District says no one knows how to fix math problem

By Laurie H. Rogers

Before I quote from the Feb. 11, 2009, meeting minutes of the board of Spokane Public Schools, I’ll review some events of the last two years:

• The National Mathematics Advisory Panel issued recommendations that called for more traditional approaches to math instruction (i.e. traditional algorithms, caution with calculator use, more practicing of skills, and increased rigor).
• Washington’s K-12 math standards were completely revamped, calling for more traditional content.
• For 20 years, mathematicians have criticized the reform math curricula widely used across Washington (and throughout Spokane Public Schools). These curricula also were hammered in Washington’s recent curricula assessments.
• Washington State’s Department of Education (OSPI) issued recommendations for K-8 math curricula that are based on the new standards. The curricula used in Spokane are not on the list. Expectations are that Spokane’s high school curriculum also will be rejected.
• Advocates have repeatedly asked school boards across the nation to replace reform math curricula with more traditional curricula.

You get the gist. Spokane needs to adopt more traditional math curricula. Waiting only prolongs the students’ agony. The district already has recommendations for K-8 math curricula that were vetted by people who support a traditional track. All the board has to do is adopt some of them.

Now I can quote from the Feb. 11 meeting minutes.
“NEW BUSINESS Teaching and Learning Services Middle School Math Update Ms. Bridget Lewis, executive director for Teaching and Learning Services, introduced Ms. Gina Rye, middle school math coordinator, and Mr. Rick Biggerstaff, secondary math coordinator. … Ms. Lewis commented that the staff needs to dig deeper in terms of the grade 6 to 7 transition.

"President Treppiedi asked the staff to help the board understand why middle school math scores are as low as they have been. It was his opinion that there is a lack of rigor in the elementary schools. Ms. Lewis responded that the data across the state and nation is not unique to Spokane. She said no one has the answer; however, the staff does know that they have to pay close attention to what is happening in the classroom. She pointed out that the data shows that Spokane has more students taking advanced placement math and all students are taking more mathematics. …

"Dr. Stowell noted that grades 3 through 7 math scores are higher than the state average. In spite of not having all of the answers, the scores are moving in the right direction. She stated that math and science summer camps and math coaches would help, but it is difficult to fill the open teaching spots. Ms. Lewis added that it is going to take multiple strategies such as standards-based grading, math labs, and professional learning in order to improve mathematics instruction.

"Director Douthitt indicated that the board would like to hear more ideas about adaptive changes. Director Bierman agreed that change takes time; he felt, however, that the math program is on the wrong track and needs to be distinctly different from what it is today, in both the language and the model that is used. Director Douthitt expressed appreciation for the way this presentation was constructed. He conceded that the frustration is that no one has figured out how to solve the problem. Because the district will still face the dilemma in 2014, he didn’t want the team to be constrained by saying 'we can’t do this.'

"Ms. Lewis said the team wants to look at this very straight forward and determine how to get at the hard questions.”I’ll offer some thoughts on certain portions of these meeting minutes.

“…the staff needs to dig deeper in terms of the grade 6 to 7 transition.” What does this mean? Does it mean to replace the math curriculum? If not, they can “dig” as deeply as they want; they’ll never reach the solution.

“Ms. Lewis responded that the data … is not unique to Spokane.” This statement is true, but it doesn’t mean an answer isn’t available. Indeed, it points to a national failure with reform math curricula.

"(Ms. Lewis) said no one has the answer; however, the staff does know that they have to pay close attention to what is happening in the classroom.” Actually, we have the answer, and it’s clear: Replace the curricula with more traditional approaches. For some inexplicable reason, district employees obstinately refuse to say so. It’s true that staff members should “pay close attention to what is happening in the classroom.” If they were, they would notice that students aren’t learning sufficient mathematics.

“(Ms. Lewis) pointed out that the data shows that Spokane has more students taking advanced placement math and all students are taking more mathematics.” More students are indeed taking AP classes – but substantially more students also are failing to pass the AP exams. I reject the statement that “all students are taking more mathematics.” Some might be taking more math classes, but if the classes were effective, students would know more math than they do.

“Dr. Stowell noted that grades 3 through 7 math scores are higher than the state average.” So what? Spokane’s 2008 math WASL scores look like this:Grade Level Math 3rd Grade - 75.2% 4th Grade - 60.7% 5th Grade - 69.2% 6th Grade - 55.9% 7th Grade - 52.4% 8th Grade - 49.5% 10th Grade - 45.9%
“(Dr. Stowell said) in spite of not having all of the answers, the scores are moving in the right direction.” District staff members do have the answers; they just refuse to acknowledge them. You tell me – do the 2008 math WASL scores look like they’re “moving in the right direction”?

