Our mathematics education system is inequitable. It operates in ways that leave a significant proportion of students with negative mathematics experiences and inadequate mathematical preparation. The problem is historical and systemic, and the students most disaffected by the current system are overwhelmingly Black and Latino, Indigenous, poor, women, immigrant or first generation college students. If our mathematics community is to sustainably grow and thrive, mathematics education at all levels must be transformed.
This workshop focuses on students for whom we do not yet successfully ensure access to and advancement in mathematics. Sessions will share relevant programmatic efforts and innovative research that have been shown to maintain or increase students’ engagement and interests in mathematics across k-12, undergraduate and graduate education. The sessions will focus particularly on reproducible efforts that affirm those students’ identities and their diverse intellectual resources and lived experiences. These efforts at various levels of mathematics education will highlight ways in which meaningful experiences in mathematics can disrupt ongoing systemic oppression. Participants will leave with conceptual and practical ways to open up and elevate mathematics education where all students thrive.
The following questions will frame the structure of the workshop:
Critically examining and challenging the system of mathematics as gatekeeper: How is mathematics positioned as a gatekeeper/door in K-12, undergraduate, graduate STEM education?
Who gets through the door and who doesn’t? Why? Who controls the flow? Do we unintentionally close doors on some students? How do we reflect and assess our actions within the current system?
What is at stake specifically for me and for the mathematics profession in general, if access to mathematics continues to be limited for select groups of people?
How do we interrogate and challenge current institutional systems, practices and underlying values (e.g., placement testing, mathematics content, curriculum tracking, and “weed out” courses) that determine what mathematics is studied and how mathematics is experienced, particularly for those historically marginalized because of race, class, gender, disability, and language?
What is our role as mathematicians, mathematics educators, and mathematics teachers in regulating the access to mathematical learning and teaching spaces (e.g., classrooms, office hours, tutoring centers, and informal interactions)? Is there consensus on the purposes of such mathematical spaces? What do those who feel excluded from these spaces want from them?
Developing a vision for a more open, just, and humane mathematics education: Do open, fair, humane, and just mathematics education systems exist? What do they look like? What are key principles and practices of these systems? To cultivate mathematics as a thriving discipline, we must understand what institutional structures, pedagogies and expected outcomes are needed and how they affect students’ identities, sense of themselves, and their mathematical literacy and skills.
Which aspects of our institution/field/discipline do we want to uphold, and which do we want to change? Are there multiple pathways to mathematical advancement? For instance, how might we rethink the hierarchical or linear sequencing of mathematics courses while maintaining rigor, access, and enjoyment for our students? Are specific priorities, such as those placed on algebraic proficiency or on placement tests to gain entry into college courses, consistent with the values we want to uphold?
What customs and practices in mathematics education are institutionalized in ways that lead to the systematic mistreatment of certain groups? What are the effects of this structural oppression and how can they be reversed? What would math education environments look like in the absence of these customs and practices?
What are the roles and responsibilities of mathematicians, mathematics educators, and teachers in creating such a vision?
Taking action: It is everyone’s responsibility to take action that leads to positive change. We want participants to leave the workshop with concrete actions they can take at their own institutions and beyond to create and sustain open, enriching, and anti-oppressive spaces for mathematics where students can thrive.
What efforts have been successful and for which students? What are challenges and lessons learned from these efforts? Are these efforts reproducible in other educational levels or in other populations? At the k-12 level, are there classroom-based, school-based or other local efforts that can be adapted to reach larger populations? How can we design and implement models (e.g., enrichment, bridge, co-requisite or stretch) that effectively counteract practices of placement, sorting, tracking and weeding?
What can we learn from historical and contemporary activist movements to facilitate systemic change in mathematics education across k-12, undergraduate and graduate institutions? What are systematic efforts that have produced positive and sustained change? What are the details of these efforts with respect to the mathematics, instruction, and relationships with students? How do we use this information to establish a just system?
What is the role of collaboration among mathematicians and mathematics educators in generating systemic change and holding ourselves accountable?

