Division I regional track finals
Fenwick graduation 2012
Ponitz graduation 2012
Dayton Daily News education reporter Scott Elliott writes about schools, kids, teaching and learning.
Home > Blogs > Get on the Bus > Archives > 2008 > March > 29 > Entry
Our problem with mathematics
There are a lot of back-and-fourth arguments about what we do right and wrong when it comes to teaching children in the United States. But on one topic there is considerable agreement — our kids, in general, have weaker mathematics skills then they should have.
In last week’s New York Times, a national advisory panel reported that math in the U.S. is only at a “mediocre level” with a big fall off beginning in middle school. And the panel says the problem is the way we teach math.
Specifcally, the report takes issue with certain methods of teaching fractions, geometry and measurement and recommends an overhaul of the K-8 approach to teaching math. This story is well worth reading if you have wondered about your own child’s math preparation.
I’ve observed that a common complaint about math is often true — early elementary school teachers are often primarily reading experts. It’s not that they can’t teach math. They can. But their focus, energy and excitement tends to be built around reading instruction for many.
What have you observed about math instruction? What do you think the problems are? Do you agree with the findings cited from this report?
(Image credit: East Baton Rouge Parish Library)
Permalink | Comments (17) | Post your comment | Categories: Teaching and Learning
Comments
By Laura
April 1, 2008 8:55 PM | Link to this
Terri: My math book has 30 chapters. Given the number of shortened weeks where a full chapter isn’t possible in one week, a teacher absence of several days (during which there is little chance of a getting a sub and NO chance of getting one who can or will teach), or any other of a million possibilities, and it isn’t possible to finish the book in one year. The state of Ohio BOE has adopted far too many indicators to be taught in any one year.By Caroline
April 1, 2008 6:24 PM | Link to this
I think the average person would be shocked by the kind of math that is expected out of today’s kids. Have you looked at the Ohio proficiency exam? Look at the exam for 7th and 8th graders. The students are expected to know much more complicated concepts about math than I had to know at that age. I am not a math teacher, but it seems to me that students need to spend more time practicing on the basics before they get into the higher-level math.By School Supporter (Classic)
April 1, 2008 5:06 PM | Link to this
Terri writes, “Instead of Algebra 2 we should mandate a consumer math class - 1 semester long - teach them interest rates, installment plans, buying a car, insurance, budgeting, taxes, etc.” Why wouldn’t this be part of a “business” requirement? Don’t we need to be strengthening the quantitative components of social studies, business, etc? (Not to argue that math class can’t be more applicable—we don’t want to deny opportunity to kids, but insisting on Algebra II & Trig doesn’t seem quite right—we ought be able to find something equally challenging but more engaging. Statisitcs? Computer programming?)By Terri
April 1, 2008 10:45 AM | Link to this
I am a math teacher, so in the interest of job security I think all students should take lots and lots of math. The level of math is the question really. Everyone does not need to know calculus, yet that is what the state standards are indicating. Ask any adult in most any job - they don’t need to know Algebra 2, yet that is now mandated by the state. Do well informed citizens need to know how to think/reason? Yes, without a question. Do well informed citizens need to know data analysis and statistics? Yes. Do they need to know consumer math - yes. Do they need to know how to graph trigonometric ratios or hyperbolas - no. We can teach thinking and reasoning without frustrating the students who are either not interested in or do not have the aptitude for higher math. The new state rule will just lead to a “watered down” version of Algebra 2. Instead of Algebra 2 we should mandate a consumer math class - 1 semester long - teach them interest rates, installment plans, buying a car, insurance, budgeting, taxes, etc.By Fixing the problem
March 31, 2008 3:51 PM | Link to this
Some thoughts from the math front lines: BELIEVE ME, we math teachers are CONSTANTLY trying to figure out the best way to teach kids this material. Regardless of the curriculum you’re SUPPOSED to be using, we look and look and look for new and interesting ways to present it. But here’s a news flash: kids have never been especially good at fractions or integers OR word problems. It’s only gotten worse because most of our day-to-day math is now done automatically, by technology, so kids do not see math as a necessity. You’ve got to make it worth it to them. Perhaps, you don’t get to have lunch until you can solve a math problem? But, seriously, I know people who study trends worry about the future of the U.S. if we don’t beef up math and science, and this is why we’re pushing so much of it earlier and earlier in school… but until you convince parents that it’s necessary, you won’t get the support at home you need.By Mary
March 31, 2008 1:36 PM | Link to this
Laura, I knew I would get a reaction from you and probably others,so I put quotes around “conspired”. I do recall some of the many new approaches to teaching math that I have read or heard about that makes me think some of the decisions on math instruction were deliberate: “Chicago Math”, “Everyday Math”, “Hong Kong Math”, etc. I gather some of the math instruction philosophies de-emphasized some traditional and more rigorous aspects of math instruction such as quantitative ability and exactness. I think in some mis-guided efforts to assist the math challenged-math averse students, math instruction was perverted for all students, including gifted math students who loved math. With educational theories also promoting heterogenous grouping and demonizing ability grouping, the educational needs of many higher ability students were also sabotaged. Apparently, some of these approaches did little to help the math challenged, as well.By Concerned Mom of 3
March 31, 2008 12:59 PM | Link to this
School Supporter (Classic): The kids attended Horace Mann Montessori. In Montessori, the students are grouped in multi-age groupings and have the same teacher for three years at a time. The groupings start with 3-6 year olds, then go to a grouping of 6-9 year olds, and finally a 9-12 year old grouping. In this case, the kids 9-12 Math teacher was awesome! While the planning for three different levels of math students is difficult, it presents a great opportunity for the teacher to move a student to a different group if they are excelling or if they are struggling. My son, who has a knack for math, was not held back because the other goof-off kids weren’t getting the concepts. Mrs. Cameron-Brown just moved him to a group that challenged him to achieve his full potential. Whatever she did, she did right- and we are so thankful. She is currently teaching in a second grade classroom, but I have had the opportunity to volunteer in her room with one of my soccer players. She still runs her room with student groupings and independent work packets- even though Horace Mann is no longer considered a Montessori School. She should be nominated for teacher of the year. (Although nobody ever seems to ask the parents.) The parents who care, know who the master teachers are. Anyway, that is how they had the same math teacher for three years in a row.By DPS teacher