A few of the statements can be dealt with together:
"(Dr. Stowell) stated that math and science summer camps and math coaches would help, but it is difficult to fill the open teaching spots.”
“Ms. Lewis added that it is going to take multiple strategies such as standards-based grading, math labs, and professional learning in order to improve mathematics instruction.”
“(Director Douthitt) conceded that the frustration is that no one has figured out how to solve the problem."
“Ms. Lewis said the team wants to look at this very straight forward and determine how to get at the hard questions.”Shall we laugh or cry? It’s the curriculum, the curriculum, the curriculum! Replacing the reform curricula with more traditional approaches is what will improve mathematics instruction. Why won’t they say it?
One begins to wonder if some of these people own stock in companies that publish reform curricula.

Folks, this is what is being done on your behalf. Please speak up and/or vote with your feet. Quite literally, the children’s futures are at stake.

Please note: The information in this post is copyrighted. The proper citation is: Rogers, L. (March, 2009). "District says no one knows how to fix math problem." Retrieved (date) from the Betrayed Web site: http://betrayed-whyeducationisfailing.blogspot.com/

Your child's education is up to you

Over the last 27 months, I’ve come to see public education as an immoveable force. Administrators are fond of talking about “accountability,” but it doesn’t mean much, not in any real sense. Today's administrators know that all they have to do is produce upward ticks in pretend numbers. The only real accountability comes when unhappy parents leave the school district. Although a few thousand Spokane families have done that over the last five years, local administrators have so far declined to say publicly that the enrollment drops have anything to do with how the schools operate.

Meanwhile, things stay fairly quiet, which is what bureaucrats generally prefer.

My comments here could be seen as “cynical” or “critical,” but I see them as “realistic.” With realism comes truth. With truth comes knowledge. With knowledge comes power. With power comes change – even if it’s change for just one child. When it’s your child, one child is a lot.

My husband and I have therefore taken control of our daughter’s education. We now know it isn’t enough to just be involved in the school or the classroom; we need to know what she’s learning. We also must have some idea of what she should be learning. When the school curriculum or learning environment fails her, we must fill in critical gaps. This isn’t a game we’re playing. Her future is at stake. Six short years from now, it won’t matter whether we helped out with field trips or cut paper for the class every Friday. What will matter is the knowledge she takes with her to college.

Although several people in this district care about our daughter – most notably her teachers and principal – no one at the district level has expressed even a sliver of interest in what kind of experience she must have had that would lead me to do an intense and focused two-year investigation of public education. To them, I’m sure she’s just a bit of data in a long string of data. I doubt they know who I am. Over two years, I've interviewed three curriculum coordinators, two board members and other sundry district staff. I’ve sat down with district Superintendent Nancy Stowell and asked her pointed questions. I’ve written about Dr. Stowell on my blog and run into her a half a dozen times at various meetings. She still introduces herself to me as if we've never met. Clearly, she doesn’t feel the need to retain any information about me or my concerns.

Over 27 months, I've come to believe I could be brilliant, have the best research, find the most perfect words and fill up school board meetings with the most knowledgeable people – and administrators would still operate as if I don’t exist. If I ever manage to effect positive change in this district, I have no doubt that the minute I turn my back, someone will begin working to erase it.

I have two main goals now:

1. Help parents cut through the fake statistics and “edu-speak” so they can see things more clearly.
   
2. Tutor students in math. I looked into earning an education degree, but colleges of education tend to train teachers by using discovery learning methods and reform philosophy. I'm 47 and a college graduate. I get hives at the thought of sitting in groups to hash out simplistic problems I could easily solve on my own. I’ve therefore chosen the math program over the education program.

In these two small ways, I hope to help the children succeed. I yearn for revolution, but perhaps some of the improvement will just have to come one person at a time.

Speaking of “one person at a time,” I received an email from a Spokane parent who is distressed by reform math. Last fall, an elementary-school teacher told her to not teach traditional math to her children. She wrote:

