Proponents of critical mathematics (CM) argue that it has the potential to be more equitable and socially empowering than other approaches to mathematics education. In this article, the author presents results from a practitioner research study of his own teaching of CM to low-income students of color in a U.S. context. The results pertain to the evolution of his reflections about the potentially enhancing relationship between the critical and the mathematical components of CM and the nature of student empowerment as he designed and taught with CM materials. The results point to curricular and instructional factors that present serious barriers to effective implementation of CM at the secondary level.
AndersonG. L.HerrK.NihlenA. S. (1994). Studying your own school: An educator’s guide to qualitative practitioner research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
2.
AppleM. (1992). Do the standards go far enough? Power, policy, and practice in mathematics education. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 23(5), 412–431.
3.
AtwehB. (2004). Understanding for changing and changing for understanding: Praxis between practice and theory through action research in mathematics education. In ZevenbergenR.ValeroP. (Eds.), Researching the social dimensions of mathematics education: Theoretical, methodological and practical issues (pp. 187–206). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Press.
4.
BartellT. (2001). Learning to teach mathematics for social justice: Negotiating social justice and mathematical goals. Journal of Research in Mathematics Education, 41, 5–35.
5.
BoalerJ. (1997). Experiencing school mathematics: Teaching styles, sex, and setting. Buckingham, UK: Open University Press.
6.
BoalerJ.StaplesM. (2008). Creating mathematical futures through an equitable teaching approach: The case of Railside School. Teachers College Record, 110(3), 608–645.
7.
BrantlingerA. (2010). A view from the other side: Practitioner research on critical mathematics pedagogy in an urban high school. In ScottK.BlanchettW. (Eds.), Research in urban educational settings: Lessons learned and implications for future practice (pp. 85–102). Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.
8.
BrantlingerA. (2011a). Critical mathematics in a secondary setting: Promise and problems. In AtwehB.GravenM.SecadaW.ValeroP. (Eds.), Mapping equity and quality in mathematics education (pp. 543–554). Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Springer.
9.
BrantlingerA. (2011b). Rethinking critical mathematics: A comparative analysis of critical, reform, & traditional geometry instructional texts. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 78(3), 395–411.
10.
CasellaR. (2001). “Being down”: Challenging violence in urban schools. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
11.
ChazanD. (2000). Beyond formulas in mathematics and teaching: Dynamics of the high school algebra classroom. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
12.
CohenD. (1988). Teaching practice: Plus ça change. In JacksonP. W. (Ed.), Contributing to educational change: Perspectives on research and practice (pp. 27–84). Berkeley, CA: McCutchan.
13.
DelpitL. (1988). The silenced dialogue: Power and pedagogy in educating other people’s children. Harvard Educational Review, 58(5), 280–298.
14.
EmersonR.FretzR.ShawL. (1995). Writing ethnographic fieldnotes. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
15.
FendelD.ResekD.AlperL.FraserS. (2000). Interactive mathematics program (IMP): Integrated high school mathematics. Emeryville, CA: Key Curriculum Press.
16.
FrankensteinM. (1983). Critical mathematics education: An application of Paulo Freire’s epistemology. Boston University Journal of Education, 165(4), 315–339.
17.
FrankensteinM. (1989). Relearning mathematics: A different third R—radical maths. London: Free Association Books.
18.
FrankensteinM. (1991). Incorporating race, gender, and class issues into a critical mathematical literacy curriculum. Journal of Negro Education, 59, 336–359.
19.
FreireP. (1971). Pedagogy of the oppressed (RamosM. B., Trans.) New York, NY: Seabury Press.
20.
GeeJ. P. (2005). An introduction to discourse analysis: Theory and method. London: Routledge.
21.
GonzalezL. (2009). Teaching math for social justice: Reflections on a community of practice for high school math teachers. Journal of Urban Mathematics Education, 2(1), 22–51.
22.
GramsciA. (1971). Selections from the Prison Notebooks. International Publishers.
23.
GregsonS. (2013). Negotiating social justice teaching: One full-time teacher’s practice viewed from the trenches. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 44(1), 164–188.
24.
GutiérrezR. (2002). Enabling the practice of mathematics teachers in context: Towards a new equity research agenda. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 4(2–3), 145–187.
25.
GutsteinE. (2003). Teaching and learning mathematic for social justice in an urban Latino school. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 34(1), 37–73.
26.
GutsteinE. (2006). Reading and writing the world with mathematics: Toward a pedagogy for social justice. New York, NY: Routledge.
27.
GutsteinE.PetersonB. (Eds.). (2005). Rethinking mathematics: Teaching social justice by the numbers. Milwaukee, WI: Rethinking Schools, Ltd.
28.
LampertM. (2001). Teaching problems and the problems of teaching. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
29.
MartinD. (2012). Learning mathematics while Black. The Journal of Educational Foundations, 26(1–2), 47–66.
30.
McKernanJ. (1991). Curriculum action research. New York, NY: St. Martin’s Press.
31.
MehanH. (1979). Learning lessons: Social organization in the classroom. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
32.
MerriamS. B. (1998). Qualitative research and case study applications in education. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
33.
National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (1989). Curriculum and evaluation standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: Author.
34.
National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (2000). Principles and standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: Author.
PaisA.FernandesE.MatosJ.AlvesA. (2010). Methodology in critical mathematics education: A case analysis. Proceedings of the Sixth International Mathematics Education and Society Conference, 1, 408–417.
PowellA. B.BrantlingerA. (2008). A pluralistic view of critical mathematics. In Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference on Mathematics Education and Society (pp. 424–433). Retrieved from http://pure.ltu.se/portal/files/2376304/Proceedings_MES5.pdf
39.
PruynM. (1999). Discourse wars in Gotham-west: A Latino immigrant urban tale of resistance and agency. Boulder, CO: Westview.
40.
SchoenfeldA. (1988). When good teaching leads to bad results: The disasters of “well-taught” mathematics courses. Educational Psychologist, 23(3), 145–166.
41.
SellsL. W. (1978). Mathematics: A critical filter. Science Teacher, 45, 28–29.
42.
SkovsmoseO. (1994). Towards a philosophy of critical mathematical education. Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Press.
43.
StinsonD.WagerA. (2012). A sojourn into the empowering uncertainties of teaching and learning mathematics for social change. In WagerA. A.StinsonD. W. (Eds.), Teaching mathematics for social justice: Conversations with educators (pp. 3–18). Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
44.
TateW. (1995). Returning to the root: A culturally relevant approach to mathematics pedagogy. Theory Into Practice, 34(3), 166–173.
45.
TurnerE.Font StrawhunB. (2007). Problem posing that makes a difference: Students posing and investigating mathematical problems related to overcrowding at their school. Teaching Children Mathematics, 13(9), 457–463.
46.
WilliamsJ.JosephG. G. (1993). Statistics and inequality: A global perspective. In NewlsonD.JosephG. G.WilliamsJ. (Eds.), Multicultural mathematics: Teaching mathematics from a global perspective (pp. 175–204). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
