On July 12, the California State Board of Education endorsed a new math framework.
The decision sparked criticism due to its perceived emphasis on political activism over fundamental math competencies.
The product of four years of revisions, the guidance document spanning 1,000 pages is under fire.
Critics argue that it dilutes essential math education with themes of social justice, political activism, and environmental justice.
Mary Nicely, the state’s chief deputy superintendent of public instruction, stands by the new approach, believing it encourages 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,” Nicely said.
The guidance proposes a number of strategies.
Among these are the introduction of “big ideas” into math instruction and a focus on problem-solving, critical thinking, and real-world application of math concepts.
It also promotes culturally relevant content.
Michael Malione, a private math tutor and founder of SaveMath.net, leads opposition to the framework.
Malione expresses concerns about the vague concept of “big ideas” and questions the lack of input from advanced math degree holders in the development process.
On his website, Malione argues that a focus on social justice could undermine students’ math education.
“Typically, a curriculum framework would orient around the content standards regarding when and how they should be taught—to provide guidance to educators, parents, and textbook publishers. The SFR draft framework does not,” Malione wrote.
He emphasizes that the framework promotes political activism and detracts from a solid math foundation by involving social justice issues, racial justice, equity, gender inclusivity, and trauma-informed pedagogy in math education.
In contrast, the 2013 California framework dedicated 66% of its content to implementing math content standards, demonstrating a substantial shift in focus.
The State Board counters that the framework aligns math concepts across grade levels and supports student progress.
It aims to provide equal access to high school math, expand course options, and foster data literacy skills.
RELATED: Insanity: California Bill Likely to Become Law Redefines Infertility, Would Extend Treatment to Men
Linda Darling-Hammond, president of the State Board of Education, sees the changes as necessary for equity.
However, she acknowledges that California’s performance in math is below average on a national scale, suggesting a pressing need for improvement.
A significant response to the framework’s approval was an open letter to Gov. Gavin Newsom, signed by more than 1,000 people, including academics and professionals. They voiced concerns about the framework, prompting revisions.
Yet, critics believe the framework continues to focus on social justice principles, introducing political elements into math teaching.
This shift from traditional math could negatively affect student readiness for higher-level math and real-world problem-solving.
Bill Evers, director at the Independent Institute, shares this concern. In his view, the revised framework remains politicized, framing math problems within social and environmental contexts.
This approach, Evers suggests, risks the quality of math education by encouraging teachers and students to prioritize activism over core math skills.
