7
A better-supported interpretation is that social, political, and economic forces converge in
ways that systematically limit the opportunities that students from historically marginalized
groups have to learn mathematics. In this section we identify four critical components of access
to opportunities to learn mathematics: 1) access to advanced mathematics courses; 2) access to
quality mathematics curricula and instruction; 3) access for English learners; and 4) access to
productive mathematics identities. We cite research that illuminates ways in which each of these
components of access is differentially distributed across racial/ethnic, SES, and language groups.
However, since opportunities to learn mathematics are closely linked to opportunities to learn in
general, we begin by considering school-level factors that disproportionately affect certain
students’ academic experiences.
The Broader Context of Limited Opportunities to Learn
Opportunities to learn and access to high quality schooling are unequally distributed in
American society. Research shows that schools attended by racial/ethnic minorities, low-SES
students, and English learners are systematically under-resourced. These schools tend to have
fewer well-trained or even credentialed teachers, more dilapidated buildings, less access to basic
supplies (such as pencils and paper), less access to technology (e.g., computers and calculators),
and fewer advanced and AP courses (Darling-Hammond, 2010; Oakes, 2007; Kozol, 2006 as
compared to schools attended by middle and upper class and white students. Within schools,
tracking systems maintain differential (and less rigorous) educational experiences for Black and
Latina/o students, poor students, and English learners (Oakes, 1985; Darling-Hammond, 2010;
Olsen, 1997; Gifford & Valdés, 2006).
8
Scholars have also identified discipline systems in schools and classrooms as an
important factor that impacts the schooling experience of students from marginalized groups
(Dance, 2002; Ferguson, 2000; Noguera & Wing, 2006). Discipline systems in schools often
operate in ways that disproportionately penalize Black and Latino male students in particular
(Ferguson, 2000; Noguera & Wing, 2006); as a result, these students encounter a less friendly
school environment and miss class time when they are being punished for infractions for which
other students are not punished (Noguera & Wing, 2006). The combination of having less access
to rich learning opportunities and being more harshly penalized for minor infractions can leave
students feeling less connected to school and less likely to develop identities as competent
students (Nasir, Jones, & McLaughlin, 2009; Darling-Hammond, 2010).
Factors Specific to Mathematics Education
Having noted these broader school factors that impact students’ opportunities to learn in
general, we now turn to four critical access points specific to mathematics education.
Lack of access to advanced mathematics courses
3
Access to rigorous mathematics courses is perhaps one of the most fundamental gateways
to learning opportunities. The practice of “tracking” students into more or less rigorous
mathematics pathways has repeatedly been found to unfairly disadvantage Black and Latina/o
students, poor students, and English learners (Darling-Hammond, 2010; Oakes, 1985; Olsen,
1997). Tracking occurs when students are placed into particular pathways (e.g., “low-track” or
3
In this section, we use “advanced mathematics courses” to mean Calculus, Pre-calculus, and Trigonometry and
“rigorous” as a descriptor of courses that are high-quality, conceptually oriented, and cognitively demanding.
A high-tracked course is not necessarily advanced or rigorous. For example, an Honors Algebra class could be
designed to cover a large amount of material very procedurally.
9
“remedial” versus “college preparatory”) based on factors such as standardized test scores,
grades, and teacher recommendations. While tracking is often justified as a way of tailoring
instruction to students’ different abilities and needs, it commonly produces classrooms that are
highly segregated with respect to race and that reflect structural and personal biases rather than
actual differences in students’ abilities. Research has shown that Black and Latina/o students are
often assigned to lower tracks than White and Asian students, even when their achievement
profiles are similar (Oakes, 2005). Tyson (2006), for example, has found that “gifted” programs
consistently under-enroll Black students, even excluding students with higher academic
achievement than their White peers at the same school. Once students are tracked into low-
track/remedial pathways, it is often difficult for them to “jump” into college preparatory tracks
(Darling-Hammond, 2010; Oakes, 1985). Tracking systems thus contribute to the
underrepresentation of Black and Latina/o students, poor students, and English learners in
college preparatory classes and the overrepresentation of these groups of students in remedial
tracks and special education. In contrast, Lee, Croninger, and Smith (1997) have found both
higher and more equitably distributed achievement in schools that offer a narrow selection of
mostly academic courses, as opposed to schools with more tracks, even when students are
ostensibly assigned to tracks based on their own choices.
Lack of access to quality mathematics curriculum
Opportunities to learn are also fundamentally related to access to high-quality
mathematics curriculum, that is, access to rich and challenging content and activities. Leading
national standards documents and mathematics education scholars emphasize the importance of
student-centered, conceptually oriented and problem-solving focused approaches to mathematics
Dostları ilə paylaş: |