With Numeracy for all

Abstract

The reform of mathematics education in urban schools cannot and will not succeed without a social transformation that liberates young people from the hunger, poverty, and violence that trap so many in the ghetto of despair. This liberation is both an economic necessity and an ethical imperative. It requires developing new strategies for the delivery of services that heal and protect America's youth. The most successful reform initiatives will focus on the whole chil" the whole family, the whole community-the whole socioeconomic matrix. For this reason, we face a compelling need to accelerate the still-nascent movement toward comprehensive, coordinated, school-based services. This need is closely linked to a second: We must no longer tolerate the covert racism and ethnocentrism that subject traditionally underserved students to material that-because it fails to challenge them-clears a pathway to boredom and disillusionment. The tyranny of low expectations must end.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

American Association for the Advancement of Science . (1993). Benchmarks for science literacy. New York: Oxford University Press.

Berry, G. L. (1993). Psychological service providers, the opportunity to learn, and inner-city students: Beyond mere curricular reform. Journal of Negro Education, 62(3), 355-376.

Cummins, Jim. (1986). Remarks presented at the 1986 annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association.

The Carnegie Commission on Science, Technology, and Government . (1991). In the national interest: The federal government in the reform of K-12 math and science education. New York: The Carnegie Corporation.

Fuhrman, S. H. (1993). The politics of coherence. In S. H. Fuhrman (Ed.), Designing coherent education policy (pp. 1-34). San FrancisCO: Jossey-Bass.

Glaser, R. , & Silver, E. (1994). Assessment, testing, and instruction: Retrospect and prospect. In L. Darling-Hammond (Ed.), Review of research in education (pp. 393-422). Washington, DC: American Education Research Association.

Jackson, S. A. (1993). Opportunity to learn: The health connection. Journal of Negro Education, 62(3), 377-393.

Lacampagne, C. , Blair, W. , & Kaput, J. (Eds.). (1995). The algebra initiative colloquium: Proceedings from a conference on reform in algebra (2 vols.). Washington, DC: Office of Educational Research and Improvement, U.S. Department of Education.

Ladson-Billings, G. (1994). The dream keepers: Successful teachers of African American students. San FrancisCO: Jossey-Bass.

10.

McGilly, K. (Ed.). (1994). Classroom lessons. Cambridge: MIT Press.

11.

McKnight, C. (1990). Mathematics education, the disadvantaged, and large-scale investigation: Assessment for stability versus assessment for change. In M. Knapp & P. Shields (Eds.), Better schooling for children of poverty: Alternatives to conventional wisdom (pp. 7-12). Menlo Park, CA: SRI International. (Commissioned by U.S. Department of Education)

12.

Means, B. , Chelmer, C. , & Knapp, M. (Eds.). (1994). Teaching advanced skills to at-risk students: Views from research and practice. San FrancisCO: Jossey-Bass.

13.

Moses, B. (1995). Algebra, the new civil right. In Lacampagne et al. (Eds.), The algebra initiative colloquium: Proceedings from a conference on reform in algebra (2 vols.). Washington, DC: Office of Educational Research and Improvement, U.S. Department of Education.

14.

Mullis, I. , Jenkins, F. , & Johnson, E. (1994). Effective schools in mathematics: Perspectives from the NAEP 1992 assessment. Washington, DC: Office of Educational Research and Improvement, U.S. Department of Education.

15.

NAEP. (1994a). NAEP 1994 mathematics report card for the nation and the states. Washington, DC: National Center for Educational Statistics, Office of Educational Research and Improvement, U.S. Department of Education.

16.

NAEP. (1994b). NAEP 1992 trends in academic progress. Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics, Office of Educational Research and Improvement, U.S. Department of Education.

17.

National Council of Teachers of Mathematics . (1989). Curriculum and evaluation standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: Author.

18.

National Research Council . (1990). Reshaping school mathematics: A philosophy and framework for curriculum. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

19.

National Science Teachers Association . (1992). The content core: A guide for curriculum designers. Scope, sequence, and coordination of secondary school science. Washington, DC: Author.

20.

Oakes, J. , Ormseth, T. , Bell, R. , & Camp, P. (1990). Multiplying inequalities: The effects of race, social class, and tracking on opportunities to learn mathematics and science. Santa Monica, CA: RAND.

21.

Raizen, S. , Baron, J. , Champagne, A. , Haertel, E. , Mullis, I. , & Oakes, J. (1990). Assessment in science education: The middle years. Andover, MA: the NETWORK, Inc.

22.

Secada, W. G. (1992). Race, ethnicity, social class, language, and achievement in mathematics. In D. A. Grouws (Ed.), Handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 623-660). New York: Macmillan.

23.

Smith, M. S. , & Scoll, B. W. (1995). The Clinton human capital agenda. Teachers College Record, 96(3), 389-404.