Search Results

You are looking at 1 - 3 of 3 items for

  • Author or Editor: Christopher C. Jett x
Clear All Modify Search
Restricted access

Christopher C. Jett

The stories of high-achieving African American mathematics students are gaining prominence in the research literature. In this multiple case study, I use a critical race theoretical frame to document and analyze the experiences of 4 mathematically persistent African American male students who earned undergraduate degrees in mathematics and subsequently enrolled in mathematics or mathematics education graduate programs. The findings reveal that these African American men drew from internal factors to influence their mathematical persistence and identified how racial microaggressions manifest themselves in postundergraduate contexts. Recommendations for practice, policy implications, and future research directions that emerged from this study are discussed to better understand African American men's mathematics experiences.

Full access

Christopher C. Jett, David W. Stinson and Brian A. Williams

Four strategies can be effective in creating supportive learning environments.

Restricted access

Nicole M. Joseph, Christopher C. Jett and Jacqueline Leonard

Cases for Mathematics Teacher Educators: Facilitating Conversations About Inequities in Mathematics Classrooms (hereafter referred to as Cases), edited by Dorothy Y. White, Sandra Crespo, and Marta Civil (2016), is a robust anthology about inequities in mathematics classrooms in three spaces: mathematics methods courses, mathematics content courses, and graduate and professional development courses. This pedagogical contribution utilizes and deconstructs dilemmas occurring in mathematics teacher educators' (MTEs) classrooms. The text consists of 19 cases and 57 corresponding commentaries (three per case) that serve as critical analysis for discussion. The authors present their cases to provide the reader with their respective dilemmas, identities as teacher educators, and strategies for engaging in equity work. This organizational structure is significant methodologically because it promotes opportunities for critique and conversation about the authors' biases and assumptions. However, there are missed opportunities in many of the cases to acknowledge microaggressions and systematic oppression in higher education and in U.S. society in general (Chang, 2016).