Microsoft Word - 2 FINAL Nasir Vol 9 No 1.doc Journal of Urban Mathematics Education July 2016, Vol. 9, No. 1, pp. 7–18 ©JUME. http://education.gsu.edu/JUME NA’ILAH SUAD NASIR is a professor of Education and African American Studies at the Uni- versity of California, Berkeley, 660 Barrows Hall, MC 2572, UC Berkeley, Berkeley, CA, 94720- 2572; email: nailahs@berkeley.edu. She studies race, education, and learning, and focuses on eq- uity in mathematics education. COMMENTARY Why Should Mathematics Educators Care About Race and Culture?1 Na’ilah Suad Nasir University of California, Berkeley athematics learning has traditionally been thought of as unrelated to matters of culture. It is also typically viewed as outside of the realm of race, aside from concerns about the mathematics “achievement gap.” I argue, as do many oth- ers in emerging scholarship on race and mathematics learning (e.g., Martin, 2003, 2013; Nasir & Shah, 2011; Shah, 2013), that this long-held perception of the sepa- ration of mathematics learning from issues of race and culture is a fallacy. To be effective, mathematics educators and the field of mathematics education in general must be centrally concerned with these issues. Race and culture are not only core to the learning process but also they are central forces that organize our society and determine access to high-quality mathematics instruction. In this commentary, I build the case for why the aforementioned statement is of critical importance. I begin by considering why the field of mathematics educa- tion (most often) does not attend to issues of race and culture. I then offer three crit- ical reasons why mathematics educators should consider race and culture. As I do so, I describe findings from several studies. Specifically, I focus on two lines of in- quiry: (a) a set of studies on students’ understandings about and management of racial stereotypes; and (b) a case study of one high school mathematics department, referred to as “Railside High,” that successfully enacted an equity pedagogy in mathematics. I close with a few thoughts about why these issues are so critical in this historical moment in our schools and in our nation. Why Mathematics Education Does Not Attend to Race and Culture There is a long history in mathematics education of seeing race and culture as outside of the purview of the discipline of mathematics, and the myth that race and culture do not matter for mathematics teaching and learning continues to perpetu- ate. This position is often justified by a set of assumptions that are blatantly false, 1 This commentary is a revised and abridged version of the plenary address delivered at the 35th annual meeting of the North American Chapter of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education, Chicago, IL; November 15, 2013. M Nasir Commentary Journal of Urban Mathematics Education Vol. 9, No. 1 8 but which we as a society are deeply invested. They include ideas about the nature of mathematics thinking and learning, such as that mathematics is racially and cul- turally neutral, and that we should focus on developing “universal” approaches to instruction, rather than culturally specific ones. Contemporary theories of learning, particularly theories from sociocultural or ecological perspectives, however, do not support these assumptions (Cole, 1996; Gutiérrez & Rogoff, 2003; Howard, 2010; Lee, 2007; Nasir, 2002; Rogoff, 2003; Saxe, 1999, 2002; Wenger, 1998). Instead, these theories view learning as an inher- ently cultural endeavor that occurs in the context of cultural practices, which hap- pen in relation to cultural artifacts and social interactions carried out to achieve so- cially and culturally defined goals. Not only is learning inherently cultural in nature, but schools, themselves, are cultural institutions. Schools are culturally lived and experienced; in that, they are culturally organized, guided by norms, conventions, artifacts, and involve social interaction. They are also potential spaces of empow- erment, marginalization, and identity building (i.e., spaces where cultural and iden- tity trajectories are offered and taken up). Thus, schooling institutions house com- plex ecologies and sets of cultural practices and agentic actors. Another reason mathematics education does not attend to issues of race and culture is that we live in a society that holds problematic and unrealistic ideas about race (Bonilla-Silva, 2010; Lopez, 2013). These ideas include the belief that when we focus on race, we call attention to it, and thus exacerbating (or creating) race as an issue in schools. This belief is oftentimes connected to the notion that we are in a “post-racial” era, and that racism is a thing of the past, or the notion that when we account for race it is akin to providing “special treatment” (e.g., affirmative action), and that people