There’s a piece in the current Scientific American magazine about the national math curriculum controversy. Here’s the opening paragraph:
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.
