Where’s The Math?

U.S. Secretary of Education Margaret Spellings today announced the release of the final report of the National Mathematics Advisory Panel.

The Washington Post reports:

Panel Urges Schools to Emphasize Core Math Skills

A presidential panel declared math education in the United States “broken” yesterday and called on schools to focus on ensuring that children master fundamental skills that provide the underpinnings for success in higher math and, ultimately, in high-tech jobs.

The National Mathematics Advisory Panel convened in April 2006 to address concerns that many students lack the know-how to become engineers and scientists. The 24-member panel of mathematicians, education experts and psychologists said yesterday that students need a deeper understanding of basic skills, including fluency with whole numbers and fractions. It urged more training and support for teachers and called on researchers to find ways to combat “mathematics anxiety.”

The New York Times reports:

Report Urges Changes in Teaching Math

American students’ math achievement is “at a mediocre level” compared with that of their peers worldwide, according to a new report by a federal panel, which recommended that schools focus on key skills that prepare students to learn algebra.

“The sharp falloff in mathematics achievement in the U.S. begins as students reach late middle school, where, for more and more students, algebra course work begins,” said the report of the National Mathematics Advisory Panel, appointed two years ago by President Bush. “Students who complete Algebra II are more than twice as likely to graduate from college compared to students with less mathematical preparation.”

The press release can be found here: U.S. Secretary of Education Margaret Spellings Highlights Findings of the National Mathematics Advisory Panel

The report can be found here: National Mathematics Advisory Panel Final Report

Singapore math in L.A. Schools
Day to Day, March 13, 2008 · A new way of teaching math is helping students at some Los Angeles schools improve their test scores. “Singapore Math” was controversial at first. Now a presidential advisory panel is poised to issue guidelines that use the method.

Massachusetts Makes Strides in Math Curriculum
All Things Considered, March 12, 2008 · The “fuzzy” math lessons that kids come home with drive parents crazy and confuse even teachers. So, two years ago, alarmed by all of the fuzziness and U.S. students’ lackluster performance on international math tests, the Bush administration asked a panel of experts to bring more coherence and depth to the math curriculum. But only one state has even come close to doing what the panel envisions: Massachusetts.

National Pi Day Celebrates Math
Morning Edition, March 14, 2006 · Tuesday is National Pi Day — March 14th (3.14). It’s the day for celebrating the mathematical concept. Pi Day promotes the celebration of mathematics education, and the multi-cultural interest in Pi.

SB 6534, has just passed the legislature and is on its way to the Governor for signature. The main purpose is to describe the new process and timetable for the final leg of the math standards revision process. It also gives the State Board of Education, rather than OSPI the final say in determining the standards. Due to these changes, the final standards adoption may be delayed until as late as September 25, 2008.

The Legislature intends that the revised mathematics standards by the SPI will fortify content and increase rigor; provide greater clarity, specificity, and measurability of what is expected of students; supply more explicit guidance for educators; enhance the relevance of mathematics to students, and ultimately result in more Washington students having the opportunity to be successful in mathematics.

The SBE is directed to retain a national consultant in mathematics to analyze the February 2008 version of the revised mathematics standards, compare them to previously reviewed exemplar standards, and recommend specific language and content changes needed to finalize the standards. By May 15, 2008, the SBE reviews the consultant’s draft report; consults the Mathematics Advisory Panel; holds a public hearing; and directs any subsequent modifications to the report. After modifications to the report are made, the SBE forwards the report and recommendations to the SPI for implementation.

By July 1, 2008, the SPI must revise the mathematics standards to conform precisely to and incorporate each of the SBE’s recommendations. By July 31, 2008, the SBE either approves the final revised mathematics standards for adoption by the SPI or develops a plan for ensuring that the recommendations are implemented so that final revised standards can be adopted by September 25, 2008.