should be able to achieve on their own merit. Although these prevailing “common-sense” notions are powerful, scholarship on race and racism do not support them. Sociologists suggest that the very purpose of race as a construct is to provide differential access to resources for the intention of maintaining the social order (Massey, 2007; Omi & Winant, 1994). Social strati- fication, or the process by which differential access is provided to different social groups, involves two mechanisms: allocating people to social categories, and insti- tutionalizing practices that allocate resources unequally between the groups (Mas- sey, 2007). Key in this process is creating narratives (stereotypes) about social groups (including racial and ethnic groups) to justify the unequal allocation of re- sources. Obviously, most teachers and administrators are not, and do not, consider themselves to be racist. Most are well intentioned, and want the best for all stu- dents. If that is true, then how do practices of racism persist in school? One of the ways Bonilla-Silva (2010) argues that racism persists is through how we frame our conversations and ideas about race. He contends, “a new powerful ideology has emerged to defend the contemporary racial order: The ideology of color-blind rac- Nasir Commentary Journal of Urban Mathematics Education Vol. 9, No. 1 9 ism” (p. 25). Color-blind racism refers to the core ideas deeply held in our society that appear not to be about race but in fact are, which, in turn, perpetuate racial ide- ology. The central component of any racial ideology is its frames for interpreting in- formation. According to Bonilla-Silva (2010), there are four key frames that allow racism to be perpetuated without anyone appearing racist. The first is naturaliza- tion, which refers to situations when people make sense of racial phenomena as natural occurrences. An example is assuming that neighborhood segregation re- flects the preferences of racial (or ethnic) groups to live near people like them, ra- ther than reflecting a set of institutionalized practices of real estate or lending prac- tices (e.g., redlining). The second is cultural racism, which refers to the use of cul- turally based arguments to explain the social standing of minorities. For example, the idea that Blacks underachieve in school because they hold a cultural belief that school is not important. The third frame is minimization of racism; people assume that discrimination is no longer a central factor, and thus minimize the proposed effects of race in their explanations or understandings. And the final frame of color- blind racism is abstract liberalism. This frame is a bit more complicated. Bonilla- Silva writes: By framing race-related issues in the language of liberalism, whites can appear to be “reasonable” or even “moral” while opposing almost all practical approaches to deal with de facto racial inequality. For instance, the principle of equal opportunity, central to the agenda of the civil rights movement and whose extension to people of color was vehemently opposed by most whites, is invoked by whites today to oppose affirmative- action policies because they supposedly represent the “preferential treatment” of cer- tain groups. The claim necessitates ignoring the fact that people of color are severely underrepresented in most good jobs, schools, and universities, and hence, it is an ab- stract utilization of the idea of “equal opportunity.” (p. 28, emphasis in original) Thus, abstract liberalism refers to the set of ideas about meritocracy and equality in the abstract, and thus, does not consider how these ideals play out in a highly racial- ly stratified society. Taken together, these four frames function to allow racism to be perpetuated, without ever acknowledging its presence. Throughout this remain- der of this commentary, I return to Bonilla-Silva’s frames as I elaborate why it is of critical importance for mathematics educators to care about race and culture. Three Reasons Why Mathematics Educators Should Care about Race and Culture Bonilla-Silva’s (2010) work underscores the idea that race is operating even when we do not (or choose not to) see it. This color-blindness (and cultural blind- ness) is certainly true in mathematics teaching and learning. I argue, however, that Nasir Commentary Journal of Urban Mathematics Education Vol. 9, No. 1 10 there are (at least) three key reasons why mathematics educators should attend to issues of race and culture. They are: 1. Our society is racially stratified and students experience access to high- quality mathematics instruction by virtue of race. 2. Racial stereotyping influences access to mathematical identities for stu- dents, and thus disrupts mathematics learning. 