .

Accessed: 17/06/2014 14:21

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

.

National Council of Teachers of Mathematics is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extendaccess to The Arithmetic Teacher.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 195.34.79.223 on Tue, 17 Jun 2014 14:21:28 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

One Point OF X7ÍGCD

What Is Mathematics Equity? By Jean Kerr Stenmark

If I look up equity in my thesaurus, there are three categories of mean- ings: • equality, equilibrium, evenness,

and par; • fairness, impartiality, justice, and

objectivity; • ownership, assets, property, pros-

perity, treasure, and wealth.

What does all that have to do with mathematics equity? A lot!

Mathematics education is not the same for all students. It does not have equality and evenness. Think about the schools you have known. Are all students offered the same curriculum?

Nor is mathematics education fair, impartial, and objective for all stu- dents. Research shows that some groups of students are called on less often, are asked lower-level ques- tions, and in fact are treated in a manner that would be considered un- fair if it were noticed. Next time you observe a class, make a quiet tally of who gets called on.

As for the last category, involving assets, ownership, treasure, and wealth - well, we know that whole groups of students aren't encouraged to follow the path to the riches of mathematical knowledge - they man- age to avoid the classes where that treasure lies, even though many mem- bers of those groups are actually very competent in mathematics. The

Jean Kerr Stenmark is with the EQUALS and Family Math programs at the Lawrence Hall of Science, University of California, Berkeley, CA 94720. She is coauthor of the books Family Math and Math for Girls and other Problem Solvers.

January 1989

groups? Female and minority stu- dents!

If I ask my friends what they think of when I say equity, the first re- sponse is usually "equal opportunity for all." But then occasionally a really thoughtful person says, "Yes, it's having the opportunity, but it's more than that. It's being prepared, know- ing how to take advantage of the op- portunity, and being encouraged and motivated to do so."

The status quo in mathematics edu- cation is not equitable. It's neither equal nor just, nor does it give every- body ownership.

Here are some criteria for an equi- table mathematics program: • No students are tracked into low-

level mathematics, from which there seems to be no escape. The ideal, now being put into practice in many schools, is to have no tracking at all at any grade from kindergarten through high school.

• Every student is offered a broad mathematics curriculum and is en- couraged to take as much mathe- matics as possible.

• Students constantly use the lan- guage of mathematics, talking to each other in groups, writing in journals, explaining their work, and exploring new ideas.

• When a student doesn't understand a concept or a process, an alterna- tive is suggested. Many possible strategies can be applied to solving any problem, simple or complex.

• The same amount of time and the same quality of time are given to each child, whether it's teacher time, computer time, or the chance to speak in a group.

• Students' learning is assessed in many ways - by teacher observa- tion, beginning and ending samples of work, mathematics journals, mathematics projects, interviews, student self-assessment, and so on.

• The use of standardized tests is min- imized, since they don't necessarily reveal a true picture of a student's understanding. Before any test is used, it is thoroughly evaluated for bias.

• Mathematics classrooms are places of encouragement and excitement where frustration is eased rather than compounded.

• Parents understand that mathemat- ics is more than arithmetic and that the problem-solving process is more important than a single right an- swer.

• Students are not judged good or poor at mathematics or any mathe- matics-related subject or career by their looks, their last name, their birthplace or neighborhood, or the group to which they belong. I could continue - and you will

want to add your own ideal criteria that will ensure every person's fair and equal opportunity for a rich math- ematics program.

Bibliography Cummins, Jim. "Empowering Minority Stu-

dents: A Framework for Intervention." Harvard Educational Review 56 (February 1986): 18-36.

Oakes, Jeannie. "Tracking: Can Schools Take a Different Route?" NEA Today 6 (January 1988):41-47.

Parker, Ruth. "Small-Group Cooperative Learning in the Classroom." OSSC Bulletin 27 (March 1984). щ

3

This content downloaded from 195.34.79.223 on Tue, 17 Jun 2014 14:21:28 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions