Transcript Community Math Forum Bellevue High School Bellevue

Community Math Forum
Bellevue High School
Bellevue, Washington
Tuesday, April 25 2006
Co-Sponsored by
Where’s the Math?
and
Washington State PTA
Presentation by Elizabeth Carson
Co-Founder and Executive Director
NYC HOLD Honest, Open, Logical Decisions
on Mathematics Education Reform
www.nychold.com
US K-12 Mathematics Education Reform
1989 – present
Origins, qualities, controversy, results, and
the implications for our children and our nation
A Nation At Risk
• A Nation at Risk 1983 The report by The National
Commission on Education Excellence began:
“ Our nation is at risk. Our once unchallenged preeminence in
commerce, industry, science, and technological innovation is being
overtaken by competitors throughout the world.” We report To the
American people that while we can take justifiable pride in what our
schools and colleges have historically accomplished and contributed
to the United States and the well-being of its people, the educational
foundations of our society are presently being eroded by a rising tide
of mediocrity that threatens our very future as a Nation and a
people.” If an unfriendly foreign power had attempted to impose on
America the mediocre educational performance that exists today, we
might well have viewed it as an act of war As it stands, we have
allowed this to happen to ourselves.”
1989 Governor’s Summit
Charlottesville, VA
“In the area of setting national education goals,
we unanimously agree that there is a need for
the first time in this nation’s history to have
specific results-oriented performance goals.”
President George Bush, Sr
Remarks at the Education Summit Farewell Ceremony at
the University of Virginia, September 1989
GOALS 2000
Educate America Act
(1994)
• A federal program that provided grants to states and
districts to establish challenging academic content
standards and accompanying assessments. It codified
the six national education goals that emerged from the
1989 education summit of President Bush, Sr and the
nation’s governors. Introduced by the Clinton
administration.
• Goal # 5: By the year 2000, US students will be first in
the world in mathematics and science achievement
National Council of Teachers of Mathematics
NCTM
• NCTM 100,000 member association of K12 math teachers and mathematics
educators in schools of education
• 1980 Agenda for Action
• 1989 Curriculum and Evaluation
Standards for School Mathematics
• 2000 Principles and Standards for School
Mathematics (PSSM 2000)
National Council of Teachers of Mathematics
NCTM
Standards
Vision documents. Not mathematics content standards.
Not grade specific articulation of goals for mastery.
Based in progressive education ideology. Constructivist
learning theory. Discovery, student directed learning.
Teacher is to be “a guide on the side, not a sage on the
stage.”
Calls for radical departure from traditional mathematics
content and sequence, and traditional classroom
practices.
National Council of Teachers of Mathematics
NCTM
1989 An Agenda for Action
• Called on educators to emphasize problem solving over drill and
practice and to “introduce calculators and computers into the
classroom at the earliest grade practicable.”
• Shirley Hill, former NCTM president remarked, “Its very clear the
time to begin a careful transition from the concentration on
traditional computation to a curriculum which takes advantage of the
calculating tools.”
Susan Walton, “Add Understanding, Subtract Drill,” Education
Week, July 27, 2983. National Science Board Commission on
Precollege Education in Mathematics, Science and Technology,
Education Americans for the 21st Century, excerpts reprinted in
Education Week, September 14, 1983
National Council of Teachers of Mathematics
NCTM
1989 Curriculum and Evaluation Standards
Summary of Changes in Content and Emphasis in 5-8
source: NCTM document distributed to Manhattan District 2 parent community to explain basis for
TERC Investigations and CMP
Highlights
•
Increased Attention: pursuing open ended problems, representing problems
verbally, discussion and writing in math class, connecting mathematics to other
subjects, creating personal algorithms and procedures, group work, calculators.
teacher as facilitator, discovery learning.