3. High-quality mathematics instruction (potentially) disrupts unequal access to mathematics learning for students from marginalized groups. I discuss each of these reasons in turn, considering examples and data that support each assertion. Reason #1: Our society is racially stratified and students experience access to high- quality mathematics instruction by virtue of race. We know from research that in nearly every single life outcome, people from marginalized groups (African Americans, Latinas/os, Native Americans, and Asian Pacific Islanders), as well as poor people, have less desirable outcomes (Nasir, Scott, Trujillo, & Hernández, 2016). Our society in the United States is highly racially strat- ified (Carter, 2012) and this stratification plays out in specific ways in the educational arena (Carter & Welner, 2013; Kozol, 2005; Orfield, 2001; Reardon, 2011). With respect to mathematics teaching and learning in particular, we see con- sistent and long-standing disparities by race in not only mathematics achievement but also in opportunities to learn on a wide range of dimensions. Test scores and course completion outcomes continue to show disparities by race and income level. Analysis of the 2005 National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) scores in mathe- matics show that 39% of White eighth graders are proficient in mathematics, versus 9% of Black and 13% of Latina/o. By the end of high school, Black and Latina/o stu- dents’ overall mathematics scores are not significantly different from those of White eighth graders (Haycock, 2001; Lubienski, 2002). With respect to course completion, 49% of Latina/o and 47% of Black students have taken algebra or pre-algebra, com- pared to 68% of White students, and as of 2000, 13% of students from poor families were “proficient” or “advanced,” compared to 38% of students from non-poor fami- lies (Flores, 2007). While White students are overrepresented in “gifted,” “honors,” and “advanced placement” programs, Black and Latina/o students are severely un- derrepresented (Darling-Hammond, 2010; Oakes, 2005; Tyson, 2006). The situation for the English language learner (ELL) is similarly challenging. ELLs are also fre- quently blocked from higher-level tracks because of their English skills (Darling- Hammond, 2010). Perhaps even more alarming is that though gaps between White, Black, and La- tina/o students narrowed through the 1970s and 1980s, they have widened again in Nasir Commentary Journal of Urban Mathematics Education Vol. 9, No. 1 11 recent decades (Darling-Hammond, 2010). This widening may be due, in part, to the increasing emphasis in schools on standardization and high-stakes accountability (e.g., No Child Left Behind Act of 2001), which exacerbated inequity by driving the schools that are least successful to focus on basic skills as a means of test preparation (abandoning a focus on critical thinking and problem solving). These schools also often pushed out students who are struggling and in need of support (Haney, 2000; McNeil, 2000; Mintrop, 2003; Pedulla et al., 2003). These disparities in achievement gaps are often rooted in severe inequities in opportunities to learn mathematics. Students from marginalized groups are less likely to have well-trained teachers, and have less access to other resources as well, such as material supplies and technology (Darling-Hammond, 2010). In addition, disciplinary systems in schools operate in ways that disproportionately penalize Latino and Afri- can American male students (Gregory, Skiba, & Noguera, 2010; Monroe, 2005; Na- sir, ross, McKinney de Royston, Givens, & Bryant, 2013; Noguera, 2003; Skiba, Mi- chael, Nardo, & Peterson, 2002), which too often result in more out-of-class time (i.e., lessened opportunity to learn). Perhaps the most critical access issue is that of access to high-quality mathe- matics instruction. Students from marginalized groups not only attend schools with fewer qualified teachers (Darling-Hammond, 2010) but also have less access to col- lege preparatory pathways, and are more likely to be enrolled in a district that em- ploys instructional practices that center on preparation for standardized tests (Davis & Martin, 2008). Students who are English learners are often incorrectly placed in low- er-track courses, as counselors and teachers may not realize that they had already studied the material in their home country (Gutiérrez, 2002). Despite these documented inequities, as a society, we maintain the narrative that all students have an equal chance to learn. Our general unwillingness to acknowledge the reality of stratification in access to opportunities to learn is related to the frame of minimization of racism. In other words, while we note the achieve- ment gaps, we rarely acknowledge the extent of racial difference in educational ac- cess. Our unwillingness to center these opportunity gaps is also related to the abstract liberalism frame; in that, we ascribe to