Monday, November 14, 2005
Buyer BEWARE
I'm copying this post from another teacher's blog: http://www.kimberlyswygert.com/
You should show this post to your parents especially if you previously went to public school (where the following methods are strictly applied and enforced). This post hits the nail on the head regarding the institutionalized failure in education that has plagued young students for the past 10 to 15 years; you are lucky if you have parents or tutors who can help you to compensate for this malpractice:
The parents' fight against fuzziness
The NYTimes opens an article about the new "innovative" math with a provocative anecdote:
LAST spring, when he was only a sophomore, Jim Munch received a plaque honoring him as top scorer on the high school math team here. He went on to earn the highest mark possible, a 5, on an Advanced Placement exam in calculus. His ambition is to become a theoretical mathematician.
Jim might have seemed the veritable symbol for the new math curriculum installed over the last seven years in this ambitious, educated suburb of Rochester. Since seventh grade, he had been taking the "constructivist" or "inquiry" program, so named because it emphasizes pupils' constructing their own knowledge through a process of reasoning.
Jim, however, placed the credit elsewhere. His parents, an engineer and an educator, covertly tutored him in traditional math. Several teachers, in the privacy of their own classrooms, contravened the official curriculum to teach the problem-solving formulas that constructivist math denigrates as mindless memorization.
The article does a nice job of capturing the frustration parents feel with math instruction so "progressive" and devoid of "mindless memorization" that their sixth-graders are unable to make change from a $20 bill. What's more, the parents who are helping their children memorize multiplication tables are derided as "helicopter parents":
Susan Gray, the superintendent, attributed the criticism of the math program to "helicopter parents" who are accustomed to being deeply involved in all aspects of their children's lives. "Because the pedagogy has changed, the parents who knew the old ways didn't know how to help their children," she said. "They didn't have the knowledge and skills to support their children at home. There's a security in memorization of math facts, and that security is gone now."
Um, is that supposed to be an advantage of constructivist math? That engineers, scientists, and doctors who used to be able to expect their kids to make change can no longer do so? And I'd like to point out to Ms. Gray that the term "helicopter parents" was developed to mock those overprotective souls who keep a close eye on kids who've left the nest and moved on to college. Applying the term to parents who are horrified at how handicapped their young kids are by lack of "drill and kill" math knowledge is condescending and nasty.
The article's primary shortcoming is its lack of links to bloggers, educators, and teachers who have been fighting this battle for quite some time. At the very least, the author should have linked to Bas Braams and Mike McKeown for their tireless work in this area. To get the best sense of the ongoing battle to return common sense and multiplication tables back to public school math, you can also click on over to the NYHOLD site and just keep scrolling. A recent paper by Stanley Ocken, a professor of mathematics at CUNY-NY, sums things up nicely:
...the New York State 4th and 8th grade assessments are weak in computational and pre-algebra skills. Those exams include lots of word problems dealing with everyday situations, but the actual math skills required are minimal [What's more, such items place a heavy reading load on students, and often end up measuring more reading comprehension than math skills]. That’s a direct result of the vision described in the NCTM Standards: computation with standard algorithms must be removed from its dominant place in the elementary curriculum. After all, you can get the answer with a calculator.
The problem with that recommendation is its effect on students’ future ability to handle algebraic symbolism efficiently, fluently, accurately. It’s necessary, but not sufficient, that kids learn the multiplication table cold. Once that's done, they need to assemble basic operations into more complex tasks. That’s why they still need to practice standard algorithms for multi-digit multiplication and division. It is the experience of sustained number manipulation, with fluency and accuracy as the goal, that establishes a foundation for future success with lengthy algebraic symbol manipulation tasks that are critical in mathematics and science, beginning with a good Algebra II course. And it is the importance of sustained number manipulation that is categorically rejected by the NCTM Standards and by elementary math programs, including Everyday Math, that share the NCTM vision.
This fuzzy math has been lauded by the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics for years as more inclusive and beneficial to students in a high-tech age, and a cursory read of their mathematics standards would seem to support their claims. However, the careful reader will note that, despite their claims that there's no one "right" way to teach math, the NCTM pushes collaborative learning over solitary work, and they present "conceptual understanding" as something that contrasts to, rather than results from, the learning of basic skills. Calculators are also a integral (ha) part of their brave new vision.
For more criticism of the NCTM and their plan for teaching "conceptual understanding" without having to memorize any formulas, you can click back to old links of mine here, here, here, and here.
And to end with my own anecdotal evidence of sorts, let's just say that everyone I know who tutors high school math, either on the side or as a full-time job, is not having to hunt for pupils, even in the best school districts where the public schools are considered to be very good. The tutors I've spoken with don't describe their pupils as being pushed by "helicopter parents," either, but say that the outside is tutoring is a necessity to balance the undemanding school curricula.
