A few days ago Greg Ashman handballed an article to us, suggesting we might enjoy it, although clearly he meant “enjoy” it. The (paywalled) article, just published in the journal Research in Mathematics Education, is titled
Intersectional feminism to reenvision mathematical literacies & precarity
Yeah, you don’t have to read the article. We did.
We don’t even know what to do with this one. Since it is paywalled, most readers will be unable to (attempt to) read the article. And, posting a few highlight excerpts misses the point; doing so could not convey the endless swampiness of the twenty-five pages of self-indulgent nonsense. So, we’ll give up. We’ll post the abstract, make one quick comment explaining the purpose of the authors’ diagram above, and be done with it.
Here is the abstract:
Current global crises (e.g. COVID-19 pandemic and climate change) necessitate changes to mathematics curricula, especially related to using mathematics to solve real-world problems. We begin with the Programme for International Student Assessment’s (PISA) framework for mathematical literacy (FML), since it functions as a global guide for curriculum. We demonstrate its inadequacy to solve current crises and to mediate the precarity of girls and women. Then we reenvision the FML by integrating concepts of critical mathematics education with intersectional feminism. We reenvision how to think about mathematical literacies. In particular, we add practices of feeling, acting, and reimagining to the conventional construct of mathematical reasoning. We reenvision ways to think about or classify real-world problem contexts by exploring three potential themes for real-world problem contexts.
In summary, the authors have attempted to employ an anybody-but-straight-white-males brand of feminism to make PISA’s flaky twaddle even flakier and twaddlier. Given the above diagram is the authors’ rejigging of PISA’s mathematical frameworks, it is clear that the authors have succeeded admirably.