“Laurie … I have to tell you, I'm going through a kind of personal revolution right now. I've always felt that I was hindered by a lack of knowledge, betrayed, if you will, by my own public education, and would just sound ignorant if I spoke out on the things I felt strongly about (education, political issues, etc.), so I said and did nothing. Besides, I'm just one little suburban mother. What difference could I possibly make? I have long felt that the public education system has failed us as a nation, and that this is now more apparent than ever. I've been very concerned about the direction our nation is heading at such a rapid pace, so I've been educating myself on American history and government. For the first time in my life, I've been following the actions of the government, communicating to my representatives, and I'm 33 years old. My own public education didn't come close to preparing me to be an active, educated citizen in the community, let alone in the nation (yet I still cast my vote at every election). I've been compelled to educate myself and take a more active role. I just can't sit complacently by anymore, and I've realized that everyone who has a part in making a difference is just one person. It's only when voices speak out that they're heard. “I spent 13 years in public school, 2 years in community college, and 3 more at a state university, and I have always felt ignorant and uneducated! There is definitely something wrong there, and the last thing I want is for my kids to grow up that way, too. So, I offer no more excuses for being part of the problem. I want to be part of the solution, and I do feel that it all comes down to education. I thank you for doing your part to improve the state of education (and, therefore, the country) and I want to do mine as well, so count me in! “I did go to bat for my own child last week, and I wish I had done it a year ago. (My son) has been complaining about school in general and math in particular. I think he's bored with the math in 1st grade and especially the pace of the class. Last year, I had the same issue with (my daughter) and (the teacher) danced around it, asserting that she was challenged in class in a variety of ways. My naive mistake was giving her the benefit of the doubt and not pushing any farther than bringing the issue up again at conference time. Last week, I went straight to (the principal). I have to say, I was very pleased with his reaction and the result. By the end of the day it was arranged (that my son) would go to (the next grade) for math. …”

This mother acknowledged, however, that the curriculum in the next grade is also insufficient, so she is tutoring her children in two traditional programs – “Singapore Math” and “Saxon Math.” She expressed concerns about the calculators in the elementary grades and wondered how I felt about it. I told her I’m opposed to introducing calculators in elementary school, that there is no need for it, and that it’s my belief that they interfere with the learning of necessary arithmetic skills. I asked the mother if I could quote from her email, and she said I could:

“I hope it can help encourage other parents to get involved or even just interested. One of the greatest things I took away from homeschooling was the attitude that my children's education is my ultimate responsibility, whether I choose homeschool, public school, or somewhere in between. That realization has been very empowering.”

I couldn’t have said it better.



Please note: The information in this post is copyrighted. The proper citation is:
Rogers, L. (March, 2009). "Your child's education is up to you." Retrieved (date) from the Betrayed Web site: http://betrayed-whyeducationisfailing.blogspot.com/

This article was also published at EducationNews.org at http://ednews.org/articles/35600/1/Your-Child039s-Education-is-Up-To-You/Page1.html

Free math assessments March 21

On March 21, 2009, from 1-5 p.m., Education NW Resources will conduct free assessments in mathematics for students in grades 2-12. The assessments are intended to reflect essential math skills and international math standards. Each assessment will be about 30-45 minutes long, and will take place at Education NW Resources, 9429 N. Newport Highway, Spokane, WA.

“Our entire purpose is to educate parents on the existence of the new state math standards, and on how their children are doing with basic math skills,” Deborah Knutson said. “Our experience tells us that many students in the area have serious gaps in critical skills, and also that many parents are unaware of how wide those gaps are.”

Knutson noted that, in 2008, Washington State’s math standards were revised substantially, increasing their rigor and emphasizing more “traditional” algorithms and concepts. However, the Washington Assessment of Student Learning (WASL) doesn’t yet reflect these changes, and the planned “end-of-course” tests haven’t yet been implemented.

“We hope parents will take advantage of these assessments,” Knutson said. “They’re relatively short, they’re free, and they’ll give parents a better idea of where their children are in mathematical skill.”

Parents can call 323-4950 to register, or they can register at the door. Seating is limited, however. Please call to reserve a seat and a time.

Contact: Deborah Knutson
Education NW Resources
9429 N Newport Highway
Spokane, WA 99218-1245
Phone: (509) 323-4950
Fax: (509) 323-4950
Toll Free: (866) 491-0495

info@educationnwresources.com

What Is the Purpose of Public Education?

Updated March 11, 2009:

Part of the barrier to getting proper math instruction into America’s K-12 public schools is in the definitions. What constitutes “success” or “failure”? Which math skills are “necessary”? What is the primary function of public schools? Why do children go to school?

I don’t think of “success” and “failure” in terms of what’s good for the administrators but in terms of what’s good for the students. In my view, a public school’s primary function is to help students get prepared for postsecondary life. Children go to school so they can learn what they need to learn in order to grasp the future they want. Based on test results, remediation rates and dropout rates, there’s no question in my mind that today’s public schools are failing the students.

Many administrators, on the other hand, appear to see the primary function of schools as being all about inclusion, tolerance, equity, values and (the omnipresent yet ill-defined) “excellence.” They probably see themselves as successful.

Don’t laugh. I’m not pulling this stuff out of my hat.