You should show this post to your parents especially if you previously went to public school (where the following methods are strictly applied and enforced). This post hits the nail on the head regarding the institutionalized failure in education that has plagued young students for the past 10 to 15 years; you are lucky if you have parents or tutors who can help you to compensate for this malpractice:
The parents' fight against fuzziness
The NYTimes opens an article about the new "innovative" math with a provocative anecdote:
LAST spring, when he was only a sophomore, Jim Munch received a plaque honoring him as top scorer on the high school math team here. He went on to earn the highest mark possible, a 5, on an Advanced Placement exam in calculus. His ambition is to become a theoretical mathematician.
Jim might have seemed the veritable symbol for the new math curriculum installed over the last seven years in this ambitious, educated suburb of Rochester. Since seventh grade, he had been taking the "constructivist" or "inquiry" program, so named because it emphasizes pupils' constructing their own knowledge through a process of reasoning.
Jim, however, placed the credit elsewhere. His parents, an engineer and an educator, covertly tutored him in traditional math. Several teachers, in the privacy of their own classrooms, contravened the official curriculum to teach the problem-solving formulas that constructivist math denigrates as mindless memorization.
The article does a nice job of capturing the frustration parents feel with math instruction so "progressive" and devoid of "mindless memorization" that their sixth-graders are unable to make change from a $20 bill. What's more, the parents who are helping their children memorize multiplication tables are derided as "helicopter parents":
Susan Gray, the superintendent, attributed the criticism of the math program to "helicopter parents" who are accustomed to being deeply involved in all aspects of their children's lives. "Because the pedagogy has changed, the parents who knew the old ways didn't know how to help their children," she said. "They didn't have the knowledge and skills to support their children at home. There's a security in memorization of math facts, and that security is gone now."
Um, is that supposed to be an advantage of constructivist math? That engineers, scientists, and doctors who used to be able to expect their kids to make change can no longer do so? And I'd like to point out to Ms. Gray that the term "helicopter parents" was developed to mock those overprotective souls who keep a close eye on kids who've left the nest and moved on to college. Applying the term to parents who are horrified at how handicapped their young kids are by lack of "drill and kill" math knowledge is condescending and nasty.
The article's primary shortcoming is its lack of links to bloggers, educators, and teachers who have been fighting this battle for quite some time. At the very least, the author should have linked to Bas Braams and Mike McKeown for their tireless work in this area. To get the best sense of the ongoing battle to return common sense and multiplication tables back to public school math, you can also click on over to the NYHOLD site and just keep scrolling. A recent paper by Stanley Ocken, a professor of mathematics at CUNY-NY, sums things up nicely:
...the New York State 4th and 8th grade assessments are weak in computational and pre-algebra skills. Those exams include lots of word problems dealing with everyday situations, but the actual math skills required are minimal [What's more, such items place a heavy reading load on students, and often end up measuring more reading comprehension than math skills]. That’s a direct result of the vision described in the NCTM Standards: computation with standard algorithms must be removed from its dominant place in the elementary curriculum. After all, you can get the answer with a calculator.
The problem with that recommendation is its effect on students’ future ability to handle algebraic symbolism efficiently, fluently, accurately. It’s necessary, but not sufficient, that kids learn the multiplication table cold. Once that's done, they need to assemble basic operations into more complex tasks. That’s why they still need to practice standard algorithms for multi-digit multiplication and division. It is the experience of sustained number manipulation, with fluency and accuracy as the goal, that establishes a foundation for future success with lengthy algebraic symbol manipulation tasks that are critical in mathematics and science, beginning with a good Algebra II course. And it is the importance of sustained number manipulation that is categorically rejected by the NCTM Standards and by elementary math programs, including Everyday Math, that share the NCTM vision.
This fuzzy math has been lauded by the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics for years as more inclusive and beneficial to students in a high-tech age, and a cursory read of their mathematics standards would seem to support their claims. However, the careful reader will note that, despite their claims that there's no one "right" way to teach math, the NCTM pushes collaborative learning over solitary work, and they present "conceptual understanding" as something that contrasts to, rather than results from, the learning of basic skills. Calculators are also a integral (ha) part of their brave new vision.
For more criticism of the NCTM and their plan for teaching "conceptual understanding" without having to memorize any formulas, you can click back to old links of mine here, here, here, and here.
And to end with my own anecdotal evidence of sorts, let's just say that everyone I know who tutors high school math, either on the side or as a full-time job, is not having to hunt for pupils, even in the best school districts where the public schools are considered to be very good. The tutors I've spoken with don't describe their pupils as being pushed by "helicopter parents," either, but say that the outside is tutoring is a necessity to balance the undemanding school curricula.
# posted by C @ 2:02 AM 