•
Decreased Attention: practice, answering questions that require a yes or no or a
number as a response, memorizing rules or procedures, practicing tedious paper and
pencil calculations, finding exact forms of answers, Algebra: manipulating symbols,
memorizing procedures and drilling on equation solving, Statistics and Probability:
memorizing formulas, Student reliance on outside authority (teacher or answer key)
Teacher teaching computations out of context, drilling algorithms, teaching topics in
isolation, being the dispenser of knowledge, “ testing for the sole purpose of
assigning grades.”
National Council of Teachers of Mathematics
NCTM
1989 Curriculum and Evaluation Standards
“It offers as its principal vision that school mathematics
need not be difficult or dull and the cure was to remove
the mathematical content from it leaving behind the
mathematical concepts as a sort of Cheshire Cat grin.”
Ralph Raimi, Professor of Mathematics Emeritus,
University of Rochester, a distinguished expert on
domestic and international mathematics standards
Letters, Notices of the AMS, February, 2001
National Council of Teachers of Mathematics
NCTM
1989 Curriculum and Evaluation Standards
“The Council is now led by theoreticians from our Schools of
Education, imposing policies that distort teaching and heavily impair
the learning of school mathematics.”
“It [1989 NCTM Standards ] does not hold the properties of
mathematics that make its study worthwhile. Mathematics is exact,
abstract and logically structured These are the essential properties
of mathematics.”
Frank Allen, Professor of Mathematics Emeritus, Elmhurst College
and former president of the NCTM (1962-64) in “The NCTM Council
Loses Hard Earned Credibility”
National Council of Teachers of Mathematics
NCTM
2000 Principles and Standards (PSSM)
The current, revised edition
•
Revisions process solicited input from the mathematics community including committees of the
American Mathematical Society (AMS) and the Mathematics Association of America (MAA) called
Associated Resource Groups (ARG) Several detailed AMS and MAA ARG reports were submitted
to the NCTM.
•
Final PSSM document is absent important ARG recommendations
•
Professor Ralph Raimi on the 2000 edition:
“PSSM continues to abhor direct instruction in, among other things, standard algorithms, Euclidean
geometry and uses of memory. “
“Almost anything in the way of content to be remembered can be omitted from a school
mathematics program without running afoul of PSSM, providing the pedagogy is right and the
process suitably “exploratory.” ‘Explore,’ ‘develop’ and ‘understand’ and their variants are much
more prominent in the text than ‘know,’ ‘prove’ and ‘remember’.”
National Council of Teachers of Mathematics
NCTM Standards
Philosophical Underpinnings
•
"Algorithms force children to give up their own thinking.“
•
"Once they have become successful at using algorithms, it is extremely and surprisingly difficult to get children to unlearn them“
•
"Algorithms 'unteach' place value and hinder children's development of number sense."
•
"When the teacher decrees that an answer is correct, all thinking and all initiative stops."
•
"Children will inevitably reach the truth if they debate long enough because, in logico-mathematical knowledge, relationships are never
arbitrary.”
•
"Three principles we advocate: following children's lead, not teaching algorithms, and not saying that an answer is correct or incorrect the opposite of the traditional approach to teaching mathematics.”
•
“ In the traditional approach, each topic, such as the multiplication of fractions, is introduced by the teacher. The teacher then shows the
students how to get answers and assigns similar exercises. The correctness of each answer is then judged by the teacher (or by a
computer nowadays). This approach is rooted in the belief that mathematics is a set of rules, skills, and concepts to be learned by
internalization from the environment. However, Piaget's constructivism has shown with more than 50 years of scientific research that
children acquire logico-mathematical knowledge by constructing it from the inside, in interaction with the environment."
