1

Mathematics for All Movement:

Trend Analysis Paper

Brooklyn K. Hunt

Department of Curriculum and Instruction, Purdue University

EDCI 52003: Theories and Trends in Curriculum and Instruction

Krista Primrose, PhD

December 4th, 2022

 2

The Mathematics for All movement emphasizes the importance of all students becoming

mathematically literate regardless of race, ethnicity, gender, or socio-economic status.

Mathematics is the great social equalizer as it serves as the ‘gatekeeper’ to college entrance and

better careers (Diaz, 2013; Gates & Vistro-Yu, 2003). The Mathematics for All movement

focusing on working toward equity in mathematics education by increasing mathematical

literacy in all students instead of focusing on educating only the top-performing students.

Background

The Mathematics for All movement is rooted in educational theory that dates to 1942

with Ralph Tyler’s developmental conformism. Mathematics for All pushes the ideas that

standards should be developed and conformed to by all students (Martin, 2003, 2013). At the

Fifth International Congress on Mathematical Education in 1984, the phrase ‘Mathematics for

All’ was the title for one of the groups organized at the conference (Damerow & Westbury,

1985). This was one of the first instances that the phrase was coined in the educational sphere.

In 1988, Reyes and Stanic published a piece that discusses the gaps in mathematical

achievement between different racial, gender, and socioeconomic groups, creating “a foundation

upon which to base future research on equity issues in mathematics education” (Martin, 2003,

pp. 7-8). In 1989, The National Council of Teacher of Mathematics (NCTM) published

Curriculum and Evaluation Standards for School Mathematics (NCTM, 1989). The work largely

discussed the need to provide the opportunity for all students to learn mathematics, not just

students interested in attending college. “If all students do not have the opportunity to learn this

mathematics, we face the danger of creating an intellectual elite and a polarized society”

(NCTM, 1989, p. x). After NCTM’s publication of these standards, the Mathematics for All

movement started to reform mathematics education in the hopes to increase equity and lessen the
 3

mathematical achievement gap by recommending “a core mathematics knowledge base” (Gates

& Vistro-Yu, 2003, p. 41).

Over the next ten years the inequitable achievement of racial minority students persisted

with only moderate improvements (Martin, 2003). In 2000, NCTM reaffirmed their commitment

to the Mathematics for All movement with the publication of the updated Standards volume. In

this document, the most valuable aspects of mathematical knowledge are described and the

importance of equity within mathematics education is reemphasized (NCTM, 2000; Gates &

Vistro-Yu, 2003).

Since the publication of Standards (NCTM, 2000), the Mathematics for All movement

reform efforts can be seen in the adoption of policies by schools, districts, and states. Many

districts now require all students to take algebra in 8th or 9th grade, regardless of their

mathematical background to push students to take more advanced mathematics courses (Martin,

2003, 2013). Most states adopted the Common Core State Standards for Mathematics in the early

2010s.

Discussion

Although many educators agree with the philosophy behind Mathematics for All, the

implementation of the idea fell short in many of their eyes. Rather than creating an elite group

of students that could compete with the world in mathematical rigor, the Mathematics for All

movement has lowered the bar so all can achieve (Gates & Vistro-Yu, 2003).

Martin (2003) asserts that Mathematics for All has compounded the inequities faced by

minority students due to districts requiring all students to take algebra in 8th or 9th grade without

providing the proper resources to ensure that all students are prepared to take that level of
 4

mathematics course. I have experience this in my own classroom. All students in my state are

required to take algebra in 9th grade regardless of their ability to handle the content. Thus,

students of all skill levels are required to learn the same algebra standards, as defined by the

Common Core State Standards, without the proper background knowledge. The responsibility to

catch up, scaffold, differentiate, and provide supports to these struggling students lies solely on

the shoulders of the teacher.

The Mathematics for All movement has only been implemented using a top-down

approach through the adoption of CCSS and algebra requirements (Martin, 2003). This has

forced minority students to be mathematically mainstreamed into thinking like white and Asian

students (Martin, 2013). A bottom-up approach that focuses more on the individual needs of

minority students and their social backgrounds will make mathematics accessible and applicable

to all (Martin, 2003).

Adopting a social justice approach to mathematics education would be top-down

approach that would support the long-term goals of Mathematics for All while also meeting the

social and mathematical needs of all students. A social justice approach mathematics education

would have “those who have been traditionally shut out of the mathematics pipeline learn

mathematics to help them improve the conditions of their lives” (Martin, 2003, p. 9). Thus,

mathematics would truly become the great equalizer as all students would not only have access

to advanced math courses, but they would become mathematically literate and prepared for the

success and opportunities that higher levels of mathematics bring (Diaz, 2013).
 5

References

Damerow, P., & Westbury, I. (1985). Mathematics for all‐‐problems and implications. Journal of

Curriculum Studies, 17(2), 175–184. https://doi.org/10.1080/0022027850170206

Diaz, J. D. (2013). Governing equality. European Education, 45(3), 35–50.

https://doi.org/10.2753/eue1056-4934450303

Gates, P., & Vistro-Yu, C. P. (2003). Is mathematics for all? Second International Handbook of

Mathematics Education, 31–73. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-010-0273-8_3

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. https://doi.org/10.5951/jresematheduc.44.1.0316

National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (1989). Curriculum and evaluation standards for

school mathematics. Reston, VA: Author.

National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (2000). Principles and standards for school

mathematics. Reston, VA: Author.

Reyes, L. H., & Stanic, G. (1988). Race, sex, socioeconomic status, and mathematics. Journal

for Research in Mathematics Education, 19(1), 26–43.