America’s education advantage, unrivaled in the years after World War II, is eroding quickly as a greater proportion of students in more and more countries graduate from high school and college and score higher on achievement tests than students in the United States, said Andreas Schleicher, a senior education official at the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development in Paris, which helps coordinate policies for 30 of the world’s richest countries.

… and lax local standards and poor curriculum choices are part of the problem:

America’s system of standards, curriculums and testing controlled by states and local districts with a heavy overlay of federal rules is a “quite unique” mix of decentralization and central control, Mr. Schleicher said. More successful nations, he said, maintain central control over standards and curriculum, but give local schools more freedom from regulation, he said.

If you think reading is a bit boring, well, you may be right.

But for one Pennridge 10th-grade English class, a hands-on architecture project has made reading exciting.

English teacher JoAnn Rubin uses a creative architecture project that teaches her students to use the precision of the English language and architecture as well as the freedom of artistic expression to help all types of students succeed in her English course.

“Not everyone is good at reading,” Rubin said about the project. “Some kids are really artistic.”

Okay, it actually wasn’t an article about English at all – here’s the real article about a geometry teacher.  Why is it acceptable for newspaper reporters to say math is boring and for math teachers to tell their students that not all of them will be good at math?  It’s this kind of thinking that provides a rationale for programs like Investigations that substitute writing and drawing and gluing for math.

See the C-Net video at the 1:08:45 mark.

The informational gathering was led by a senior corporate pitchman, who preached the wonders of Investigations, dazzled the congregation with Power- Point slides, numbers, data, mentions of Japanese superiority and slick humor— all the while informing the parents that they must remain faithful to the orthodoxy of Investigations.

Amherst, Mass., was also using Investigations but recognized the need for a change, identified alternative choices, and began a pilot test of a different curriculum in some of its schools:

First, a committee examined seven different math programs and narrowed the list to two (the new version of Investigations and an alternative). The committee then conducted a “pilot test” in which four elementary schools used one curriculum and the other four elementary schools used the other for one year, and all teachers reported their experience using a standardized rubric. The evidence collected from this one year trial strongly favored one of the curricula (which, interestingly, was not Investigations), and this new curriculum was adopted district-wide with substantial support. Note that no outside consultants were hired, as district personnel handled the entire process.

State College seems to be between the two Amhersts on this timeline.  A critical mass of SCASD Directors seem to recognize that there is a problem with the math curriculum,  but no plans are (yet) in place to try something new.

Students play at home and at school against other students around the world in live games of mental arithmetic. Each game lasts for 60 seconds and students can play up to 500 games, earning points for each correct answer. The students who answer the most questions appear in the Hall of Fame. Students cannot select their level but will move up as they progress.

Over the past 20 years educators have fought over the best way to teach numbers to kids. Advocates of traditional math tout the practice of algorithms and teacher-centered learning, whereas reform-math proponents focus on underlying concepts and student inquiry. In the face of continued declining scores in the U.S., these so-called math wars have heated up recently with the circulation of petitions, the release of contested curriculum guidelines and, in one case, the filing of a lawsuit. At stake is the ability of American high school graduates to perform everyday math tasks and compete in a global economy.

The piece doesn’t have much new information for those who have been following this issue, but there are some interesting comments from readers.  Here’s one:

The math wars are over.  Students need both arithmetic skills and a conceptual understanding.  In order to get both of these students need to practice math with the US algorithms until they are fluent with the procedure.  With this practice teachers can break down the algorithm to explain how and why it works.  And, then students can apply it to actual problems.

The problem with inquiry-based programs is that they are designed to only develop a conceptual understanding.  The spiral nature and lack of practice with efficient strategies (such as the US algorithm) leaves out the other half of the equation to develop students proficient in math.

Please review the work of the National Math Advisory Panel and the NCTM Focal Points.  Even the NCTM realized its 1989 approach was not working and published its Focal Points.

Here’s a comment from a reader who’s not happy with Scientific American consulting mathematicians for the article:

One principal flaw with this article is that the people quoted were primarily professors of mathematics.  As a group, professors know their subjects very well, but unfortunately few know much if anything about how educating a mind works.

The math wars are over.  Students need both arithmetic skills and a conceptual understanding.  In order to get both of these students need to practice math with the US algorithms until they are fluent with the procedure.  With this practice teachers can break down th ealgorithm to explain how and why it works.  And, then students can apply it to actual problems.