•
“Reform in mathematics education no longer means doing better what we have been doing for centuries. It is time to go beyond "helping"
children in well-intentioned ways that are in reality harming them"
( excerpts from The article "52 x 8: The Importance of Children's Initiative ( The Constructivist, Fall, 1997) provided to Manhattan District 2
parents to explain the NCTM philosophy behind TERC Investigations and CMP )
National Council of Teachers of Mathematics
NCTM Standards
Calculators in Elementary Math Class
•
“This 1989 NCTM Standards is not instructive mathematics. It cheats our children. It neglects the fundamental
operations of arithmetic in the early grades, advocates the early use of calculators, and denies the foundation on
which student’s understanding of algebra is based.” Frank Allen, past President of the NCTM, in “The NCTM
Council Loses Hard Earned Credibility:”
•
“The Investigations curriculum incorporates the use of two forms of technology in the classroom: calculators and
computers. Calculators are assumed to be standard classroom materials, available for students in any unit.”
Computation and Estimation Strategies Building on Numbers You Know, Grade 5, Investigations in Number Data
and Space
•
“According to the Third International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS) the use of calculators in US fourth
grade mathematics classes is about twice the international average. Teachers of 39 percent of US students report
that students use calculators at least once or twice a week. In six of the seven top scoring nations, on the other
hand, teachers of 85 percent or more of the students report that students never use calculators in class.” David
Klein, Math Problems, Why the US Department of Education’s recommended math programs don’t add up,”
American School Board Journal, April 2000
•
A study of calculator usage among calculus student at Johns Hopkins University found a strong correlation
between calculator usage in earlier grades and poorer performance in calculus
W. Stephen Wilson and Daniel Q Naiman, “K-12 Calculator Usage and College Grades,” Educational Studies in
Mathematics, 56:119-122, 2004
National Science Foundation Education and Human
Resource Directorate (NSF EHR)
And the NCTM
Influential Federal Funding Source for NCTM Based K-12 Reforms, since 1991
•
Annual budgets eg: $ 994 million (FY 2004 est) $ 771 million (FY 2005 req)
•
Awards for research development and implementation, to partnerships between University
Schools of Education, District and State Departments of Education, K-12 Schools as laboratories
and private businesses and institutions
•
Research and Development of new math programs. eg: Investigations (TERC) , Connected Math
Project (CMP), Core-Plus
•
“Teacher Enhancement Grants” Teacher Training aligned with new NCTM math programs
•
State and Local Mathematics Standards Development aligned with the new NCTM math
programs
•
State, Urban, Rural Systemic Initiatives (SSI) (USI) (RSI)
renamed Local Systemic Change Initiatives (LSC) (to implement the new NCTM math programs)
•
Implementation and Support Centers for NCTM math program implementations
Eg: COMAP ARC UCSMP Everyday Math Center TERC MSPnet
National Science Foundation Education and Human
Resource Directorate (NSF EHR)
And the NCTM
NSF EHR Awards provide powerful funding incentives to colleges and universities and
states and local school districts for research and development projects and K-12 reforms.
•
“The support for these programs [Everyday Math, Investigations, Mathland, CMP, Core-Plus and IMP) in the
Department of Education is ultimately the responsibility of the Education and Human Resources Department,
EHR, at the National Science Foundation “At least equally important are the Systemic Initiatives funded by the
EHR, which have the objective of pushing the districts where these initiative are awarded to adopt curricula in
mathematics which align with the 1989 NCTM Mathematics Standards.”
Testimony of James Milgram, US House Committee on Education and the Workforce, February 2, 2000
•
“Not only do the Systemic Initiatives undermine local control of education, but, as our analysis in this chapter
suggests, they also seem to lower academic standards for mathematics education and weaken the educational
base for American science.”