As part of our district’s January 2009 celebration of Martin Luther King Jr. Day, Spokane Superintendent Nancy Stowell sent a letter to her “colleagues” that included the text of her welcome address for the Unity March. In part, she said:
“We renew our commitment to acknowledging the effects of white privilege and doing all that we can to understand and mitigate its effects – so that each of us understands race in a personal and profound way.
“We renew (our) commitment to creating classrooms, schools, and a school district that is founded on the principles of social justice … a compassionate system that knows each child.
“We renew our commitment to the development of culturally proficient and courageous educators who can succeed with all students because they believe in the value of each student.”

Dr. Stowell didn’t mention creating classrooms that are founded on the principles of a coherent and rigorous education. She didn’t mention renewing the district’s commitment to hiring academically proficient educators who can succeed with all students because they know the subject matter they’re trying to teach.

(These would be great ways to mitigate the effects of ethnic disparities.)

Reading Dr. Stowell’s remarks, you’ll understand the continued existence of a poster still tacked to a bathroom wall in the elementary school just down the street from me, that says: “The aim of education is the knowledge not of facts but of values.”

When I talk about math, administrators talk about “equity.” I talk about college; they talk about “social justice.” I talk about challenging the children; they talk about “achievement gaps.” I ask for better mathematics curricula – part of the schools’ primary function – and they say there isn’t enough money.

Actually, there’s a ton of money; it just pays for things that are not part of the primary function. It also pays for myriad things that shouldn’t be in the schools at all.

Meanwhile, President Obama is planning to deliver to states about 44 billion in nonexistent taxpayer dollars over the next six weeks. This money is on top of an already bloated education budget. More billions are forthcoming. Unless that money fixes the lack of academic content in our public schools, it won’t improve public instruction – it will just make the ineffectiveness exponentially more expensive.

The primary function of public school is academics. It isn’t supposed to be cheap daycare. It shouldn’t be promoting socialist views or any other political agenda. Its primary job isn’t to teach values or ethics, to feed the children, provide teen mothers with daycare, teach English to “undocumented immigrants,” or turn out people who are personally and profoundly aware of “white privilege.” Its primary function is to effectively and efficiently teach all students to a high standard of academic knowledge that will ready them for college, a trade, business ownership, a political career or whichever postsecondary life they envision.

If public schools don’t do this – their primary job – they’re a waste of students’ time and of taxpayers’ money.

So far, the education bureaucracy appears to be largely unwilling to address the biggest problem facing our public schools: The lack of core academic content – in much of the teacher training, in much of the curriculum, and in the daily focus of the typical classroom.

Some parents are coping with the educational shipwreck by deciding that sloshing through the water is OK. “Maybe she doesn’t have to work that hard,” one parent said recently about her daughter. “Academics aren’t everything.”

Others seek academic excellence (or even just academic competence) for their children by choosing to homeschool or to supplement at home (as we do) or by heading to charter schools, magnet programs, faith-based schools, private schools or co-ops.

I support these decisions. There is no guarantee that alternative choices will provide children with the best education possible, but we must allow for the most basic right Americans have: The freedom to choose the process. We have the right to choose to fail, and we have the right to choose to excel. It’s that flexibility that has traditionally made America strong.

Until lately, the market has always guided success and failure. It’s always provided us with the motivation to dismantle failing structures. Now, government programs support massive, systemic failure – while excellence barely has a place to breathe. For parents and students, flexibility and the freedom to choose have been legislated and mandated almost right out of the public-education system.

Every child deserves the best possible education, but what does that really mean? A gentleman from Massachusetts recently asked me: "If you could start all over again and build a brand new public education system … what would it look like?” This is an excellent question, and I’ve been pondering it ever since. I’m interested in hearing your ideas. Please reply to this blog or email me at wlroge@comcast.net.

Let’s say the future of public education is open to you. What would you create?

Please note: The information in this post is copyrighted. The proper citation is:
Rogers, L. (March, 2009). "What Is the Purpose of Public Education?" Retrieved (date) from the Betrayed Web site: http://betrayed-whyeducationisfailing.blogspot.com/

Students Need Parents & Teachers To Speak Up

On Feb. 25, 2009, Spokane’s school board hosted a “Coffee and Conversation” before its regular school board meeting. The public was invited to offer comment on topics of its choosing. A few dozen people attended; they offered comment on math, the bond and levy, and various district policies. It was a great start, but we need more from parents and teachers. Many of them know things are wrong; they've got to stand up and say so.

I asked for six things, including these:

1. Traditional mathematics curricula.
   Spokane’s K-12 math curricula must be replaced with more traditional curricula. This should happen now, not in 18 years when the next wad of taxpayer money floats by. There is money to do this now; it’s just being spent on other things. The district could lay off a couple of $100,000 administrators and use their salary to buy traditional curricula.
   