At the start of the 2005-06 school year, Ramona began using textbooks developed for use in Singapore, a Southeast Asian city-state whose pupils consistently rank No. 1 in international math comparisons. Ramona’s math scores soared.

“It’s wonderful,” said Principal Susan Arcaris. “Seven out of 10 of the students in our school are proficient or better in math, and that’s pretty startling when you consider that this is an inner-city, Title 1 school.”

Read article in the Los Angeles Times

Regardless of nationality, as soon as a student completes the eighth grade — they have just Two Million Minutes to prepare for college and ultimately a career.

This important documentary examines how students in India and China are being better prepared than American students to compete in a flattening world.

For more information visit the movie website

The Two Million Minutes storyline was conceived by Robert A. Compton. Compton has had a distinguished business career as a venture capitalist, as former President of a NYSE company, as the entrepreneur founder of four companies and as an angel investor in more than a dozen businesses. His trips to India in 2005 and 2006 inspired him to create the documentary Two Million Minutes.

A group of 60 UW professors has put out the following statement:

We the undersigned faculty in math, science and engineering at the University of Washington have become increasingly concerned about the declining level of math competency of students entering the university. Many students arrive with poor mastery of essential mathematical skills, such as algebra, manipulation of fractions, trigonometry, and basic mathematical operations. Increasing numbers of students are forced to take math remediation courses after admission to the UW. Over the past decade many of us have lowered the mathematical levels of our courses as math skills have declined. We believe that it is essential that steps be taken to ensure that Washington State students are provided with world-class mathematics standards, curricula, and instruction.

In an article by Andrew Doughman THE DAILY of the University of Washington writes:

Some UW students claim the state’s math curriculum has inhibited their education.

“Washington education systems in public schools are questionable,” said freshman Avery Hilliard, a student in a remedial math class. “My high school was trying to phase out a certain math program, leaving transfer students like me in weird math pathways [between integrated and traditional algebra].”

Other students believe high school math curriculum is not entirely to blame for what Mass claims is the degradation of students’ math abilities.

“I wouldn’t necessarily blame it on their high school math instructors,” said math tutor Charlene Reyes, a senior in electrical engineering.

“People get nervous about subjects they are unfamiliar with.”

The question is, why are students unfamiliar with math after 12 or 13 years of schooling?

After a pilot this fall, Bellevue is planning to drop the vacuous TERC Investigations curriculum. The TERC Investigation curriculum has drawn many complaints from parents. The report on the pilot in Bellevue can be found here: Elementary Mathematics Pilot Final Report. The report finds the Everyday Math curriculum less effective than Math Expressions and fewer teachers preferred it.

The Bellevue Reporter reports:

Based on data from the studies that were done last fall on two K-5 math programs – Everyday Math and Math Expressions – officials are recommending that the board adopt the latter during its March 18 meeting.

“It is so good, that going back to (Investigations) at this point in the year makes me sick to my stomach,” one teacher said of Math Expressions in an anonymous teacher survey. “Prior to this, I actually thought Investigations was alright. Now I look at it and can’t believe how awful it is in comparison to Math Expressions.”

Another teacher said they have taught several curriculums and Math Expressions is the best the teacher has ever seen.

Many parents at the meeting shared the same enthusiasm.

Susan Pomeroy’s son, a 2nd grader at Cherry Crest Elementary, was one of the students in the Math Expressions pilot. Pomeroy is part of the “Where’s the Math” group that advocates a more traditional math curriculum, or “computational” math.

“I was thrilled that he actually had a book that he brought home, so we were very pleased,” she said after the meeting. She also liked that her son’s homework assignments were mapped to whatever he had learned in school so she could see.

Washington has started to make halting progress to address the problem by launching an overhaul of math education and requiring students to take more math classes. But those efforts will mean little if schools don’t have enough qualified math teachers. Last year, school districts reported they had 551 vacancies for math teachers. New graduation requirements are expected to increase the deficit by 450.