Michael McKeown, David Klein, Chris Patterson, “The NSF Systemic Initiatives, How A Small Amount of Federal
Money Promotes Ill-Designed Mathematics and Science Programs in K-12 and Undermines Local Control of
Education,” Chapter 13 in What’s At Stake in the K-12 Standards Wars, Sandra Stotsky, Ed (2000)
•
“No single institution in the United States has caused more damage to the mathematical education of children than
the National Science Foundation (David Klein talk delivered at a Math Seminar, American Enterprise Institute,
March 4, 2002)
Mathematics and Scientific Communities Respond to
Federal Government Endorsement of 10 NCTM Based
Math Programs
•
October 1999 a US Department of Education “Expert Panel” recommended 10 NCTM math
programs describing them as “Exemplary” or “Promising”
•
November 18, 1999 Open Letter to US Education Secretary Richard Riley is published in the
Washington Post, asking for a withdrawal of the NCTM program recommendations. The letter
references critical analysis of several of the NCTM programs, by mathematicians and scientists at
leading universities. The letter expressed concern with the Expert Panel itself, the absence of
sufficient mathematics expertise and balance on the panel
Letter Authors:
David Klein, Professor of Mathematics, California State University at Northridge
Richard Askey, John Bascom Professor of Mathematics, University of Wisconsin at Madison
R James Milgram, Prof of Mathematics Stanford University
Hung-His Wu, Professor of Mathematics University of California Berkeley
Martin Scharlemann, Professor of Mathematics, University of California, Santa Barbara
Betty Tsang, National Superconducting Cyclotron Laboratory, Michigan State University
Letter Co-signers:
Over 200 mathematicians and scientists, among them, our nation’s most distinguished, including
seven Nobel laureates and winners of the Fields Medal, the highest award in mathematics,
department heads at more than a dozen universities including Caltech, Stanford and Yale and two
former presidents of the Mathematical Association of America.
Investigations in Number Data and
Space (TERC)
Wilfried Schmid, Dwight Parker Robinson Professor of Mathematics, Harvard
University on TERC:
“A TERC teacher doesn't explain, and a TERC teacher doesn't teach! I don't want to
be misunderstood: group learning and discovery learning are parts of the tool chest of
every accomplished teacher, but it is folly to turn these techniques into an ideology. If
we mathematicians had to re-discover mathematics on our own, we would not get
very far! And indeed, TERC does not get very far. By the end of fifth grade, TERC
students have fallen roughly two years behind where they should be.“
“The TERC authors are opposed to the teaching of the traditional algorithms of
arithmetic, such as long addition, subtraction with borrowing, and the usual penciland-paper methods of multiplication and division. Not only do they refuse to teach the
algorithms, they make clear their preference not to have the students learn them
outside of the classroom, either.”
Opening Remarks, “Are Our Schools Math Programs Adequate? Experimental Math Programs
and Their Consequences,” Math Forum sponsored by NYC HOLD, NYU Law School, 2001
Connected Mathematics Project
(CMP)
Jim Milgram, Professor of Mathematics, Stanford on CMP
“Overall the program seems to be very incomplete, and I would judge that it is aimed
at underachieving students rather than normal or higher achieving students. In itself
this is not a problem unless, as is the case, the program is advertised as being
designed for al students.”
“Standard algorithms are never introduced not even for adding, subtracting,
multiplying or dividing fractions”
“Precise definitions are never given.”
“Repetitive practice for developing skills, such as basic manipulative skills is never
given. Consequently, in the seventh and eighth grade booklets on algebra, there is no
development of the standard skills needed to solve linear equations, no practice with
simplifying polynomials or quotients of polynomials no discussion of things as basic
as the standard exponent rules.”
An Evaluation of CMP, R James Milgram
Teacher Concerns With NCTM Math
Constructivist curricula, such as TERC and CMP, forsake algorithms, postulates, and theorems
(the foundation of mathematics) as well as teacher centered learning. Instead, they have students
working among themselves in groups, loosely guided by the teacher in a drawn out attempt to
"discover" mathematical truths A constructivist would argue that kids who memorize standard
algorithms have no feel for numbers. This is a misconception. When taught properly, a student is
first introduced to place value, then the distributive property. With these principles established, a
teacher would introduce the standard algorithm and drill in a constructive fashion. Students gain
mastery of an algorithm that solves all problems of its type. With that in place, students don’t
have to struggle with simple calculations.
We who either teach or are parents of District 2 students know of the failures of these curricula.
