The California State Board of Education approved a new math framework on July 12, that focueses on Marxist indoctrination. Critics say the framework promotes teaching political activism to children instead of focusing on math skills and standards.
“Teaching Toward Social Justice”: California’s new math framework aims to create “equitable outcomes” rather than tracking student performance.
The framework, outlined in a 1,000-page guidance document, underwent four years of revision and three drafts based on public feedback.
It allegedly adds “meaning-making,” social justice, and an “inquiry” based approach to the curriculum.
The math framework now focuses on concepts of social justice, political activism, and environmental justice. Opponents argue that the emphasis on these topics detracts from mastering math skills.
On the other hand, proponents, such as Mary Nicely, the state’s chief deputy superintendent of public instruction, believe that the framework provides equitable access to math instruction.
“The framework has struck a great balance in new ways to engage students in developing a love for math while supporting those on an accelerated path,” Ms. Nicely said in a statement.
“Our State Superintendent is a champion of equity and excellence, and it is our core mission that every child—regardless of race, ZIP code, or background—has access to a quality education.”
According to a report by Education Week, the 1,000-page guidance seeks to put meaning-making at the center of the math classroom. It promotes a focus on problem-solving and applying math knowledge to real-world situations.
They want math to be culturally relevant. The problem is it is all from a hardcore left ideology.
LITTLE ATTENTION TO CONTENT STANDARDS
Opponent, former teacher Michael Malione of SaveMath.net said there was a lack of vetting for the concept of “big ideas” and the limited involvement of individuals with advanced math degrees in its development.
Mr. Malione argues on his website that the framework’s focus on “social justice” will harm students and that it devotes too little attention to math content standards.
“Typically, a curriculum framework would orient around the content standards regarding when and how they should be taught—to guide educators, parents, and textbook publishers. The SFR draft framework does not,” he states on his website.
Mr. Malione points out that the framework promotes the use of math to explore concepts of fairness concerning various social issues and encourages student political activism. It also emphasizes racial justice, equity, gender inclusivity, and trauma-informed pedagogy in math education.
“One would think the proposed math framework would focus on describing how to convey the required math subject content in detail, but unfortunately, it does not,” his website states.”
The California State Board of Education states that the framework aims to align math concepts across grade levels, ensure equal access to high school math pathways, provide multiple approaches to support student progress, expand course options, and develop data literacy skills.
The guidance outlines key strategies such as structuring math instruction around integrated “big ideas,” emphasizing problem-solving and critical thinking, connecting math to real-world applications, incorporating culturally relevant content, fostering inquiry-based learning, and promoting fluency in math concepts and algorithms.
Linda Darling-Hammond, president of the California State Board of Education, praised the framework for its focus on excellence with equity.
Equity is Marxism in 2023.
“It replaces a focus on ‘math class’ with something more akin to a sociology class, adopting a politicized stance of learning and applying math in a one-sided interpretation,” Mr. Malione states on his website.
According to Bill Evers, director of the Center on Educational Excellence at the Independent Institute, the framework remained highly politicized after revising an earlier version.
In a previous statement to The Epoch Times, Mr. Evers said he believes that the curriculum emphasizes political and teaching dogma, with math problems still framed within social and environmental contexts.
“They still want the teachers to be social justice warriors themselves, and they want them to turn out new social justice warriors and environmental activists,” he said.