2. Math tutoring.
   Our students desperately require tutoring that’s based on a traditional approach (direct teaching, traditional algorithms, no calculators, little or no group work, a logical progression of concepts, and regular practicing of skills) so they can catch up to where they should have been. There are many ways to access this tutoring. Some of it might even be free.
   
3. Proper assessments.
   An assessment is required to determine which math skills are missing. This assessment can’t be the WASL or SASL because neither is based on the new standards.
   It won’t be pleasant to see the results of proper assessments, but the results will be truthful and accurate. With truth and accuracy, we’ll have some hope of filling in the gaps before the students try to graduate.

After the “Coffee and Conversation,” a cameraman asked me if I thought the district had been listening to its constituents. This is a tricky question. I’ve been researching public education since January 2007. I’ve interviewed dozens of people, including two school superintendents, a former curriculum director, a former board president and three curriculum coordinators. Despite the flood of evidence that ALL of our math curricula are seriously deficient, no central office employee has ever acknowledged it to me.

On the other hand, were administrators polite to me? Always. Did they accommodate requests for information and private meetings? Almost always. I presume they listened, but I think they didn’t agree with me, they wouldn’t say they agree with me, or they didn’t give a flip about what I said. I told the cameraman that administrators have always been polite and accommodating but didn’t appear to agree with me.

Spokane’s newest board member is Dr. Jeff Bierman, a physics professor at Gonzaga University. On Feb. 25, Dr. Bierman supported my comments, agreeing that the math curricula are weak and that changes need to be made. He said he chooses to supplement the instruction for his own children. That was the first time I heard anyone associated with the administration publicly acknowledge the curriculum problem.

The mistake would be to think this welcome support will change the math curricula. In January 2009, curriculum coordinators said they planned to recommend retaining two of our disastrous (reform) curricula for Grades 5 and 6. Although Dr. Bierman’s Feb. 25 comments were soon echoed by a parent, a high school math teacher and a college mathematician, he was the only board member or district employee at the meeting who spoke publicly in support of traditional mathematics.

What’s desperately needed is a firm push from parents and teachers. Supporters of reform math occupy the seats of power. Parents, students, teachers, college professors, tradespeople and businesspeople – we all have a vested interest in how well math is taught. This district has serious problems in mathematics that directly affect our families. It isn’t an exaggeration to call it a crisis.

Students are not learning the math they need to even begin college. They don’t have the math they need to get jobs that require arithmetic (much less algebra, geometry, trigonometry or calculus). Our high-school graduates will be competing against private-school students, homeschooled students, and students from places like Finland, Singapore, California and Massachusetts – most of whom will have enough mathematics for college. (More and more of those graduates are being accepted on Washington campuses, and there are only so many seats.) A solid math education will help students secure a future. This isn’t being extremist – this is being a realist. But it’s hard to get this message across.

I hear: “Well, I have to trust them.” (But trusting them put us here. Now, it’s time for scrutiny.)
I hear: “Life is short. There’s more to life than academics.” (True. But school isn’t “life.” School is supposed to be about academics.)
I hear: “The district is doing the best it can.” (If it were doing the best it could, things would be better than they are.)
I hear: “I don’t know anything about math, so I can’t comment.” (Most parents and teachers know when the children can’t multiply or divide. They can comment about that.)
I hear: “It will work itself out.” (It hasn’t “worked itself out” in 20 years. But if we participate, it might work itself out in time to benefit our children.)
I hear: “Not everyone will go to college. There are plenty of good jobs you can get without a college degree.” (True. Many of those jobs require math, however.) Observing my efforts to improve mathematics instruction in Spokane, my daughter called me Horton, as in “Horton Hears a Who.” “No one else seems to hear what you hear,” she said. “Whoville is floating away, and the children are stuck on it. No one can hear them except you.” What we need, she said, is a YOPP – a Dr. Seuss sound that makes people stand up and take notice. If we have a huge, loud and fabulous YOPP, she said, everyone would hear it.

I told my daughter about the mathematicians and advocates who are YOPPING, who have worked hard for decades to try and rid the country of the scourge of reform math. I told her how they’ve done research, presented evidence, gone to meetings, testified in legislatures, built Web sites and blogs, and written Letters to the Editor. “I’m not alone,” I said. “Across this entire country, many Hortons have been fighting for Whoville.”

“Then why haven’t things changed?” she wondered.

Why indeed. What do I tell her? That it’s easier and more convenient to turn our backs while the monkeys toss Whoville around? That many teachers won’t speak up for Whoville because they’re afraid they’ll get into trouble? That many parents won’t speak up because they’re too busy and distracted to hear or believe the message? That many school administrators will believe in reform math – despite all contrary evidence – until they die? That lots of them would rather not hear from us at all?