The actual shortage is even greater. Many teachers who have been thrown into math classes are not qualified to teach the subject. Getting a handle on how many teachers have math credentials is essential to knowing the true extent of the teacher shortage.

Read article in the Tacoma News Tribune

Despite specific suggestions from public feedback, direction from exemplary standards, and national guidance from the NCTM Focal Points, systemic flaws remain in OSPI/Dana Center’s final mathematics standards revision.  After multiple revisions, missed deadlines, and major remaining problems, one can only conclude that the Dana Center does not have the capability to create a rigorous, balanced, and focused standards document.  It is time to turn the process over to other hands.

1)  The document does not appear to be reaching closure. 83% of the K-8 document has been modified through additions, deletions, and edits, compared to the last draft.  This significant revision still does not address the failings of the previous versions, and many of the changes actually result in a poorer end result.  With so many changes, it’s impossible to tell if the final standards meet the rigor, content and clarity expectations of HB 1906 and Strategic Teaching’s recommendations without a detailed review.  

2)  The High School Standards are superficial and lacking in clarity and focus.  There is far too much material to be covered in one year, making it impossible to teach in sufficient depth. 

Examples:

2.4.A Use the attributes of geometric figures to solve spatial problems.

This standard was identified in the previous draft as ambiguous and remains unchanged. If 100 teachers read this item would they all choose to teach their students the same list of “attributes” and the same list of “geometric” figures and work through the same list of “spatial problems”?

A2.1.C Use algebra and the properties of number systems to develop valid mathematical arguments, make and prove conjectures, and find counterexamples to refute false statements. (ASN.1.F)

As an overarching idea, this could be reasonable, but if all the high school teachers in a district were looking at this standard, would they teach students the same thing?  What “conjectures" should they prove?  Of the countless conjectures one could make, how can teachers know what conjectures to teach? How would this be assessed?

3)  The standards do not discourage the use of calculators in grades K- 8.  The original Strategic Teaching Review and Recommendation stated, “The use and misuse of technology mandates plain direction in the standards.”  The Dana Center has failed in providing this explicit direction, instead choosing to skirt the issue:

“The choice of what tools to use and how to teach are appropriately left to the judgment of professional teachers.  Calculators, in particular, play an important role as students move from elementary school to middle school to high school, but they may be appropriate at any level when their use supports mathematics learning.”

Washington’s students are suffering from a profound lack of computational fluency, due to insufficient practice with basic facts.  Use of calculators in the elementary grades can severely undermine this fundamental building block for future mathematical success. 

4)  The math standards are discriminatory to students with learning disabilities.  These standards discriminate against students with learning disabilities (LD), special needs, autism, and ELL learners.  For example, by requiring all of our students to provide verbal and written descriptions of mathematics processes, students with problems with language expression are prevented from enjoying success with mathematics. 

Example:
4.2.A.  Represent decimals through hundredths using numbers, words, pictures, and physical objects, and translate among representations.

5)  The Use of Standard Algorithms Are Still Inconsistent
Strategic Teaching’s Feb 5th review was very specific in their recommendation: “…students need to know and practice to fluency the commonly used, standard algorithm…”  throughout the revision process, the Dana Center has attempted to sidestep the issue, rather than addressing the concern. 

The presentation and specificity of the multiplication and long division algorithm are stated in grades 4 and 5, however standard algorithms for addition and subtraction, which are integral to the multiplication and division procedures, are not required.  Reference to standard algorithms for multiplication and division of fractions has disappeared since the last revision.

6)  Pedagogy is still imbedded in the standards and some key content has been moved from the standards into the Explanatory Comments section.  Performance expectations should not require that students can explain strategies.

Examples:

1.2.F Explain and use strategies for remembering basic addition facts and related subtraction facts for sums equal to at least 10.

“Strategies for remembering” is a classroom-level concern, not a standard. 

3.1.A Represent multiplication as joining equal groups of objects using words, numbers, pictures, physical objects, and equations, and translate among representations.