March 31, 2008 12:02 PM | Link to this
I concur with Laura - most of us feel more comfortable teaching reading and we also have a fast-paced schedule for math instruction that really doesn’t give the kids a chance to get enough practice in basics. We also try to teach many concepts when the children are not developmentally ready . I have been teaching for many years and skills that used to be taught in grades 3 & 4 are now pushed down into grades 1 & 2, and so we shouldn’t wonder if the kids are not performing as well as they might! As far as doing anything to “improve” math instruction, I’d prefer to wait until Mr. Bush and his group move out of DC to begin. So far, Bush, Spellings, et. al. have made a mockery of “No Child Left Behind” but have enriched their friends in the testing business at great expense to our schools.By Barb
March 31, 2008 9:49 AM | Link to this
The problem with math is that many of our children do not know how to think and process. For many children this comes from experiences at home, going to the grocery store, cooking with measurement. For many public school kids these are no longer the experiences they have. They come to school not able to think so they can not process. It is a terrible thing for the children. Television does not require a thought process for the most part and that is where our young children spend their time. Many do not care to put the effort into thinking through something because pride in what you are doing is a skilled that is taught and instilled in children at a very young age. When we figure out how to make that type of change to children then we will be able to educate the children.By Laura
March 31, 2008 8:39 AM | Link to this
Oh, Mary, how did you figure us all out?? Math teachers: we have been discovered. All those times we were teaching arts and crafts instead math- and we thought we could get away with it!By Worried DSP Parent
March 31, 2008 8:19 AM | Link to this
Math was a weak subject in school for both myself and my wife, so we’re worried that our son’s should show any of the same weakness - if they do, it seems like we’re going to have better luck going to Sylvan or Kumon than rely on their teachers. And as for the comment about the amount of information they get bombarded with and are expected to learn, when we attempted to homeschool our eldest last year, the stuff they were expecting us to teach was more like stuff I did in [the equivalent of] 6th or 7th Grade, which seemed ridiculous to us.By Terri
March 30, 2008 10:17 PM | Link to this
One chapter a week? That means your book has 36 chapters? The most I have ever seen is 15.By School Supporter (Classic)
March 30, 2008 10:17 PM | Link to this
Concerned, how did kids have the same math teacher for 4th, 5th and 6th grade? As for too much stuff, a couple things can go wrong when adopting standards: piling on everything relevant to the subject, failure to ruthlessly vet, and failure to identify “power standards.” Would the objectives be more reasonable if measurement and data objectives were part of science and social studies?By Mary
March 30, 2008 4:06 PM | Link to this
One of the most depressing, eye opening issues about education that I - an engineer who enjoyed math - have encountered is that math instruction had even been corrupted since I was in school. My reaction was how could they screw up math? That took a lot of work. I believe a lot of teachers, particularly elementary, are more artsy craftsy, than mathsy, and probably hated math. They must have “conspired” to screw math up for everyone. Then, of course we have HIB immigration visas to import engineering and math talent because our students who like math were not nurtured in the education system.By Laura
March 30, 2008 3:09 PM | Link to this
I do think most teachers feel they are more qualified to teach reading than math (or science). There is usually a “mini-battle” when teachers are told one has to teach reading and the other math. No one feels qualified. But we do it. As an elementary math teacher, I would agree with everything in the article. Students need to be much more proficient in add., sub., mult., and div. But we can drill until we lose our minds and it doesn’t seem to matter. Fractions and problem solving are extremely difficult for students to learn. I don’t know why. I was never a superior math student in school, but don’t remember having as much trouble as my students learning these concepts. Could be it be outside/home experiences that students don’t get now? I also strongly agree with the comment that we need to try and teach concepts more thoroughly and fewer at a time. My textbook has a new skill every single day of the year. The pacing chart allows me one week to complete a chapter including the end of chapter test. It also requires that I “double up” on some lessons in order to fit them all in. Granted some are building on a skill from the day or week before, but it still assumes every child caught on the first time. It is rather mind-boggling. And rather impossible to accomplish.By teacher
March 30, 2008 1:39 PM | Link to this
The problem is we are trying to cram too much stuff into these kids heads. Instead of making sure they have the basics down we have to move on. Dayton has a pacing chart. Sometimes they have us trying to get two chapters done in a week. Some weeks we only have one chapter to get done. Also the math books introduces a skill then moves on assuming the kids got it the first time. Things I used to do in middle school back in the late 80’s we are now doing in third grade. I think for some kids it’s just too much thrown at them at once.By Concerned Mom of 3
March 30, 2008 1:10 PM | Link to this
I would like to take this opportunity to praise one of my son’s math teachers… Brady says he can definitely see where he and his peers from his elementary school are way ahead of students from other elementary schools. He and his friends are breezing through the accelerated math program. I believe this is due to the excellent teaching skills of their 4th, 5th and 6th grade math instructor, Mrs. Cameron-Brown. Thanks for the solid foundation. Your students are doing great- and they appreciate how you helped them achieve their full potential! (I overheard the neighborhood kids talking about this on the way home from Stivers one day!)They were really thankful to have had you for a teacher!