Thursday, May 26, 2011

Guest Post: Equity, Opportunity, and Developmental Mathematics

Today’s contributor is Jack Rotman. Jack has been teaching at Lansing Community College in Michigan since 1973, specializing in developmental mathematics. As a member of the American Mathematical Association of Two-Year Colleges’ (AMATYC), Jack is involved in a number of efforts to innovate developmental math instruction. Below, he shares his insights into how this work is connected to equitable instruction and opportunity for community college students.

Mathematics often serves as a gatekeeper to credentials in higher education, with the discipline sometimes being placed in this role against our will.  In this post, I will share some thoughts on the connections among developmental mathematics, equity, and current innovations.

We have a tendency to believe that the gaps in equity among student groups are beyond our control, that perhaps inequity is due to lifestyles, culture, or other factors that we cannot influence. However, there exist bodies of knowledge and theories which predict that our instructional design can have profound influence on these inequities if we understand the factors that need to be addressed. For example, in Berliner and Calfee’s Handbook of Educational Psychology,  Webb & Palincsar point out that “ethnic background and race operate as status indicators” in our classrooms, meaning that non-minority students feel more comfortable (contributing, asking questions, etc.). Another related concept from the work of Na’ilah Suad Nasir is the “default trajectory of failure,” where the culture or sub-culture not only accepts failure but expects failure. An exciting body of evidence in social-psychological interventions in education is suggesting some effective means to counter this default trajectory. An analysis of this work is forthcoming from David Yeager and Gregory Walton of Stanford University. For other applications of theories and research, you might start by looking at the work of Craig Nelson who conducts workshops on improving the retention of all students—including minority students—in STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics) fields. 

Increasing equity involves being aware of language, power, and the social climate in academia. The most fundamental of these ideas is power; without power, there can be no real opportunity, which is the outcome of equity. There are many different power dynamics that play out in an individual classroom, but as professionals, we can consciously employ strategies that build up students’ sense of academic power. In my own classes, I use a combination of “cold calling” to include all students and rotating small groups, along with keeping an eye out to make sure that everybody is active. This kind of empowerment is not a “zero-sum” process; indeed, it is possible to create an environment where all students increase their power in academia.

Evidence shows that HOW we do WHAT we do can move us towards more equitable approaches to developmental mathematics—and some approaches might take us in the wrong direction: One of the current trends in developmental mathematics is the emphasis of online homework systems, and the related module-based redesign efforts. I believe that these trends will not increase equity in our classrooms. Our response needs to include face-to-face time that is structured to empower all students. On the other hand, many colleges are implementing learning communities, and evidence suggests that this practice has a lot of potential to make classrooms more equitable. Another current set of initiatives involves a basic re-design of the curriculum, and this is a good thing from an equity standpoint. The existing curricular model is based on a calculus-target, and a non-engaging set of learning outcomes. Redesigns—like Statway and Quantway, for example—contextualize abstract mathematical concepts with more practical applications; the New Life model is similar, though a more general approach than the Carnegie models. We need to base our curriculum on the mathematics that will inspire students and provide benefits in their non-math courses. You can learn more about other venues exploring this work by following these links:  American Mathematical Association of Two-Year Colleges’ (AMATYC) Developmental Math New Life Community and my blog, Developmental Mathematics Revival.

Jack Rotman has taught at Lansing Community College (MI) since 1973, specializing in developmental mathematics. Jack chaired the Developmental Mathematics Committee of AMATYC twice, from 1993 to 1997, and from 2005 to 2010.  He was a reviewer for the original Crossroads standards (1995), and a contributing writer for the Beyond Crossroads document (2006).  Since 2009, Jack has led the AMATYC ”New Life Project” for developmental mathematics, a project that includes over 60 professionals in a national effort to develop a new model for developmental mathematics. Jack, along with Julie Phelps (Valencia CC, FL), serves as an AMATYC Liaison to the Carnegie Foundation’s pathways work.

No comments:

Post a Comment