Comments for Parents for Quality Math Education

Comment on Mr. Meyer by thausman

thausman — Sun, 27 Jun 2010 17:23:04 +0000

My district in WA uses the mantra “balanced math” as an excuse to continue using the extremely unbalanced Investigations curriculum. They even hired an expensive consultant from Colorado, who wrote a book called “5 Easy Steps to a Balanced Math Program”.

Unfortunately teachers have to develop all the material for each of the five steps. As a result most teachers simply grab their Investigations materials because it’s more efficient to use already prepared lessons.

The very notion that we should try to “balance” Investigations has cost our district hundreds of thousands of dollars in consulting fees, and our math scores continue to decline. What we really need is a world-class math curriculum that is already balanced. We are wasting valuable money and time trying to support TERC, when we should have replaced it years ago.

Comment on Surveying the situation by Math Mom

Math Mom — Mon, 14 Jun 2010 02:17:01 +0000

I agree with Steve. Annonymity is the best way to get anonymous feedback.

Comment on One step back by Barb

Barb — Sun, 13 Jun 2010 10:26:36 +0000

Excellent points. Let’s hope things continue to progress, eh?

Comment on PQME: Censored! by Barb

Barb — Sun, 13 Jun 2010 10:24:09 +0000

Hey – I can get to PQME’s site in Nepal, so the Maoists here apparently haven’t noticed just how anti-government your posts are

Comment on Surveying the situation by Steve

Steve — Thu, 10 Jun 2010 17:28:10 +0000

Andy,

Yes, let’s be clear. Anyone can view the C-NET tape to see if I misrepresented the teacher’s opening comment or her general impressions of Investigations, which I characterized as “mixed feelings” in my original post. I don’t see how what I wrote implies that this teacher is “against Investigations 2″.

I am grateful that this teacher had the courage to say what she said at the meeting. Given that she e-mailed me later to thank me for writing something similar in an e-mail to the Committee, I doubt that she believes I misrepresented her views.

I do not believe it is useful or fair to put this specific teacher on the spot any more than she is already. The point of my post was to call for an anonymous survey of teachers in order to get the most honest opinions. Can you offer a serious counterargument to this?

The District has gone ahead with a non-anonymous survey of teachers re Investigations 2 and, as you know from a report to the Committee, the early indications are that much of the feedback is negative. Shouldn’t this increase our interest in knowing what teachers say about Investigations when they are not reporting it face-to-face to their bosses?

Steve

Comment on Surveying the situation by Andy Cole

Andy Cole — Thu, 10 Jun 2010 16:24:21 +0000

Let’s be really clear here. The teacher that spoke up about “..hanging herself..” was referring to the fact that she could not yet judge Investigations 2 because she had not yet seen it and really did want to get her hands on it. The quote above makes it look like she was against Investigations 2 and that was not the case. She had not yet formed an opinion.

Comment on Surveying the situation by Anonymous

Anonymous — Tue, 08 Jun 2010 23:33:04 +0000

Well, it is NOT anonymous!

Comment on Surveying the situation by Maren Larson

Maren Larson — Tue, 08 Jun 2010 10:52:44 +0000

The climate for teachers who do not hold the same views as the Math curriculum office personnel is not good. Any teacher with less courage than those who have already dissented would think twice about expressing their views openly.

I agree, that it is absolutely critical that SCASD Leadership make the survey anonymous.

Comment on Martin Gardner, 1914-2010 by Steve

Steve — Sun, 06 Jun 2010 16:28:43 +0000

Here’s the solution to the missile problem, e-mailed by a comment-shy reader:

“500 miles.

The combined speed is 30,000 mi/hr. That’s 500 mi/minute. The starting distance is a red herring, what matters is how much they close the gap in a minute.”

Comment on One step back by Anonymous

Anonymous — Sun, 06 Jun 2010 13:56:32 +0000

Here is something I really don’t understand. It has pretty much been decided that Investigations I or II does not work. It doesn’t meet the needs of our students. Why give it another year? I don’t understand the attitude of some committee members who want to give Investigations II in first and second grades a chance. What for? I understand that the time is short, so why not do what was done in the past? Several years ago when the district wanted to pilot a new text book, they gave different teachers (one per grade level) a program to pilot for the year. They had meetings on a regular basis to discuss the pros and the cons of each program. Why not do the same here? Give a group of teachers, who are not biased towards Investigations, a program to pilot. At the end of the year, compare notes and make an educated decision that way. Give them a try! Otherwise, we are back to square one. We are putting fingers in the holes in the levee. We are going to use the same program that is full of holes, and the teachers will be encouraged to continue to supplement with their own materials. Imagine how much money the district would save by not buying the asinine workbooks that go with Investigations. They are a waste of time and money.

Anonymous