Thread by @LBmathemagician

There is a natural culture of exclusion that divides people into insiders and outsiders. This view pays into unequal participation, inequitable access to resources, unproductive social interactions, and eventually competitive learning.

This culture of exclusion with the end result of competitive learning is a lot like roller derby. It creates a system of education that means that some people need to win, which consequently means that others have to fail.

There is a limited number of resources and we must fight for who receives the best resources.

@SMCrespo66 discusses #complexinstruction and work that seemed from designing groupwork, and how it branched into the work by @ilana_horn in Strength In Numbers.

Elizabeth Cohen worked to open up the idea of multiple ability curriculum with #complexinstruction which creates multiple ways for students to be framed and seen as "smart".

There are many entry points that allow students to bring different areas of expertise in to equalize participation, and raise the issue of status and accountability in math classrooms.

Do we truly believe in collaboration? That with more people we will see different things, and that the more things we can see actually makes us stronger?

What makes a #groupworthy task that creates the need for collaboration? This is in addition to a task being considered #HQMI with high cognitive demand. What particular elements make it #groupworthy (as defined by @ilana_horn)?

We might need to adapt a task in order to make it be group worthy. We may add additional questions or restructure the task. It moves the conversation from the math content to the students who will engage with the task itself.

One teacher was working to disrupt the competitive learning occurring in the math classroom by using silent groupwork, where every student works collaboratively on one piece of paper with different colored markers without speaking.

How does this structure challenge the competitive nature of mathematics learning that we know dominates the culture in math classrooms? What is it about a silent communicative culture that is so abnormal to us?

In some ways, #letthemarkerdothetalking allows teachers to observe evidence of student thinking that reduces competitive learning and observe student thinking in new ways that verbal groupwork doesn't allow.

A culture of exclusion also creates status hierarchies and cultural narratives that are based on what society deems as valuable or defines as knowledgeable. Often, it is taken as a "truth", even though it is only one perspective of that "truth".

We are replicating social inequalities and inequities when we allow cultural narratives to frame status hierarchies in our classrooms.

A few cultural narratives that exist in math classrooms:
-Good students get write answers: This narrative means that only a few people are right, while others are wrong. This reiterates the competitive learning we are trying to remove from math education.

-Good teachers are in control: When a classroom is "in control", it means that the students are obedient and that she holds the learning in the room in the palm of her hand.

-Only a few people can be math smart: This creates a club of members and outcasts, and the outcasts are deemed math illiterate. These outcasts can be framed as not smart in this way, which again, reiterates the competitive nature in math classes

So we can ask 3 questions:
-Is the task groupworthy?
-What are the teacher moves that create equal participation?
-How do our teacher moves and groupworthy tasks remove status hierarchies that are so embedded in math classrooms?

We can disrupt these cultural narratives in different ways:
-Disrupt Control: Position students as smart and capable
-Disrupt Competition: Create a culture of collaboration
-Disrupt Exclusion: Proactively design lessons for inclusion.

more work from @SMCrespo66 at sites.google.com/msu.edu/dr-san…