A comparative study of the Brearley School and Wadleigh High School in early 20th century New York City

IF 1 Q3 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH Journal of Mathematical Behavior Pub Date : 2025-01-18 DOI:10.1016/j.jmathb.2025.101237
Yana Shvartsberg
{"title":"A comparative study of the Brearley School and Wadleigh High School in early 20th century New York City","authors":"Yana Shvartsberg","doi":"10.1016/j.jmathb.2025.101237","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>This paper offers comparative analysis of mathematics education for girls in two New York City schools during the time from 1890 to 1920, known as the Progressive Era in the United States. During this time, secondary education transitioned from being mostly accessible through private and religious institutions to becoming widely available through public high schools. This expansion led to an unprecedented increase in enrollment and brought several challenges, including the need to adapt curricula to meet the diverse needs of students. Concurrently, changes in labor market demands, particularly in urban areas, underscored the varying educational objectives for girls and boys, driven by the belief that they would have distinct career paths upon graduation. As a result, many educators and policymakers viewed curriculum differentiation as a necessary tool to accommodate students from varied backgrounds. Curriculum differentiation enabled students to choose classes they considered essential, a trend particularly prominent in public schools. In contrast, private schools continued to enroll students who planned to pursue further education after graduation, and therefore, these schools had to maintain their curricular rigor. Wadleigh Public School and Brearley Private School, both girls-only institutions, provide a snapshot of this complexity by highlighting how distinct goals in mathematics education coexisted within the same city at the same time. This paper explores the strengths and challenges faced by both schools, focusing on the purpose of mathematics education, curricular differentiation, and demographic factors affecting girls' enrollment in mathematics classes.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":47481,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Mathematical Behavior","volume":"78 ","pages":"Article 101237"},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Mathematical Behavior","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S073231232500001X","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This paper offers comparative analysis of mathematics education for girls in two New York City schools during the time from 1890 to 1920, known as the Progressive Era in the United States. During this time, secondary education transitioned from being mostly accessible through private and religious institutions to becoming widely available through public high schools. This expansion led to an unprecedented increase in enrollment and brought several challenges, including the need to adapt curricula to meet the diverse needs of students. Concurrently, changes in labor market demands, particularly in urban areas, underscored the varying educational objectives for girls and boys, driven by the belief that they would have distinct career paths upon graduation. As a result, many educators and policymakers viewed curriculum differentiation as a necessary tool to accommodate students from varied backgrounds. Curriculum differentiation enabled students to choose classes they considered essential, a trend particularly prominent in public schools. In contrast, private schools continued to enroll students who planned to pursue further education after graduation, and therefore, these schools had to maintain their curricular rigor. Wadleigh Public School and Brearley Private School, both girls-only institutions, provide a snapshot of this complexity by highlighting how distinct goals in mathematics education coexisted within the same city at the same time. This paper explores the strengths and challenges faced by both schools, focusing on the purpose of mathematics education, curricular differentiation, and demographic factors affecting girls' enrollment in mathematics classes.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Mathematical Behavior
Journal of Mathematical Behavior EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
2.70
自引率
17.60%
发文量
69
期刊介绍: The Journal of Mathematical Behavior solicits original research on the learning and teaching of mathematics. We are interested especially in basic research, research that aims to clarify, in detail and depth, how mathematical ideas develop in learners. Over three decades, our experience confirms a founding premise of this journal: that mathematical thinking, hence mathematics learning as a social enterprise, is special. It is special because mathematics is special, both logically and psychologically. Logically, through the way that mathematical ideas and methods have been built, refined and organized for centuries across a range of cultures; and psychologically, through the variety of ways people today, in many walks of life, make sense of mathematics, develop it, make it their own.
期刊最新文献
History of mathematics education for girls in the Netherlands A comparative study of the Brearley School and Wadleigh High School in early 20th century New York City Development and change in mathematics education for undergraduate women: An examination of the early years of Barnard College From mathematical play to playful math Shared drawings in a mathematical modelling activity: An exploratory study
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1