The writer of the linked article being a far right supporter I wonder what it is he wants to say.

OK, thanks. The article wasn't clear to me. I got that he was right wing, but I couldn't find a clear point.

Well, to be honest, I haven't got a clue either. If he says math is racial and enforcing a white ideal of capitalism (numbers, profit, large amounts, interdependencies, etc.), isn't that arguing against yourself (if it's correct that he's a far-right supporter, which I read her but didn't google, not being native American)?

.

I taught at the college level for many years and never thought of the subject or my teaching strategies as racist, but I know only a little of how math is taught K-9. — jgill

Your reference to "teaching strategies" indicates that you recognize that math itself is not the basic problem, but the way that it is taught may be a problem. That's what StreetlightX indicates as well. The issue is the clearest at the most basic, elementary levels. There appears to be a need to employ examples at the elementary level, and the examples are chosen, or created, with various intentions of being relevant, interesting, insightful, inciteful, or whatever. You can see that relative to different people, of different backgrounds, different examples will have different effects. If the desired effect is to encourage the student to participate and continue in the learning process, there will be discrepancies in successfulness, depending on the significance of the examples.

If we proceed toward higher levels, the issue (problem, when you see it that way) goes much deeper, and it gets much more complex and difficult to identify. The often cited issue of marking, and designating correct and incorrect is just the tip of the iceberg. I'm sure you understand that in the education of a subject like mathematics there is a very real need for direction in the form of the judgement of correct and incorrect. But we can ask what is this judgement based in, where is it grounded, and we see that "correct" means consistent with the currently accepted axioms.

Now, you'll know from my discussions in this forum, that mathematical axioms are not based in empirical truth, and I do not even believe that they are logically consistent. The mathematical axioms which are accepted into the community of those who apply mathematics, are the ones which are useful within their fields of operation, so the judgements of "correct" and "incorrect", in the teaching of mathematics are very pragmatically based. This is why the different courses of mathematical education in high school are now sometimes geared toward specific career goals, what is required for that specific field of education. It used to be that math was divided by categories like "basic" and "advanced", etc., but this was sort of degrading to the person in "basic" math, so I think the trend today is to offer the math which is designated as what is required for a specific discipline..

Consider if you will, the relationship between what mathematics is, and the way mathematics is taught. We can say that mathematics consists of tools, and the tools are accepted into use, therefore designed to an extent, for the various uses. Teaching, on the other hand is a way of manipulating minds to accept specific things as correct and incorrect. The two seem very distinct, but imagine if there is a reciprocating relationship between the two. Then the tool might be designed toward manipulating minds toward accepting specific things as correct. Historically such a tool would be known as "rhetoric". But when it infiltrates into logic and mathematics it's better known as "sophistry".

I believe that this is where the issue becomes a problem. The issue is the reality of what mathematics is. The problem is that since it's a tool to be used, it can also be used abusively. In relation to the op, the problems of the teaching strategies become a problem of the mathematics itself, when the teaching strategies become implanted into the mathematical principles themselves. That would be when the principles, or axioms are designed to manipulate minds in a specific way.

Thanks for your thoughts. Always interesting and provocative. One of the major tasks in the early grades is to develop critical and precise thinking skills. This paves the road to mathematical competence. How to do this across cultural lines is probably a challenge.

I don't see how critical thinking is relevant here. What paves the road to mathematical competence is the removal of critical thoughts. This is submission to authority. What is important, is that the student accepts the authority of the teacher. Then the student accepts without being critical.

What I described is a separation between the principles themselves, axioms which are taught, and this art of teaching, the technique by which the teacher impresses one's authority on the student. If the principles to be taught, the axioms themselves, are designed so as to fulfill the task of impressing authority, then they are not principles of logic, but principles of persuasion. That is, if the students are taught to see the principles, or axioms, themselves as the authority, rather than seeing the teacher as the authority, this opens the door to abuse of the students, because the principles and axioms are really the tools of those who use them. Then instead of the student learning to be the master of the tool, the student learns to submit to the tool, becoming a slave to the tool, without knowing who the master of that tool is. So the question is, are you inclining your students to be masters of the art, or are you teaching them to submit to the principles of mathematics? And various students from different backgrounds might perceive the same teaching methods in very different ways, due to the teacher's capacity to establish one's own authority, or relying on appealing to the authority of the principles.

What paves the road to mathematical competence is the removal of critical thoughts. — Metaphysician Undercover

At times I wish I were still teaching so I could take jewels like this into the classroom. :cool:

There is an easy way to get more black mathematicians. Specifically provide huge incentives for black mathematicians and other extremely smart black people to have extremely massive families. In other words, race-specific voluntary eugenics. And/or you could import black mathematicians from abroad. Though there probably aren't that many of them throughout the entire world either.

Not necessarily.