We send our kids to math tutors in record numbers. Intelligent, hard working kids have trouble
doing simple math. We who have grown up with an understanding of elementary mathematics find
that we can't help our kids; that many of the games they play and homework they do are so
convoluted we either can't figure them out or don't see their significance. We're forced to sit by
and watch our kids' frustration, both kids who are having great difficulty and kids who are so
talented that they're terribly bored with their school mathematics. When we speak to school
officials about our frustration we're condescendingly told that we just need to understand what
they're doing. The truth is that many of us do understand what they're doing.
They're doing irreparable harm to thousands of kids.
Bruce Winokur, District 2 parent and Stuyvesant High School Mathematics Instructor, NYC
Teacher Concerns With NCTM Math
Over and over I've seen that the kids who can't calculate are the ones who
don't get the concepts either. They don't know which operations to use; they
don't know what numbers to punch into the calculator. The ones who know
enough math to calculate the right answer are the ones who understand the
concepts.
Some teachers don't like TERC & CMP but teach them because they have to.
Others say they like the programs, but after a few enthusiastic sentences
start mentioning how they need to be supplemented. The only people I know
who completely support these programs are staff developers whose professional
pride is at stake.
The students I test in middle and high school have not acquired the necessary math skills for
higher level math using programs such as TERC. The proof is the number of referrals high
schools receives for "math disabilities," when the only problem students have is prior content poor
curricula . Every school administrator tells concerned parents "it will work out" or it will "all make
sense". What Ms. McAdoo writes is true, “TERC is different from how most teachers learned
math . . .“ But that is not what makes teachers and parents turn from this program; rather, it is the
lack of content and rigor.
Parents Talk About NCTM Math
Red flags rise everywhere. Elementary students cry because they can’t
comprehend homework problems. New math workbooks omit instructional
reference materials. Children are dependent on parents for instruction.
There’s too much group work. Kids can’t grasp concepts through discovery
and walk away without the intended fundamentals. Math concepts aren’t
retained because they aren’t practiced sufficiently to be ingrained. Students
receive inflated math grades that don’t equate to their actual knowledge in
the areas of study. It’s common practice in middle school to resubmit failing
tests for revision credit to bolster grades thus creating a dilemma for parents
who see grades that reflect high achievement, yet the skills are absent.
Many families supplement with tutoring services to assure coverage.
Students who once thrived in traditional math programs are disheartened to
forfeit leisure time for remediation. Some well-known universities
acknowledge that high school graduates from reform math curriculum are
unprepared as compared with pupils from traditional programs.
Our children deserve a choice in their math curriculum.
Claudia Loy, excerpt of letter to the editor, Penfield (NY) Post, 3/17/05
Parents Talk About NCTM Math
While I totally understand the need to apply math facts and how critical that is to the
advanced math, I do not feel that totally abandoning traditional teaching methods is
the wisest plan. I also do not understand why someone seems to think that our
country’s children will learn better and be able to be compared to foreign children and
compete at higher levels in a program that is nothing like how they are being taught.
While change can be great, thorough and multifaceted research with a randomized
cross-cultural cohort is the only way to know if that method of teaching even has
promise. I do not see that in the studies that have been proudly given to me to read.
I have read and evaluated their quality and found them to be less than adequate. Put
simply, as a nurse practitioner, which I now am, if I applied a treatment to my patients
based on these studies, I would be risking my license if not someone’s well-being or
life.
Whole Language” was a failure. .Why are we trying “Whole Math?” This is lunacy
and I am ashamed to have my children participating in it.
Parents Talk About NCTM Math
I am a physician who was initially a mathematics major in college. I just found your website today,
and wish I have known about it 6 years ago when my oldest daughter began kindergarten in
District 2. It was not till late in third grade that I realized just how little math she was learning, and
how behind she was in basic skills. According to her teachers everything was fine, but then, no
testing or assessment was done other than the state wide tests.