Parents and teachers: The time is now. This is the children’s future we’re talking about. They live in Whoville, and they’re being miseducated – betrayed – by math curricula that fail them – from kindergarten all the way through Grade 12. Please call the school board. Write letters. Talk to the principal. Attend school board meetings. Tell the board what you see in the classroom. Talk to the PTA or PTG. Say no to counterproductive math curricula. Opt out of the math WASL. Demand better materials. Supplement at home and in the classroom with traditional curricula. Get this critical issue out in the open.

I don’t know if it takes a village to raise a child, but I believe it’s going to take a village to push reform math curricula out of our schools. Give a great and mighty YOPP. Make them hear you. Help open career doors for the students. Help save Spokane's Whoville.

Please note: The information in this post is copyrighted. The proper citation is:
Rogers, L. (February, 2009). "Students need parents and teachers to speak up." Retrieved (date) from the Betrayed Web site: http://betrayed-whyeducationisfailing.blogspot.com/

This article was modified slightly and reprinted March 3, 2009, on Educationnews.org, at http://ednews.org/articles/34524/1/Students-Need-Parents-and-Teachers-To-Speak-Up/Page1.html

Help Improve Math Education in Spokane

The Spokane Public Schools (SPS) Board of Directors is hosting a “Coffee and Conversation” – an open, two-way conversation with the public. Everyone is welcome.
When: Wednesday, Feb. 25, 2009, from 6-6:50 p.m., prior to the regularly scheduled board meeting at 7 p.m.
Where: The Ferris High School library, 3020 E. 37th Avenue.

I’m asking you to go to that meeting. Math education in Spokane is on the precipice of change, and it desperately needs a firm push in the right direction.

Parents, students, teachers, college professors, tradespeople and businesspeople – all of us have a vested interest in how well Spokane teaches our children. This district has serious problems in mathematics that directly affect your family.

Here are Spokane’s 2008 WASL results:

Grade Level	Reading	Math	Writing	Science
3rd Grade	72.6%	75.2%
4th Grade	76.9%	60.7%	63.1%
5th Grade	78.3%	69.2%		46.0%
6th Grade	71.5%	55.9%
7th Grade	63.3%	52.4%	66.1%
8th Grade	63.7%	49.5%		48.6%
10th Grade	80.5%	45.9%	85.0%	44.2%

Notice the pass rates for math and science. The math WASLs have long been criticized as being weak indicators of the math skills students need for postsecondary life, and yet fewer than half passed the 10th-grade test. Contrary to what I’ve heard administrators say, this is NOT the fault of the students or teachers. This is because of the reform math curricula used in Spokane: “Bridges in Mathematics,” “Investigations in Number, Data and Space,” “Connected Mathematics,” and “Core-Plus Mathematics.”

Welcome to your child’s future:

About a third of high school students are likely to drop out before graduation. Each year, dozens will leave SPS and graduate elsewhere. Of our graduates who choose college, about half will need four to six classes of remedial math (which can’t be taken concurrently) in order to pick up the math skills they don’t have. Many will decide math isn’t for them, and the door will be slammed shut on careers in engineering, medicine, technology, law, business, science and economics.

When our high school graduates decide against college, a trade or business, it won’t necessarily be because they aren’t capable. Some will just see how much math remediation they need, and they’ll decide that life is too short for more high school. This reality will be a cold shock to their parents, who watched them pass the math WASL, get "A"s in math and even head into honors math and Advanced Placement math classes.

Spokane Public Schools desperately needs at least three things in mathematics:

1. Proper math tests that tell us which skills are missing. The tests don’t have to be onerous or expensive. There are tests available now, and some are free.
   
2. Access to tutoring so that all students can get caught up to where they would have been had they been taught with better curricula. (Obviously, this tutoring should not be based on the same failed curricula and teaching methodologies.)
   
3. A more traditional track in mathematics from kindergarten through grade 12.

You might think these things are obvious, but I’ve seen a real reluctance in the district to acknowledge the weakness of reform math. In two years of asking questions all over the city, I’ve never heard any central office employee say it.

In the Feb. 10, 2009, online “Chat with the Superintendent,” I asked Superintendent Nancy Stowell about last year’s math WASL. I noted how the pass rates for mathematics dropped, grade after grade, until just 45.9% passed the 10th-grade math WASL. I asked her what this told her about the math instruction in Spokane. She said she thinks ongoing professional development for teachers is critical. Then, she said:

“Although our scores for grades three through 7 are significantly higher than the state average, we believe it is imperative that we continue to close the gap to standard for all of our students. We are definitely aware of the drop in scores at middle and high school. We are working to change that. Right now we making sure that we have materials that are aligned with the new performance expectations in math and we are continuing to provide professional development for our teachers.”

