It's also possible that during the LA race riots, since asians (esp Korean) were left to fend for themselves against mobs, this has led to an inheritance of racially negative stories.
I would also note that many discussions about American racial injustice, particularly in the education system, treats asians as if they are barely worth discussing. Only the GOP seemed to have been interested in picking up the issue, and only very little in an opportunistic way.
Page 6 and onwards: https://equitablemath.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2020/11...
The intentions behind this effort seems to be to promote math that a more diversity of people can culturally relate to. It tries to address problems that today probably makes teaching math to diverse people both difficult and inefficient. The premise is that current practices have evolved in a niche culture, thus more optimized for that niche and not directly translateable to all the diversity of cultures that exists.
However, it makes assumptions and focus around one "problem", which is kind of asking: "When did you stop beating your wife?". The references to "White supremacy culture" raises an indefensible dilemma, being itself racist and discriminatory.
Especially when the focus is so narrow and one-sided, ie. Page 11:
> PREPARE STUDENTS OF COLOR TO CLOSE THE GAP IN ACCESS TO STEM FIELDS
* Teach students of color about the career and financial opportunities in math and STEM fields.
* Encourage them to disrupt the disproportionate push-out of people of color in those fields.
* Invite leaders and innovators of color working in STEAM fields to meet your students.
The stance and focus seems to also be about rooting out negativity, but this can be said of every problem in society and is not an constructive approach in bridging gaps. Statements and mission goals such as these are just dead ends and require circular reasoning to uphold:
> “We live in a toxic culture that affects us all; one dynamic of the culture is that we are discouraged from seeing it. One of our tasks is to learn to see our culture and how it teaches us to make normal that which is not and should never be normal.”
So although you can try to "fix problems" this way, what one inevitably ends up doing is reinforcing all the divisions and problems and make them much larger and insurmountable than they need to be.
It's kind of condescending although they are right: Different people require different approaches for learning better. This goes for all genders and "races" though!
First the operating definition of white supremacy, so we're on the same page:
> White supremacy culture is the idea (ideology) that White people and the ideas, thoughts, beliefs, and actions of white people are superior to People of Color and their ideas, thoughts, beliefs, and actions.
And from Jones and Okun (2001) we have a cluster of traits which are identified with white supremacy:
- sense of urgency
- quantity over quality
- worship of the written word
- either or thinking
- power hoarding
- fear of open conflict
- only one right way
- progress is bigger, more
- right to comfort
Reading comprehension fail on my part. I knew about the link to equitablemath.org, but missed the draft proposal references to the equitablemath.org teacher's manual and guides. (The WSJ hypertext link is just to the website, which isn't quite the same thing as presumably you can pick & choose guides, including choosing none at all.) FWIW, here are the two publications that contain the phrase "white supremacist": https://equitablemath.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2020/11... and https://equitablemath.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2020/11...
The usage in those publications is entirely unsurprising given the themes and overall narrative. But the absence of their literal usage in the formal draft curriculum is presumably deliberate. Sort of like the way a proposed Civil War curriculum in Texas or Alabama might conspicuously avoid literally saying something like, "the Civil War was fought over states' rights, not slavery". Which, BTW, is something my Florida public high school history teacher actually said in the 1990s as part of his bespoke Civil War curriculum. Even though the subtext was there in the presentation to some degree, the material itself was mostly benign, so it actually did matter somewhat that he said that explicitly.