View this email in your browser ([link removed])


**
California’s new math framework doesn’t add up
------------------------------------------------------------

Dear John,

State education officials have unanimously voted to approve a new California Math Framework ([link removed]) , replacing the old-fashioned concept of teaching students to master math with the state’s “Big Ideas” to advance “math equity.”

Apparently, the State Board of Education believes that the best way to help the 84% of Black students and 79% of Latino and low-income students who don’t meet California’s grade-level math standards is to tell them that the state’s longstanding high school math track is too hard, so they should take easier classes.

You’d think State Superintendent of Public Instruction Tony Thurmond — and Gov. Gavin Newsom — might take a few minutes out of their ongoing campaign to crush local school boards over the book ban hoax, and put that same kind of pressure on school administrators (and teachers unions) to improve students’ foundational math skills.

But, no. There is no accountability in Sacramento for the failed policies that have put California far below the average of other states on math metrics.

So, the state’s new math guide focuses ([link removed]) on “integrating ‘social justice’ into lessons to 'empower’ students.” It is “more concerned with students feeling ‘positive’ about math than... about students learning math,” explains Save Math, a group of California STEM professionals who have worked tirelessly to expose the academic shortcomings of the faulty framework.

One of the widespread criticisms of the framework as it was developed over the last few years is that it proposed to end the existing math track allowing students to take Algebra in eighth grade. Without starting Algebra in middle school, it is very difficult to advance to Calculus by senior year in high school. This is the math sequence needed to prepare students for STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics) majors as well as admission at many competitive colleges.

Instead, the new framework suggests that students wait until ninth grade to start Algebra, and that all students — regardless of math ability and achievement — be grouped together in the same math classes through ninth and tenth grade.

That way, framework proponents hope, the Asian, white, and more economically advantaged students who earn higher scores on state math tests won’t get too far ahead, or may somehow teach their classmates math by osmosis.

That’s what “equity” is all about. Instead of educators doing their job to help underperforming students reach their full academic potential, the state’s agenda is to hold back high performers to camouflage the uncomfortable demographic gaps in student achievement in California’s public schools.

The problem is that the framework’s attempt to make math more “accessible” to low-performing students would have the opposite effect. Families that can afford to pay for more advanced math classes — either through private school, college courses or extracurricular math — will do so. And the students who are stuck in California’s failing public schools who can’t afford to pay for advanced math won’t have those same options.

This is just what happened in San Francisco when school officials there tried their “math equity” experiment; families who wanted their kids in more advanced math courses paid for classes elsewhere.

In response to public backlash, language in the final version of the framework includes an amendment ([link removed]) with de minimis language that “Students may take Algebra 1... in middle school.” That begs the question: Which school districts will take this option seriously?

The framework also proposes encouraging high school students to take Data Science in place of Algebra II, which is standard on the math track for college-bound kids. But nearly 450 STEM faculty across California signed a letter ([link removed]) to the State Board of Education warning that the course substitution is not adequate to prepare kids.

“We write to emphasize that for students to be prepared for STEM and other quantitative majors in 4-year colleges, including data science, learning the Algebra II curriculum... in high school is essential,” the academics wrote. “This cannot be replaced with a high school statistics or data science course, due to the cumulative nature of mathematics.”

Indeed, University of California and California State University faculty have backtracked ([link removed]) on allowing students to take Data Science instead of Algebra II to fulfill college admission requirements. Further, the Los Angeles Times reports ([link removed]) that a “majority of Black faculty members in UC science, math, technology and engineering fields said allowing data science to substitute for Algebra II would harm students of color by steering them away from math and science fields and undermine university efforts to improve diversity and equity.” (Emphasis added)

As San Francisco Chronicle opinion columnist Emily Hoeven eloquently explains ([link removed]) :

“Practically speaking, taking calculus in high school is a key — and often necessary — step for students to enter competitive colleges and to earn a four-year degree in science, technology, engineering or mathematics (STEM). Those degrees also often translate to higher-paying jobs and improved social and economic mobility.