You might think her reply means the district plans to adopt more traditional curricula, but in the Jan. 14, 2009, school board meeting, a curriculum coordinator said that for grades 5-6, “The curriculum staff will be proposing a combination of different materials – three units of new “Investigations” and three units of “Connected Math.”

That is no change. “Investigations” and “Connected Mathematics” are used now. They’re both reform. They’re both inadequate and confusing. They're unlikely to help guide students to college math. They aren’t recommended by the state. They don’t align with the new math standards. They are failed programs. And yet here they are.

Clearly, a push is needed. I’m asking you to go to the “Coffee and Conversation” and ask for better math curricula. Help students build the skills they need for the future they want. This is your chance to make your wishes known. You might think you can always have two-way, open, public conversations with the school board, but it isn’t so.

Seize the day. Join me at the meeting. Tell them what you want to see happen. If you can’t go, please call the board members or write to them. Together, we can turn this thing around.

Meanwhile, please pass on this message to other interested parents, and if you have questions or comments, you can write to me at wlroge@comcast.net.

Thank you for your help.

Please note: The information in this post is copyrighted. The proper citation is:
Rogers, L. (February, 2009). "Help improve math education in Spokane." Retrieved (date) from the Betrayed Web site: http://betrayed-whyeducationisfailing.blogspot.com/

Teacher education programs part of the problem

Up until high school, I enjoyed math. I thought I was good at it. Then, I hit Grade 11 math, and along with Grade 11 math came Mr. Anand.

Mr. Anand was Death to Math Enjoyment. He was a bright, personable, confident math teacher whose explanations were unintelligible to me. I couldn’t understand why I couldn’t get it. Hating the daily trauma of not understanding what we were doing, I began to skip the class. Eventually, I fell so far behind that the most logical course of action seemed to be to drop the course and graduate from high school without it. Mr. Anand’s class had tipped me over from “good math student” to “math dropout.”

A decade later, I enrolled in community college to pick up that math course. My community college teacher? Mr. Anand. After a few more months with Mr. Anand, I was again completely lost. I took a trig exam thinking I would ace it, and instead, I flunked it. When the stock market crashed, I gratefully accepted that as an excuse to drop the course. I was 30 years old, working in finance, and I hadn’t passed high-school math.

A year later, I had married, moved and enrolled in college. The math requirement worried me. I felt deep in my bones that I was good at math, but my experiences with Mr. Anand had spawned many doubts. Thankfully, Mr. Anand had not made his way to Tennessee. College math was fun, interesting and logical. I still enjoy math, although I’m quite unenthusiastic about Mr. Anand.

I tell you this story because I’m aware of how much difference teachers make. Teachers hold the keys to the future; their interest and skill can make or break the learning process. But the teaching profession – one of the more challenging professions out there – is complicated by the lack of core content in many teacher education programs. I’ve heard and read repeatedly about programs that are woefully light in content, that focus too much on how to teach and not enough on what to teach. It’s a shame, because common sense and research tell us that teachers who know core subjects – math, science, languages, civics and history – are better able to teach them to their students (Stotsky, n.d.; “Teaching,” 2004; “U.S. Department,” 2005, p. 3; “Teaching,” 2006).

Some educators believe they can pick up a well-written textbook and effectively teach that material even if they don’t know it themselves. The prevalence of this theory helps explain why math is so often taught as a game in which children work in groups to teach math to themselves. But I doubt the theory does hold true for math. As I tutor our daughter in algebra and geometry, it’s clear that she won’t understand it if I don’t.

The sad state of K-12 math instruction appears to be intentional. In 1997, public policy organization Public Agenda found that, of 900 professors of education, 86% believed it was more important for aspiring teachers to “struggle with the process of finding the right answers than knowing the right answer” (“Professors,” 1997). Fifty-seven percent thought that children who used calculators from the beginning would have better problem-solving skills. Just 55% would require high-school graduates to demonstrate proficiency in “spelling, grammar, and punctuation.” Sixty percent wanted “less emphasis on memorization” in the classroom.

Fast-forward 11 years to 2008. A report from the National Council on Teacher Quality said that elementary-school teachers are now ill prepared to teach math to their students, having received insufficient instruction in math while they were in college (Zuckerbrod, 2008).

Folks, teachers have been betrayed too. They’re in the same shoes as their students. They can’t know things they haven’t been taught. If they don’t know it, they’ll struggle to teach it. Some would argue that last point with me, but just look around. The proof is right there in the generally weak math skills, sinking enrollments and high rates of dropouts and remediation.

