The SFR draft framework devotes less than 6% of its text to math content standards. As a result, math classes will no longer have math content standards as their primary focus.
The framework abandons the content standards it was tasked to uphold.
The SFR draft framework makes claims that are not supported by research.
Big shifts in mathematical education are being proposed based upon these claims.
The Math Framework replaces math content standards (the detailed expectations for what should be learned in each course) with vague, ill-defined “big ideas” and “content connections” that leave the teaching and learning of specific math topics up to teacher and student choice.
This will lead to major gaps in student math knowledge as well as greater inequity in student learning in K-12 public schools.
Removing the clear standards of what math students must learn in each course and instead focusing on topics about which “students wonder” lowers expectations for all students and especially harms those who solely rely upon the K-12 public school system for education.
With students learning different math in the same classes across the state, inequity and the achievement gap will increase.
The SFR draft framework guides for a one-size-fits-all approach for students and math classes until 11th grade, delaying Algebra 1 or Integrated Math 1 until 9th grade, creating obstacles for students who wish to complete calculus in high school.
This guidance severely disadvantages CA students who wish to pursue STEM majors or careers, thus creating inequities and exacerbating disparities.
It replaces a focus on “math class” with something more akin to a sociology class, adopting a politicized stance of learning and applying math in a one-sided interpretation.
