Search for: All records

Hispanic-Serving Institutions (HSIs) advance servingness (i.e., racially-affirming support for Latin* students through campus programs and services) to promote academic success. However, the role of mathematics instruction in servingness is underexamined. Given how gateway mathematics courses filter out racial diversity in STEM majors, insights about Latin* students’ experiences of instruction in these courses can enhance servingness. This study analyzed 27 undergraduate Latin* students’ experiences of servingness through classroom participation in gateway mathematics courses at an HSI. We focused on classroom participation due to its well-documented influence on Latin* students’ mathematics identities and STEM persistence. Latin* students largely reported supportive instruction that reduced risks of participation. However, cultivating a racially-affirming community (a key aspect of servingness on the broader HSI campus) was also necessary to disrupt racialized influences and ensure Latin* students’ equitable access to participation. We conclude with implications for research and practice to advance servingness through STEM education across HSIs. 

Purpose: Mathematics instructors seek to address the well-being of students who are Indigenous, Black and Students of Color who have experienced mathematics classrooms as harmful spaces. Lesson study (LS), which engages multiple instructors at once, is a viable tool for enacting institutional change. This study investigates one US university mathematics and statistics department implementing a rehumanizing mathematics (RM) framework and especially how one AfroLatina member experienced the work. Changes in their instruction sought to better support Latine students in Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM). The study sought to understand what meaning faculty members made of their work. Design/methodology/approach: This is a case study of one university mathematics and statistics department that engaged in several cycles of LS to learn and implement the concept of RM in their classrooms. Data draw from faculty member responses to a Google Form and a 60–90 min interview. Inductive and deductive coding (Saldaña, 2012) were used to generate findings. Findings: Findings indicate mathematics and statistics department members found LS made the RM framework more tangible and actionable. Zarai found the work both exciting and scary, as she grappled with what it meant to question mathematics and center the most vulnerable students, do the work as a woman of color and feel exhausted from the work. As a case study (Yin, 2017), the findings are not generalizable. Rather, they describe the phenomenon and what were salient features for the participants (faculty members). Research limitations/implications: Limitations include that participants were surveyed and interviewed one year after receiving RM professional development and 8 months after their first LS cycle; relied upon Google survey forms and interviews where participants self-reported their experiences, and all but the first author are members of the department. To address memory issues, we returned to Padlet responses offered during the RM workshop and, during interviews, prompted participants with documents they had created in the LS cycle to jog their memories. We ameliorated department member biases by having the first author conduct interviews and lead analyses. This study raises several issues for researchers studying RM/STEM in other spaces (e.g. departments with less expertise/commitment to equity) and the role of context (e.g. university departments other than mathematics) and students (who are not Latine). It highlights the value of introducing LS to examine the learning and meaning-making for participants. Practical implications: For professional developers, understanding the range of responses that faculty members had around a single activity offers opportunities for participants to pause and reflect on their identities or the meanings they are making, which could lead to greater empathy for colleagues and practices that support their collective reflections and actions. For mathematicians/scientists interested in rehumanizing STEM, case studies of faculty members with different backgrounds and different meanings of the experience might prompt them to consider how context and identities play out locally. Social implications: Many people have experienced mathematics in dehumanizing ways. This study highlights the efforts of one mathematics/statistics department engaged in LS to rehumanize mathematics, which could help citizens identify more robust definitions of equity for themselves. Additionally, such cases could help individuals identify strategies for navigating the political and personal aspects of equity work, even if not related to mathematics. Even for those who do not share identities with people featured, case studies can highlight why colleagues might experience intense emotions around equity-oriented work, catalyze greater empathy towards them and increase collective equity commitment. Originality/value: Empirical results on LS and mathematics have centered on K–12 teaching and learning; empirical studies on RM in college and/or university settings have focused on students’ experiences. We still know little about how university instructors might make sense of the RM framework or implement it in their teaching. This is the first study of RM practiced by a university mathematics department. Understanding how university mathematicians made sense of an LS model for learning about RM is important both for understanding how LS influenced the learning and application of RM and for highlighting the experiences of AfroLatina faculty. 

Undergraduate mathematics classrooms are racialized spaces for Latin* students, even at Hispanic-Serving Institutions (HSIs) with educational missions of cultural affirmation. Instruction plays an important role in reinforcing and disrupting racial oppression in mathematics, which has significant implications for gateway courses (e.g., calculus) that impact STEM persistence. Groupwork is a widely-adopted practice in gateway mathematics courses with intentions to promote equitable access to content and participation; however, research has shown that groupwork can perpetuate inequitable experiences for historically marginalized groups in STEM, including Latin* students attending HSIs. The present study addresses these concerns of racial equity in undergraduate mathematics by exploring Latin* students’ groupwork experiences in gateway courses at a HSI. Our findings capture how groupwork facilitated or removed access to a sense of racially-affirming community, which was central in Latin* students’ visions of equitable support as mathematics learners at a HSI. 

Professional development (PD) is often recommended to equip faculty to serve racially minoritized students through instruction. However, limited work has examined equity-oriented PD for mathematics faculty, who often hold views of instruction as race-neutral. This contributed report explores the influence of a two-year PD for faculty in a mathematics department engaged in equity-oriented reform at a Hispanic-Serving Institution. We present two cases of white faculty members who demonstrated a limited ability to interrogate their white racial identities in relation to their instructional impact, despite their engagement in a sustained PD designed to promote racial equity. Implications are provided for equity-oriented PD for mathematics faculty. 

Research exploring how Hispanic-Serving Institutions (HSIs) serve Latin* STEM students has largely focused on features of organizational structures (e.g., support programs), but minimally examined instruction and classroom experiences. This is an important gap to fill, especially in gateway mathematics courses, where faculty relationships and quality of instruction impact Latin* students’ persistence and identities in STEM. To advance such research, this report presents findings from an analysis of how perspectives from HSI mathematics faculty and students about instruction in introductory statistics converged and diverged in terms of serving Latin* populations. We present two illustrative cases of dissonant and resonant perspectives on serving Latin* students through instruction that frames mathematical ability expansively (e.g., not limited to being fast or correct). We conclude with research and practice implications.