the idea that our job is to provide “equal op- portunity” through sameness, even while students face very different levels of multi- ple kinds of challenges by virtue of race and class in school and in society. This idea of equal opportunity through sameness leaves us unable to redress the myriad ine- qualities students and communities are forever facing. Reason #2: Racial stereotyping influences access to mathematical identities for stu- dents, and thus disrupts mathematics learning. The second reason mathematics educators should care about race and culture is that students experience mathematics classrooms as racialized spaces, where Black and Latina/o students are subject to negative stereotypes about their ability to do Nasir Commentary Journal of Urban Mathematics Education Vol. 9, No. 1 12 mathematics (Martin, 2013; Shah, 2013). In my own work, I have come to think about these stereotypes as “racial storylines” that are, themselves, cultural artifacts, as they are the way that we collectively make sense of (and reproduce) achievement pat- terns (Nasir, 2011; Nasir, Snyder, Shah, & Ross, 2013). The extent to which students saw mathematics achievement as racialized and were aware of societal storylines about who could be good at mathematics was the subject of a study that my colleagues and I carried out with upper elementary and middle school students (Nasir, O’Conner, Wischnia, & McKinney de Royston, forthcoming). The research team surveyed over 150 fourth through seventh graders, and interviewed and observed 12 case study students to explore (a) the extent to which students understood that racial stereotypes about mathematics achievement exists, and (b) the extent to which they believed such stereotypes. The results were sobering. The students we surveyed overwhelmingly reported that they were aware of racial stereotypes which purported that Asian students were the smartest at math- ematics, followed by White students, followed by Latina/o students, and lastly by Black students. What is perhaps even more alarming is that this awareness intensi- fied by the time students were in middle school. The pattern was the same for stu- dents’ reporting that they believed the stereotypes. Perhaps even more striking is that when the research team looked at these da- ta by race, we found that African American and Latina/o students were more likely to be aware of negative racial stereotypes about school than Asian and White stu- dents. They, however, were also less likely to say that they themselves believed such stereotypes. This reported awareness seemed to leave these students in a bit of a quandary. They were both highly aware that others thought that people like them were not good at school, yet they did not believe it. Thus, these middle school stu- dents had to cognitively and emotionally process the difference between how others thought about their school and mathematics ability, and how they thought about their ability. Observations of case study students revealed that students took different ap- proaches to the interpretation and management of identity and stereotypes, with dif- ferent consequences on student achievement and engagement in class. These in- cluded: (a) students who were simply unaware of racial stereotypes about school and did quite well academically; (b) students who took up the negative stereotypes and found their academic achievement negatively impacted; (c) students who en- dorsed the stereotypes about their own group in the abstract, but who saw them- selves as the exception (these students had mixed academic outcomes); and (d) stu- dents who overtly resisted the stereotypes and had strong academic outcomes. The- se findings make salient the deep ways that students are impacted by racial stereo- types, and the power of negative stereotypes in their lives. Bonilla-Silva’s (2010) frame of cultural racism may explain why while stu- dents articulate the power of these stereotypes in their academic lives, our schools Nasir Commentary Journal of Urban Mathematics Education Vol. 9, No. 1 13 rarely attend to supporting students in managing the negative racial stereotypes about schools that are thrust upon them. Invoking the cultural racism frame would imply that our society may make sense of racial differences in achievement out- comes as a product of different sets of values about school, and thus not take seri- ously the impact of the stereotypes on children’s lives in school. Reason #3: High-quality mathematics instruction (potentially) disrupts unequal access to mathematics learning for students from marginalized groups. The third reason mathematics educators should care about issues of race and culture is that the way we teach mathematics has incredible power to disrupt the troubling opportunity gaps and the negative processes of stereotyping and racializa- tion that have been