The problem with inquiry-based programs is that they are designed to only develop a conceptual understanding.  The spiral nature and lack of practice with efficient strategies (such as th eUS algorithm) leaves out the other half of the equation to develop students proficient in math.

Please review the work of the National Math Advisory Panel and the NCTM Focal Points.  Even the NCTM realized its 1989 approach was not working and published its Focal Points.

Me: “Can I erase this?” I pointed to the whiteboard, and he nodded. I erased the curve, and wrote a series of numbers on the board in a vertical column: 90, 85, 70, 65, and 50. “These are test scores,” I said, “How do you calcualate the mean, or average?”

Mark didn’t volunteer an answer.

Me: “Okay, let’s say the whole class takes an exam, and these are the scores. An average, or mean, tells me how well the class did overall. To calculate the average, I add all the scores, then divide by the number of scores. Here, you do it.” I have him the marker.

Mark added the numbers, then stopped.

Me: “How many scores are there?”

Mark: “Five.”

Me: “Okay, divide the total by five.”

Mark complied.

Me: “What’s the mean?”

Mark: “Seventy-two.” He looked at the numbers for a minute, then smiled. “I get it!” he said.

That’s when I realized what I’d suspected: Mark was a university freshman who had not, until just now, understood the concept of an average.

Reform math is known for several things. Instead of showing kids how to solve a problem, which Singapore Math does, reform math has them work in groups to discover ways to solve it. It wants them to explain how they did it, sometimes using a special vocabulary.

Sabrina Kovacs-Storlie, a supplemental math teacher at Schmitz Park, taught reform math for several years. “It is full of words,” she says. “So many words.”

Reform math also aims at exposing kids to advanced concepts at an early age. As a result, it jumps around. Kovacs-Storlie opens an Everyday Math book. Here is a lesson on calculating the perimeter of a shape. Next is a lesson about probability.

“It is teaching to exposure,” she says. “We are teaching to mastery.”

“By the end of this school year, our child will be able to:

1. Add and subtract three digit numbers.
2. Multiply and divide single digit numbers
3. Perform simple geometry
4. Tell time
5. Count change
6. Know basic temperatures and related instruments

This is the minimum type of outline needed for each subject area. You may provide more detail as in the outline below.

The child will be able to:

1. Read, write, and understand numbers through 1,000,000
2. Perform basic addition and subtraction facts (1-20)
3. Read, write, and understand the following symbols: = < >
4. Solve story problems
5. Use the order principle
6. Use the grouping principle
7. Do mental addition
8. Know three ways to do subtraction
9. Add and subtract when renaming is necessary
10. Estimate answers to problems
11. Write and solve multiplication equations
12. write and solve division equations
13. Learn multiplication and division facts
14. Measure lengths
15. Tell time
16. Locate points on a grid
17. Read and write some common fractions
18. Read and write some decimal fractions
19. Add and subtract decimal fractions
20. Read and write Roman numerals through 100
21. Count out change
22. Use the multiplication-addition principle
23. Multiply numbers up to three digits
24. Weigh objects
25. Read a thermometer”

…nor does Investigations 2. Not even remotely close.  Enough said.

“I am shocked to realize that the Dale Seymour “Connected Mathematics” is just as harmful for middle school as “Investigations” is for elementary school. It carries on the tradition of nightly homework that is a) hard to figure out b) takes forever to do once you figure it out c) after you’re done you haven’t learned any useful math d) it goes out of the way to make sure the #1 most important method to know is not taught, or allowed.” Arthur Hu (Education News, October 2003)

Reviews of the Connected Math curricula have been done by Dr. Tsang at Michigan State.

• 6th Grade Review
• 7th Grade Review

Based on these reviews and the preponderance of similar criticisms of Connected Math, it looks like I’m going to be homeschooling my child in math for another few years. What worked well for us this year? Doing an online math program — at school in the computer lab — in place of Investigations during classroom instruction.  While an unusual arrangement, I am confident that much more has been learned this way that would have been learned with Investigations. To do so, it was necessary to register as a Part Time Non-public Resident [PTNR] home schooled student, and these applications are due in to SCASD by March 5.  If you’d like to learn more about this approach, feel free to contact me at: schaefer819@gmail.com