Abstract and Final Summary

ABSTRACT

The purpose of this project was to examine how Social Justice Math can help students in urban school districts make real-world connections between the mandated curriculum and issues and topics of need and concern in their own communities. The goal of Social Justice Math is to help students not only become more aware of the needs of their community through units of study such as this, but to become agents of change themselves. We selected Newark as our target community, and began our project with a walking tour of the city and neighborhoods encompassing several of its public high schools. Our tour, recorded in the form of field notes, revealed that the type of stores, businesses and services readily available to Newark citizens was severely limited in the poorer neighborhoods. This particular disparity between the poorer and more affluent neighborhoods gave rise to a lesson plan and unit analyzing community businesses and services in poorer neighborhoods of Newark, and drawing comparisons to more affluent communities. Using SJM can enable students to “read their world” and develop creative solutions to real problems.

SUMMARY

As we wrapped up our project, I realized that I had learned quite a bit about Social Justice Math, but even more about teaching. I knew nothing about SJM, and basically assumed it was another way to teach what I would call “life-skills math.” As I researched I discovered it is more than playing with baseball statistics or converting a recipe from 4 servings to 6 servings. As a starting point, SJM is a method to analyze an area of concern or current issue and come up with potential solutions. But way beyond that basic starting point, SJM can provide students with a way to “read the world” and empower them to become activists to change what is wrong in their worlds. Social Justice Math can bring real solutions to community problems, not just teacher-created problems for the classroom. Most importantly, SJM can bring equity to a world in which one’s race, ethnic background, religion, socioeconomic status, etc. often determines the boundaries and limitations of one’s existence.

What I learned that surprised me was that many teachers are against this innovative form of mathematics because it cannot be easily compartmentalized in little lesson plan boxes in a teacher’s plan book. On that note, SJM also cannot easily be compartmentalized in the little lesson plan boxes in a teacher’s head. I believe SJM is met with resistance because it is open-ended in the direction it will take once it has begun, and clear-cut goals and outcomes are not necessarily easy to construct at the outset. Goals and outcomes evolve as the work project begins. This is counter to what teachers are used to, counter to how we are trained to plan ahead, counter to how we logically plan something from start to finish.

Another reason why SJM may be met with resistance by teachers is because it is more student-directed than teacher-directed. This is also counter to the traditional methods of teaching in which we are generally trained. Of course we learn to create literature circles, cooperative groups, pair-share situations in the classroom, etc. But primarily we are taught to take charge, take control, and run the room. SJM throws off that balance of power for the adult in charge.

This project was definitely a learning experience!