discussed so far. This power to disrupt is profoundly illustrated by the work of teachers at a school called “Railside High School” in the research literature (see, e.g., Nasir, Cabana, Shreve, Woodbury, & Louie, 2013). The math- ematics department at Railside has been touted nationally not only for being suc- cessful in achieving strong learning outcomes in mathematics with a diverse student population but also for developing an extraordinary teacher professional communi- ty in the mathematics department that embraced mathematically rigorous reform- minded curriculum and institutional and instructional practices (Boaler, 2006, 2008; Boaler & Staples, 2008; Hand, 2003; Horn, 2005, 2007, 2012; Horn & Little, 2010; Jilk, 2007; Little, 2002; Little & Horn, 2007; Nasir et al., 2013). With respect to learning outcomes in mathematics, Boaler’s (Boaler & Staples, 2008) team con- ducted a 4-year study that involved over 400 students and found that when com- pared to two other comparison schools, Railside students were slightly more likely to score “basic” or better on the California standardized test (49% vs. 41%), take advanced mathematics courses (e.g., calculus and pre-calculus) as seniors (41% vs. 27%), report that they “like math” (74% vs. 54%), and demonstrate interest in mathematics-related careers (39% vs. 5%). These results are particularly striking given that Railside is an urban, compre- hensive high school in Northern California with a student population (at the time of the study) that was 54% Latina/o, 21% Black, 17% Asian, 30% qualified for free or reduced-price meals, and 25% ELLs (i.e., unfortunately, too many believe such demographics prevent school success.) One of the hallmarks of the mathematics instruction is that the department ran completely de-tracked classes; utilized a mul- ti-ability, project-based curriculum; and supported the success of all learners to en- gage in complex mathematics. The work of using the power of high-quality math- ematics instruction to disrupt not only stereotypical narratives and achievement outcomes but also unequal access to mathematics learning at Railside was under- girded by a set of practices as well as a key set of beliefs and values. Practices. The Railside approach toward teaching and learning included insti- tutional practices at the level of the department and school as well as instructional Nasir Commentary Journal of Urban Mathematics Education Vol. 9, No. 1 14 practices at the level of the classroom (Nasir et al., 2013). The approach was devel- oped over a 20-year period of working together as a department. Core elements in- cluded, first and foremost, a commitment to equity. Teachers in the Railside math- ematics department collectively decided that one of the most important goals they had was to serve all of their students well, and to teach high-quality mathematics to all of their students, including those from marginalized groups. Equity, then, was viewed as the opportunity for all students to have access to high-quality mathemat- ics teaching. This commitment to equity was reflected in the ways that mathematics teaching and learning were structured at the institutional level at Railside. These institutional practices included block scheduling, so that mathematics courses ran for 90 minutes daily and were a semester long, which allowed for in class time to do extended projects and made it possible for students to take more mathematics courses during high school. Another institutional practice was the building and maintenance of the teacher professional community. This professional community was centered on discussing problems of practice together, and providing a support- ive environment to help one another maintain challenging instructional practices by working together. With respect to instructional practices, mathematics teaching at Railside was guided by a commitment to Complex Instruction (Cohen & Lotan, 1997) and group work. Complex Instruction is a pedagogical approach that emphasizes teaching in a way that attends to power and status issues in a classroom, and has the goal of equalizing status among students by providing mathematical problems that require deep thought and collaborative problem solving—what Cohen and Lotan call “group-worthy” tasks. Group-worthy tasks have to meet several design criteria: fo- cus on core mathematical ideas, offer multiple solution paths or entail multiple rep- resentations, and require (more times than not) the collective resources of the group. Thus, group-worthy problems lend themselves to opening up the opportunity for complex mathematical thinking for all students. The Railside approach to mathematics teaching also involved key practices, such as utilizing multiple representations (numerical, linear, graphical, etc.), focus- ing on big mathematical ideas (rather than procedures), asking