We recently moved here from Miami and enrolled our daughter in the second grade at a District 2
school. We're very happy with the teacher and the school, except, of course, for the level of math
instruction. Our daughter already is capable of carrying over in both addition and subtraction, and
she can also do simple multiplication and division. Her class is nowhere near this level; they are
still doing TERC to compute 2-digit addition. When my daughter attempts to do it the normal way,
the teacher tells her that she cannot. This is not only slowing her down, it is actually causing her to
regress. She is developing an aversion to the normal methods.
The inadequacies of the math program in my daughter's middle school came into clear focus
when I sent her to Kaplan to prepare for the Science High School tests. Her instructor was
sufficiently perplexed to call me up and ask why she was unaware of so many of the math
concepts that were supposed to have been covered in her school. It turned out that only the
private school students were adequately prepared to take the entrance examination for a public
high school. this was shocking.
Parents Talk About NCTM Math
My younger son is currently in 4th grade at PS --, and last year the school implemented the
TERC curriculum-- and that alone. What I have seen (and I have my older son's old homework
books to prove it) is that he is WAY behind where my older son was at this point in 4th grade. He
and many of his classmates are bored and frustrated by the curriculum.
My husband and I both work with computers (coming from arts backgrounds) and know that the
fewer steps involved, the fewer chances for error. TERC takes just the opposite approach. It is not
clean, it is not simple or elegant, TERC is just plain fuzzy…While it may be true that 76% of
District 2 students meet state standards, the dirty little secret is that our scores are skewed
because parents are resorting to private tutors... I would suggest that you take a close look at the
teaching methods of new math, best illustrated by the diagram in the Post this week. Take a really
close look, go to some classrooms, ask some fifth graders to multiply 36 x 75, or to do a math
problem involving decimals or fractions, but do so as a prospective parent. Would you put your
children into this math program? District 2 children are a year behind in instruction compared to
most private schools and now, in addition, they are saddled with a lack of basic math skills. Mr.
Levy, many of us are stuck. The private schools are full and expensive, we made a commitment to
public school in good faith and now those of us who want out cannot get out.
Susan Erlanger, Excerpt of letter to NYC Schools Chancellor Harold Levy
Parents Talk About NCTM Math
We feel that our daughter has lost a sense for basic math facts and we have seen her confidence,
as well as basic skills deteriorate especially within the last year, as a 5th grade student. We
spend hours helping her learn but find this program cumbersome and difficult for us as parents to
follow. Though we are college educated parents, with a reasonable understanding of mathematics
we are very concerned with the momentum that this system of teaching has gained. I have yet to
read anyone in academia who endorses this program. I have spoken to a number of parents who
either don't understand what is happening to their children or are absolutely livid with this system
of teaching.
This concerns two math problems my third-grade son brought home yesterday. The two problems
he couldn't complete baffled me and my husband. Not to boast, but he [husband] holds two math
degrees (Master's in statistical analysis) plus an EE. As an experienced software developer,
complex problem solving is his forte. While a teenager in the Soviet Union, he was required to
study -- like every other high school student there -- science and math subjects I didn't see until
my junior year at CSUN. I myself have a Bachelor's in math, and before motherhood worked
under contract to the US Navy as an analyst (mathematician, really), designing complex math
models for dynamic simulation. If the two of us cannot solve a third-grade math problem, just
what the heck is going on with this "wonderful" math program our school district's adopted?!
Parents Talk About NCTM Math
The curriculum approaches the absurd, teaching multiple (five!) ways of doing simple multi-digit
subtraction. It has left my son with exposure to five ways, and mastery of none. ..Why is the
school teaching them to use calculators while I am left to teach them long division? As someone
with a deep appreciation and a strong background in mathematics, it pains me to see the material
taught this way. In the short term I will be providing tutoring for my own kids to make up for what I
feel to be a hole in their educations. In the longer term, my wife and I are also looking into private
schools for this reason alone.”