This standard as defined would require that  students use and translate between ALL of the representations words, numbers, pictures, objects, and equations.  However, the explanatory comment is required to clarify the expectation:

Students are expected to be familiar with all representations and should be able to use at least two different representations.

Where’s The Math?  Updated Action Alert

If you haven’t already sent a message to your legislators, we urge you to do so now. (See talking points below)

A handy legislative e-mail tool has been produced to identify your legislators based on zip code, and makes it convenient to send personalized messages to your legislators.  Use it at http://EasySchoolbooks.com/math.php  Please copy your message and also send it to the House and Senate Education Committees, Governor Gregoire and your local newspaper if possible.

House Education Committee members:  

quall.dave@leg.wa.gov , barlow.don@leg.wa.gov , priest.skip@leg.wa.gov , anderson.glenn@leg.wa.gov , haigh.kathy@leg.wa.gov , liias.marko@leg.wa.gov , roach.dan@leg.wa.gov , santos.sharon@leg.wa.gov , sullivan.pat@leg.wa.gov

Senate Early Learning and K- 12 Education Committee:

mcauliffe.rosemary@leg.wa.gov , tom.rodney@leg.wa.gov , king.curtis@leg.wa.gov , brandland.dale@leg.wa.gov , eide.tracey@leg.wa.gov , hewitt.mike@leg.wa.gov , hobbs.steve@leg.wa.gov, holmquist.janea@leg.wa.gov , kauffman.claudia@leg.wa.gov , mcdermott.joe@leg.wa.gov , oemig.eric@leg.wa.gov , rasmussen.marilyn@leg.wa.gov , weinstein.brian@leg.wa.gov , zarelli.joseph@leg.wa.gov

Governor Gregoire’s contact info: http://www.governor.wa.gov/contact/default.asp

You can find contact information for your legislators at http://www.leg.wa.gov/legislature/.
Select “Find Your District,” and enter your address. You also can call the legislative hotline at 800-562-6000.

You can read a Preliminary Review of the OSPI/Dana February 29th Math Standards written by Where’s the Math members here.

Legislators are at a critical juncture in determining whether Washington adopts world-class math standards…. or continues to settle for standards that will allow for more of the same programs that have failed our children for the past decade.

There are two similar bills (HB 3317 and SB 6534 ) in the legislature. They will end up providing OSPI and SBE with the direction on how to complete the process of adopting new math standards. Legislators will be determining the specifics of these bills next week. NOW IS THE TIME TO LET YOUR LEGISLATORS KNOW WHAT YOU WANT!

Talking Points:

Please immediately send your representatives a message (email or call) that includes the following points, with a brief personal experience or note. Please urge others to join in this effort by contacting their legislators.

• Washington has a golden opportunity to develop ‘A’ quality math standards, equal to or better than any other state. Great standards lead to:
• Wise curriculum choices
• Proper professional development
• Meaningful instruction
• Valuable and actionable assessment
• A detailed evaluation is required by the national consultant, Strategic Teaching, to determine if OSPI’s revised standards meet the rigor, clarity, focus and balance, called for in HB 1906. Strategic teaching made the widely agreed upon initial findings and recommendations to the State Board of Education (SBE).
• The Washington Exemplary Math Standards: 2008, was written by Washington teachers and citizens to meet the SBE criteria and exemplary standards outlined in HB 1906 and Strategic Teaching’s recommendations. It should also be evaluated and considered by Strategic Teaching.
• Our children cannot afford to have this process drawn out any longer. It is urgent that the revision process be completed by Strategic Teaching, under the direction of the SBE, and not be further delayed by giving OSPI more time.

You are encouraged to compare the revised Washington Exemplary Mathematics Standards:2008 to OSPI’s latest math standards revision and take the online survey for public input.

Thank you for your support and assistance in bringing world class math to Washington children! Please know your financial support is appreciated and needed. You can donate here.