Philosophically speaking, it’s contradictory for the math framework to have as one of its stated goals helping ‘students to “see themselves” in curriculum and in math-related careers’ while simultaneously appearing to steer girls and students of color away from calculus, the foundation of a career in STEM.

... There’s nothing wrong with data science. But taking that class, in lieu of the traditional math trajectory leading to calculus, will not propel more underrepresented students into STEM fields. It will more likely have the opposite effect.”

Not surprisingly, the California Teachers Association and the state’s largest school district, Los Angeles Unified, are backing ([link removed]) the framework. They care more about social justice ideology than actually teaching kids. And, heck, they can always blame “systemic racism” if this new math framework fails students.

Meanwhile, kids from all backgrounds who academically thrive in California’s charter and private schools will continue to disprove the education establishment’s “soft bigotry of low expectations.”

It’s not hard to see where this is headed. As the mathematicians at Save Math explain, by implementing this new framework that replaces math content standards with bogus "Big Ideas," California is at risk of repeating "the failed experiment of phonics removal" that caused the state's literacy crisis — "but now with math."

The good news? School districts are not required to adopt the misguided framework. California Policy Center is developing a list of alternative math curricula to recommend to local school boards that want their students to succeed. We will distribute the list to school board members through our California Local Elected Officials (CLEO) network in the coming weeks.

SUPPORT CPC ([link removed])
New Podcast ()
[link removed]


** Radio Free California #287: Roll Up for Kamala Harris’s National Prevarication Tour!
------------------------------------------------------------
VP Kamala Harris thinks she’s found the ticket to her political resuscitation in Florida’s new history curriculum. Gavin Newsom’s war on parent-led school boards spreads statewide. Bonus: Will talks with Chris Micheli, lobbyist, attorney, and expert on the California legislature. All on this week's podcast with CPC president Will Swaim and CPC board member David Bahnsen. Listen now. ([link removed])

More from CPC ()


** Action Alert: Protect the Independence of Local Governments
------------------------------------------------------------

State Sen. Tom Umberg's bill, Senate Constitutional Amendment 7 (SCA 7), would give Califonia's public-sector unions veto power over any local government decision in the Golden State. That’s why CPC is asking local elected officials among California’s 58 counties and 482 city halls to sign CPC’s Letter of Opposition to SCA 7. If you are a local elected official, we encourage you to sign the letter here ([link removed]) . Not an elected official? Add your name to CPC's petition opposing SCA 7 here. ([link removed])
California Needs a Reality Check

Governor Newsom’s plans for offshore wind energy are more fantasy than strategy. The federal government leased 583 square miles of deep-ocean waters off California's coast for offshore wind farms. To hit the project goals requires building 450 giant wind turbines, yet the average production of the turbines will be just around 5 percent of the state's electricity consumption. CPC senior fellow Edward Ring explains why Newsom's pipe dream is a bust in his article in City Journal. ([link removed])


** Quote of the Week
------------------------------------------------------------
"Families with resources may find opportunities elsewhere, including fleeing the public school system, while our most vulnerable families, who rely solely on the public school system, will be stuck with the framework." — David Margulies and Rex Ridgeway in their op-ed ([link removed]) on California's new math framework

SUPPORT CPC ([link removed])

============================================================

ABOUT THE CALIFORNIA POLICY CENTER

The California Policy Center promotes prosperity for all Californians through limited government and individual liberty.

Learn more at ** CaliforniaPolicyCenter.org ([link removed])
.
** Twitter ([link removed])
** Facebook ([link removed])
** Instagram ([link removed])
Copyright © 2023 California Policy Center, All rights reserved.
We send periodic updates to those who opted in on californiapolicycenter.org

Our mailing address is:
California Policy Center
18002 Irvine Blvd Ste 108
Tustin, CA 92780-3321
USA
Want to change how you receive these emails?
You can ** update your preferences ([link removed])
or ** unsubscribe from this list ([link removed])
.
Email Marketing Powered by Mailchimp
[link removed]