My daughter is in 4th grade and cannot multiply, cannot divide, cannot do fractions or decimals,
barely adds well, and struggles with subtraction yet her math grade is 4 out of 5. I do not
understand nor do I want to understand that. Now how was she supposed to understand and do
this investigative math with out the basic skills? I guess that is my job now. I feel sad that I pay
my taxes and put immense trust in the quality teachers that this school district has, only to see
their hands tied and the tongues tied on this issue.
Parent Math Education Advocacy Groups
Respond to K-12 NCTM Math Programs
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
CA 1995 Mathematically Correct www.mathematicallycorrect.com
CA 1995 HOLD Honest Open Logical Debate on Math Education Reform www.dehnbase.org/hold
NY 2005 Penfield Parents Concerned With Penfield Math http://teachusmath.com
CA 1995 Parents for Math Choice
CA 1996 Parents Who Count
NY 2000 NYC HOLD Honest Open Logical Decisions on Mathematics Education Reform www.nychold.com
IL Illinois Loop www.illinoisloop.org
TX Plano Parental Rights Council www.planoprc.org
CA 2000 SMWEEPS
UT Teach Utah Kids www.teachutahkids.com
VA Parents for Better Schools www.pbsfx.org/index.html
MA 1997 Concerned Parents of Reading http://members.aol.com/rlmandell/CPR/start.html
MI Parents and Choice www.pace-chippewavalleyschools.org
WI Parents Raising Educational Standards in Schools http://my.execpc.com/~presswis/
CA Mountain View Achievement http://rsvh.addr.com/mva
AZ Arizona Parents for Traditional Education www.theriver.com/Public/tucson_parents_edu_forum
RI Rhode Island Parents Advocating Education Excellence www.geocities.com/ripaee
IO Parents for Evidence Based Education www.educationallycorrect.com/Issues/math.htm
MN 2003 Parents for Better Math
CA Citizens United for Education
Parent Groups
Respond to K-12 NCTM Math Programs
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
MD Gifted and Talented Association http://groups.yahoo.com/group/GTAletters
PA Commonwealth Education Association www.ceopa.org
PA PACurriculum Counts
CA 2004 Parents for Scotts Valley Schools www.scottsvalleyparents.org
PA Concerned Parents of Central Bucks
CA 1996 Advocates for Better Education
TX Connected Math Disconnected Parents http://cmpinpisd.freeservers.com
NH SAU 16 www.sau16.info/Mathscape_page.html
ME Alliance for Real Math in Maine Schools www.thearmms.org
CA 2005 Save Our Children From Mediocre Math
NY NYC CSD # 9 Parents Opposed to Everyday Math
MN EdWatch www.EdWatch.org
FL Broward County Gifted Advisory Committee http://gifted.browardeducation.com
MA Informed Parents of Reading www.iror.org
UT Kids Do Count http://snow.prohosting.com/mathiq/index.html
KY Education Research From a Parents Point of View www.eddatafrominnes.com
CA Citizen School Watch
TX Texas Education Consumers Association
CO Untitled Group Parent Leader Carla Albers
CO Untitled Group Parent Leader Rita Gibson
Research Base for NCTM Math
14 years of NSF EHR funded K-12 mathematics research and development:
No conclusive scientific research to support any of the NCTM based
NSF EHR funded programs
“On Evaluating Curricular Effectiveness: Judging the Quality of K-12
Mathematics Evaluations,” National Academies' Mathematical Sciences
Education Board, National Research Council (2004)
Findings: “Evaluations of mathematics curricula provide important
information for educators, parents, students and curriculum developers, but
those conducted to date on 19 curricula (which included all 13 NSF funded
K-12 math programs) fall short of the scientific standards necessary to
gauge overall effectiveness.” ( press release National Academy Press)
The State of State Math Standards
Key findings of “The State of State Math Standards,” by David Klein, with Bastiaan Brahms, William Quirk,Wilfried
Schmid and W Stephen Wilson, Fordham Foundation, 2005
•
Only 3 states are awarded an “A:” California, Indiana and Massachusetts
•
29 states are awarded a “D” or an “F”
•
Washington State receives an “F”
Most state math standards are content poor, and closely aligned with the NCTM “vision.”