Dr. Sandra Stotsky is a professor of Education Reform and holds the 21st Century Chair in Teacher Quality at the University of Arkansas. She is also a member of the Massachusetts Board of Education, and was a member of the National Mathematics Advisory Panel. She has said schools of education are “a major part of the problem,” not the solution (2005) and that they’re responsible for three critical issues facing public schools:

• Many teachers, especially those in K-8, have not gained an adequate academic background in the subject they’re supposed to teach in their professional preparation program.

“As every school district has found, most of their K-8 teachers require continuous professional development in the knowledge base for the subjects they teach. This is remediation, not enrichment or updating ….”

• Colleges and universities aren’t providing public schools with sufficient numbers of “academically qualified teachers” for core secondary school subjects.
• “Education schools do not train prospective teachers how to teach.”

“Instead, they arm new teachers with a host of pseudo-teaching strategies like small group work and with the philosophy that students should ‘construct their own knowledge’ and are more capable of shaping their own intellectual growth than teachers if they are sufficiently motivated by ‘inquiry.’ Education schools have been especially remiss in preparing new instructors with research-based knowledge for teaching beginning reading and arithmetic … The funds now invested in professional development to train our current teaching force how to teach beginning reading and arithmetic are staggering.”

Many teachers earn extra pay for master’s degrees, but Dr. Stotsky is critical of the typical master’s of education degree, calling it “an academically impoverished set of courses touting a body of ‘professional’ knowledge that has little, if any, support from credible research.” She says schools of education often disparage scientifically based evidence as “positivistic and irrelevant,” while rejecting scientific research that supports systematic and explicit instruction in reading, practicing skills, and providing “highly structured teaching” for at-risk children:

“Many if not most of the faculty in our education schools who prepare new teachers and retrain experienced ones do not accept the results of scientific research on the nature, development, and teaching of reading or writing or arithmetic. … They thus mistrain those who are preparing to teach in costly licensure programs … and continue to mistrain them in even more costly professional development programs.”

Speaking of development programs, it’s strange to me that people go to college, learn how to teach and then come out supposedly needing retraining in order to teach. Why would universities and colleges allow such a situation to continue? If teachers don’t know how to teach when they graduate from education programs, then either they need to stay there longer, or maybe there’s something wrong with the programs.

If I ran a university, and my school of education didn’t turn out teachers who were qualified to teach – without the constant need for coaching and retraining – I’d be embarrassed. If I ran a school district and had to keep retraining the people I hired – I’d be embarrassed. If I were a teacher, I’d be angry that I paid for a college education that didn’t adequately prepare me to go out and work. This is not an argument to fire a bunch of teachers; I’m following this thought through to its logical conclusion. If teachers who graduate from college need retraining, then something is awry.

Besides the fact that professional development is a lucrative business, it’s another sneaky way of blaming the teachers. It’s easier and more comfortable to say: “The math programs will work just fine once the teachers know how to teach it” than it is to acknowledge that the curriculum itself is inadequate and incomprehensible. Illogically, while teachers are away from class getting all of this retraining, their students are taught by substitute teachers who are not getting the retraining.

I’m truly surprised teachers haven’t yet filed a class-action lawsuit.

In March 2008, the National Mathematics Advisory Panel said teacher-education programs must focus more on traditional aspects of math such as whole numbers, fractions, geometry, measurement and algebra (“Foundations,” 2008, p. xviii). The Panel said teachers need to know mathematics in order to teach it better, and so the “mathematics preparation of elementary and middle school teachers must be strengthened as one means for improving teachers’ effectiveness in the classroom” (p. 39).

(It’s hard to believe the NMAP had to say that.)

Can we ever expect professors currently in the colleges of education to step back and say, “Gee, maybe we were wrong”? Most of them taught reform, promoted it, fought for it, received grant money for it and published material on it. It takes a big person to admit an error, especially one this costly in children’s futures. I expect most of them to support reform until they die.

Parents could grow old and gray waiting for teacher education programs to acknowledge the obvious. Find out what your children need to know for post-secondary life and fill in the gaps. Students shouldn’t have to wait until they’re 30 to get the math they need for the life they want.



Please note: The information in this post is copyrighted. The proper citation is:
Rogers, L. (February, 2009). "Teacher education programs big part of the problem." Retrieved (date) from the Betrayed Web site: http://betrayed-whyeducationisfailing.blogspot.com/

This article was posted February 9, 2009 at Educationnews.org, at http://ednews.org/articles/33695/1/Teacher-Education-Programs-Part-of-the-Problem/Page1.html