students to justify and explain their work, and having students present their thinking and problem solving in front of the class. This focus on presenting student work had the goal of making students’ thinking public and valued through presentations at the overhead. Beliefs and values. These institutional and instructional practices were under- girded by a set of beliefs and values that were held and reinforced within the teach- er professional community. These beliefs included: (a) acknowledging both teach- ers and students as learners, (b) working from strengths and making space for vul- nerability, (c) redefining “smart,” (d) rethinking what it means to do mathematics in school, and (e) valuing relationships. Taken together these beliefs convey a key set of interrelated values and assumptions. The acknowledgment that all teachers and Nasir Commentary Journal of Urban Mathematics Education Vol. 9, No. 1 15 students are learners meant that teachers viewed themselves as learners alongside their students, and saw the work of learning to teach and of getting to know their students as a part of what it meant to teach at Railside. This belief connected to the second belief: the goal in the classroom was to emphasize students’ strengths, while creating a classroom space where students (and the teacher) could be vulnerable. The vulnerability was made possible by redefining what it meant to be smart, as well as what it meant to do mathematics—both involved working through difficult problems collaboratively and putting forth effort when things seem difficult. All of these processes were undergirded by a value on relationships—between teachers and students and among students. Building trusting and caring relationships with students was important so that they were willing and able to take the significant emotional risks the department was asking them to take in the classroom. Interestingly, the disruption of racialized patterns of engagement and achievement at Railside was accomplished through increased access to instruction that fostered deep mathematical thinking, and not through explicit discussion about race. This differs from approaches that other efforts have taken (see Nasir, ross, McKinney de Royston, Givens, & Bryant, 2013, and Givens, Nasir, ross, & McKinney de Royston, 2016, for an example of explicitly racialized approaches). One way to think about this is that at Railside, the negative stereotypes were dis- rupted and reframed by the outcome of having a large number of potentially stereo- typed (i.e., African American and Latina/o) students being successful in mathemat- ics and developing strong identities as mathematics learners. Closing Thoughts In this commentary, I have made the argument that taking up issues of race and culture is imperative for mathematics educators and the mathematics education community. It is imperative because racial and cultural dynamics operate even when we are not paying attention to them, and are especially dangerous when they go unnoticed and unacknowledged. Specific to mathematics education, the racial- ized and cultured nature of schools and of the teaching and learning of mathematics have continued to exert an influence on learning and achievement outcomes, out- comes that get identified as issues of individual achievement or individual differ- ence. This influence is exerted both through the unequal access to high-quality mathematics instruction, and the existence of persistent racial stereotypes about mathematics “ability.” Perhaps never has the imperative to make explicit the racial- ized and cultured nature of mathematics learning been more relevant than in today’s political and educational climate, where racial disparities in policing and in access to higher education make the daily news. To not discuss or address issues of race, culture, and inequality is to accept the current patterns of inequality and marginali- Nasir Commentary Journal of Urban Mathematics Education Vol. 9, No. 1 16 zation. As Robert Moses (Moses & Cobb, 2001) contends, access to high-quality mathematics instruction is one of the key civil rights issues of our time. References Boaler, J. (2006). How a detracked mathematics approach promoted respect, responsibility, and high achievement. Theory Into Practice, 45(1), 40–46. Boaler, J. (2008). Promoting “relational equity” and high mathematics achievement through an innovative mixed-ability approach. British Educational Research Journal, 34(2), 167–194. Boaler, J., & Staples, M. (2008). Creating mathematical futures through an equitable teaching ap- proach: The case of Railside School. The Teachers College Record, 110(3), 608–645. Bonilla-Silva, E. (2010). Racism without racists: Colorblind racism and the persistence of racial inequality in America (3rd ed.). New York, NY: Rowman & Littlefield. Carter, P. (2012). Stubborn roots: Race, culture, and inequality in U.S. and South African Schools. Oxford, United Kingdom: Oxford University Press. Carter, P., & Welner, K. (2013). Closing the opportunity gap: What America must do to give every child an even chance. Oxford, United Kingdom: Oxford University Press. Cohen, E. G., & Lotan, R. A. (1997). Working for equity in heterogeneous classrooms: Sociological theory in practice. New York, NY: Teachers College Press. Cole, M. (1996). Cultural psychology: A once and future discipline. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Darling-Hammond, L. (2010). The flat world and education: How America’s commitment to equity will determine our future. New York, NY: Teachers College Press. Davis, J., & Martin, D. B. (2008). Racism, assessment, and instructional practices: Implications for mathematics teachers of African American students. Journal of Urban Mathematics Educa- tion, 1(1), 10–34. Retrieved from http://ed-osprey.gsu.edu/ojs/index.php/JUME/article/view/14/8 Flores, A. (2007). Examining disparities in mathematics education: Achievement gap or opportunity gap? The High School Journal, 91(1), 29–42. Givens, J., Nasir, N., ross, k., & McKinney de Royston, M. (2016). Modeling manhood: Reimagin- ing Black male identities in school. Anthropology & Education Quarterly, 47(2), 167–185. Gregory, A., Skiba, R., & Noguera, P. (2010). The achievement gap and the discipline gap: Two sides of the same coin? Educational Researcher, 29(1), 59–68. Gutiérrez, K. D., & Rogoff, B. (2003). Cultural ways of learning: Individual traits or repertoires of practice. Educational Researcher, 32(5), 19–25. Gutiérrez, R. (2002). Enabling the practice of mathematics teachers in context: Toward a new equity research agenda. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 4(2&3), 145–187. Hand, V. (2003). Reframing participation: Meaningful mathematical activity in diverse classrooms. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Stanford University, Stanford, CA. Haney, W. (2000). The myth of the Texas miracle in education. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 8(41). Haycock, K. (2001). Closing the achievement gap. Educational Leadership, 58(6), 6–11. Horn, I. S. (2005). Learning on the job: A situated account of teacher learning in two high school mathematics departments. Cognition & Instruction, 23(2), 207–236. Horn, I. S. (2007). Fast kids, slow kids, lazy kids: Framing the mismatch problem in mathematics teachers’ conversations. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 16(1), 37–79. Horn, I. S. (2012). Strength in numbers: Collaborative learning in secondary mathematics. Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. Nasir Commentary Journal of Urban Mathematics Education Vol. 9, No. 1 17 Horn, I. S., & Little, J. W. (2010). Attending to problems of practice: Routines and resources for professional learning in teachers’ workplace interactions. American Educational Research Journal, 47(1), 181–217. Howard, T. S. (2010). Why race and culture matter in schools: Closing the achievement gap in America’s classrooms. New York, NY: Teachers College Press. Jilk, L. M. (2007). Translated mathematics: Immigrant women’s use of salient identities as cultural tools for interpretation and learning. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Michigan State University, East Lancing, MI. Kozol, J. (2005). The shame of the nation: The restoration of apartheid schooling in America. New York, NY: Random House. Lee, C. (2007). Cultural literacy and learning: Taking bloom in the midst of the whirlwind. New York, NY: Teachers College Press. Little, J. W. (2002). Locating learning in teachers’ communities of practice: Opening up problems of analysis in records of everyday work. Teaching and Teacher Education, 18(8), 917–946. Little, J. W., & Horn, I. S. (2007). ‘Normalizing’ problems of practice: Converting routine conversation into a resource for learning in professional communities. In L. Stoll & K. Seashore Louis (Eds.), Professional learning communities: Divergence, detail, difficulties (pp. 79–92). Buckingham, United Kingdom: Open University Press. Lopez, I. H. (2013). Dog whistle politics: How coded racial appeals have reivented racism and wrecked the middle class. Oxford, United Kingdom: Oxford University Press. Lubienski, S. T. (2002). A closer look at Black-White mathematics gaps: Intersections of race and SES in NAEP achievement and instructional practices data. The Journal of Negro Education, 71(4), 269–287. Martin, D. B. (2003). Hidden assumptions and unaddressed questions in mathematics for all rhetoric. The Mathematics Educator, 13(2), 7–21. Martin, D. B. (2013). Race, racial projects, and mathematics education. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 44(1), 316–333. Massey, D. (2007). Categorically unequal: The American stratification system. New York, NY: Russell Sage. McNeil, L. (2000). Creating new inequalities: Contradictions of reform. Phi Delta Kappa Interna- tional, 81(10), 728–734. Mintrop, H. (2003). The limits of sanctions in low-performing schools: A study of Maryland and Kentucky schools on probation. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 11(3). Monroe, C. R. (2005). Why are “bad boys” always Black? Causes of disproportionality in school discipline and recommendations for change. The Clearing House: A Journal of Educational Strategies, Issues and Ideas, 79(1), 45–50. Moses, R. P., & Cobb, C. E. (2001). Radical equations: Civil rights from Mississippi to the Algebra Project. Boston, MA: Beacon Press. Nasir, N. S. (2002). Identity, goals and learning: Mathematics in cultural practice. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 4(2&3), 213–247. Nasir, N. S. (2011). Racialized identities: Race and achievement among African American youth. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press. Nasir, N. S., Cabana, C., Shreve, B., Woodbury, E., & Louie, N. (2013). Teaching mathematics for equity: A framework for successful practice. New York, NY: Teachers College Press. Nasir, N. S., O’Connor, K., Wischnia, S., & McKinney de Royston, M. (forthcoming). Knowing about racial stereotypes versus believing them. Urban Education. Nasir, N. S., ross, k. m., McKinney de Royston, M., Givens, J., & Bryant, J. N. (2013). Dirt on my record: Rethinking disciplinary practices in an all-Black, all-male alternative class. Harvard Educational Review, 83(3), 489–512. Nasir Commentary Journal of Urban Mathematics Education Vol. 9, No. 1 18 Nasir, N. S., Scott, J., Trujillo, T, & Hernández, L. (2016). The socio-political context of teaching. In C. Drew & D. Gitomer (Eds.), Handbook of research on teaching (pp. 349–390). Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association. Nasir, N. S., & Shah, N. (2011). On defense: African American males making sense of racialized narratives in mathematics education. Journal of African American Males in Education, 2(1), 24–45. Nasir, N. S., Snyder, C. R., Shah, N., & Ross, K. M. (2013). Racial storylines and implications for learning. Human Development, 55(5&6), 285–301. Noguera, P. (2003). The trouble with Black boys: The role and influence of environmental and cul- tural factors in the academic performance of African American males. Urban Education, 38(4), 431–459. Oakes, J. (2005). Keeping track: How schools structure inequality (2nd ed.). New Haven, CT: Yale University Press. Omi, M., & Winant, H. (1994). Racial formation in the United States: From the 1960’s to the 1990’s. New York, NY: Psychology Press. Orfield, G. (2001). Schools more separate: Consequences of a decade of resegregation. The Civil Rights Project at Harvard University. Retrieved from http://civilrightsproject.ucla.edu/research/k-12-education/integration-and-diversity/schools- more-separate-consequences-of-a-decade-of-resegregation/orfield-schools-more-separate- 2001.pdf Pedulla, J. J., Abrams, L. M., Madaus, G. F., Russell, M. K., Ramos, M. A., & Miao, J. (2003). Perceived effects of state-mandated testing programs on teaching and learning: Findings from a national survey of teachers. Chestnut Hill, MA: National Board on Educational Testing and Public Policy. Reardon, S. (2011). The widening academic achievement gap between the rich and the poor: New evidence and possible explanations. In R. Murnane & G. Duncan (Eds.), Whither opportunity?: Rising inequality, schools, and children’s life chances (pp. 91–116). New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation. Rogoff, B. (2003). Cultural nature of human development. Oxford, United Kingdom. Oxford University Press. Saxe, G. (1999). Cognition, development, and cultural practices. In E. Turiel (Ed.), Culture and development: New directions in child psychology (pp. 19–35). San Francisco, CA: Jossey- Bass. Saxe, G. B. (2002). Children’s developing mathematics in collective practices: A framework for analysis. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 11(2&3), 275–300. Shah, N. (2013). Racial discourse in mathematics and its impact on student learning, identity, and participation. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of California, Berkeley, Berke- ley, CA. Skiba, R. J., Michael, R. S., Nardo, A. C., & Peterson, R. L. (2002). The color of discipline: Sources of racial and gender disproportionality in school punishment. The Urban Review, 34(4), 317– 342. Tyson, K. (2006). The making of a burden: Tracing the development of a “burden of acting White” in schools. In E. M. Horvat & C. O’Connor’s (Eds.), Beyond acting White: Reframing the de- bate on Black student achievement (pp. 57–88). Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield. Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge, MA. Cambridge University Press.