•
Many states do not require memorization of basic number facts, sums and products of single digit number sand
the equivalent subtraction and division facts.
•
Very few states explicitly require knowledge of the standard algorithms of arithmetic for addition, subtraction,
multiplication and division
•
Too little attention is paid to the coherent development of fractions in the late elementary and middle grades.
•
Majority of state standards call upon students to use calculators starting in the elementary grades, often beginning
in Kindergarten, sometimes pre-Kindergarten
The State of State Assessments
2005 State National Assessment of Education Progress (NAEP)
vs State Exams reveals low standards in the majority of state
assessments.
• Idaho reports 90% of 4th graders proficient on state test NAEP 41%
proficient
• North Carolina reports 92% of 4th graders are proficient
NAEP 40% proficient
• New York reported 85% of 4th graders are proficient
NAEP 36% 4th proficient
see: state-by-state comparisons in 4th and 8th grade for math and
reading in “Achieve Quick Facts NAEP vs State Proficiency 2005”
A Nation Still At Risk
Since 1989 a national mathematics education reform movement led by the NCTM and education
theorists in our Schools of Education has swept our nation’s schools. The results:
•
National Assessment of Education Progress (NAEP)
2005 US 4th grade: 36% at or above proficient; 8th grade 30% at or above proficient
Washington State 4th grade: 42% at or above proficient 8th grade 36% at or above proficient
•
Third International Math and Science Survey (TIMSS)
2003 No change in the average math and science scores of U.S. fourth graders between 1995 and 2003, while
U.S. eighth-graders improved their averages in math and science in 2003 compared to 1995
US 4th and 8th grade ranks still far from the top. 12th and 15th in 4th and 8th grades respectively
Top performing nations: Singapore Korea Hong Kong Chinese Taipei Japan
•
Program for International Student Assessment (PISA)
2003 24 out of 29 participating nations With 10 nonmember participating nations added (including a number of
developing nations) : US tied Latvia for 27th place
Top performing nations: Finland and Japan
•
American Institutes for Research AIR report
2005 “New Study Finds US Math Students Consistently Behind Their Peers Around the World”
“Reassessing US International Mathematics Performance: New Findings from the 2003 TIMSS and PISA” (AIR)
12 nations participated in TIMSS 4th and 8th grade, and PISA (15 year olds)
US ranking: TIMSS Grade 4: 8 TIMSS Grade 8: 9 PISA : 9
Top performing: Hong Kong, Japan, Belgium, Netherlands, Latvia, Hungary, Russia rank higher in all three
What’s At Stake
The National Academy of Sciences (NAS) observed in a recent report. "Although many people
assume that the United States will always be a world leader in science and technology, this may
not continue to be the case inasmuch as great minds and ideas exist throughout the world. We
fear the abruptness with which a lead in science and technology can be lost - and the difficulty of
recovering a lead once lost, if indeed it can be regained at all.“
The report "Rising Above the Gathering Storm: Energizing and Employing America for a Brighter
Economic Future." Committee on Science, Engineering, and Public Policy (COSEPUP) a joint
unit of the National Academy of Sciences, National Academy of Engineering, and the Institute of
Medicine. 2006 A committee of leading scientists, corporate executives and educators oversaw
the drafting of the report.
To spur American innovation, its recommendations include enhanced math and science education
in grade school and high school.
The report cites China and India among a number of economically promising countries that may be
poised to usurp America's leadership in innovation and job growth.
"For the first time in generations, the nation's children could face poorer prospects than their
parents and grandparents did," the report said. "We owe our current prosperity, security and good
health to the investments of past generations, and we are obliged to renew those commitments.“