*Our mathematics education system is inequitable. It operates in ways that leave a significant proportion of students with negative mathematics experiences and inadequate mathematical preparation. The problem is historical and systemic, and the students most disaffected by the current system are overwhelmingly Black and Latino, Indigenous, poor, women, immigrant or first generation college students. If our mathematics community is to sustainably grow and thrive, mathematics education at all levels must be transformed.*

*This workshop focuses on students for whom we do not yet successfully ensure access to and advancement in mathematics. Sessions will share relevant programmatic efforts and innovative research that have been shown to maintain or increase students’ engagement and interests in mathematics across k-12, undergraduate and graduate education. The sessions will focus particularly on reproducible efforts that affirm those students’ identities and their diverse intellectual resources and lived experiences. These efforts at various levels of mathematics education will highlight ways in which meaningful experiences in mathematics can disrupt ongoing systemic oppression. Participants will leave with conceptual and practical ways to open up and elevate mathematics education where all students thrive.*

*The following questions will frame the structure of the workshop:*

**Critically examining and challenging the system of mathematics as gatekeeper: **How is mathematics positioned as a gatekeeper/door in K-12, undergraduate, graduate STEM education?

- Who gets through the door and who doesn’t? Why? Who controls the flow? Do we unintentionally close doors on some students? How do we reflect and assess our actions within the current system?
- What is at stake specifically for me and for the mathematics profession in general, if access to mathematics continues to be limited for select groups of people?
- How do we interrogate and challenge current institutional systems, practices and underlying values (e.g., placement testing, mathematics content, curriculum tracking, and “weed out” courses) that determine what mathematics is studied and how mathematics is experienced, particularly for those historically marginalized because of race, class, gender, disability, and language?
- What is our role as mathematicians, mathematics educators, and mathematics teachers in regulating the access to mathematical learning and teaching spaces (e.g., classrooms, office hours, tutoring centers, and informal interactions)? Is there consensus on the purposes of such mathematical spaces? What do those who feel excluded from these spaces want from them?

**Developing a vision for a more open, just, and humane mathematics education**: Do open, fair, humane, and just mathematics education systems exist? What do they look like? What are key principles and practices of these systems? To cultivate mathematics as a thriving discipline, we must understand what institutional structures, pedagogies and expected outcomes are needed and how they affect students’ identities, sense of themselves, and their mathematical literacy and skills.

- Which aspects of our institution/field/discipline do we want to uphold, and which do we want to change? Are there multiple pathways to mathematical advancement? For instance, how might we rethink the hierarchical or linear sequencing of mathematics courses while maintaining rigor, access, and enjoyment for our students? Are specific priorities, such as those placed on algebraic proficiency or on placement tests to gain entry into college courses, consistent with the values we want to uphold?
- What customs and practices in mathematics education are institutionalized in ways that lead to the systematic mistreatment of certain groups? What are the effects of this structural oppression and how can they be reversed? What would math education environments look like in the absence of these customs and practices?
- What are the roles and responsibilities of mathematicians, mathematics educators, and teachers in creating such a vision?

**Taking action**: It is everyone’s responsibility to take action that leads to positive change. We want participants to leave the workshop with concrete actions they can take at their own institutions and beyond to create and sustain open, enriching, and anti-oppressive spaces for mathematics where students can thrive.

- What efforts have been successful and for which students? What are challenges and lessons learned from these efforts? Are these efforts reproducible in other educational levels or in other populations? At the k-12 level, are there classroom-based, school-based or other local efforts that can be adapted to reach larger populations? How can we design and implement models (e.g., enrichment, bridge, co-requisite or stretch) that effectively counteract practices of placement, sorting, tracking and weeding?
- What can we learn from historical and contemporary activist movements to facilitate systemic change in mathematics education across k-12, undergraduate and graduate institutions? What are systematic efforts that have produced positive and sustained change? What are the details of these efforts with respect to the mathematics, instruction, and relationships with students? How do we use this information to establish a just system?
- What is the role of collaboration among mathematicians and mathematics educators in generating systemic change and holding ourselves accountable?

Show less
**Show Tags and Subject Classification**
** Primary Mathematics Subject Classification**
No Primary AMS MSC
** Secondary Mathematics Subject Classification**
No Secondary AMS MSC