Report: Preschools should place More Emphasis on Math

Preschools don't adequately cover math in part because many preschool teachers aren't as comfortable with the subject, according to a National Research Council report. Preschool math instruction may help disadvantaged students overcome the achievement gap, and researchers recommend improving math curriculum for preschools and revamping teacher training.

Mathematics education has risen to the top of the national policy agenda as part of the need to improve the technical and scientific literacy of the American public. The new demands of international competition in the 21st century require a workforce that is competent in and comfortable with mathematics.

There is particular concern about thechronically low mathematics and science performance of economically disadvantaged students and the lack of diversity in the science and technical workforce. Particularly alarming is that such disparities exist in the earliest years of schooling and even before school entry.

Recognizing the increasing importance of mathematics and encouraged by a decade of success in improving early literacy, the Mathematical Sciences Education Board of the Center for Education at the National Research Council established the Committee on Early Childhood Mathematics. The committee was charged with examining existing research in order to develop appropriate mathematics learning nobjectives for preschool children; providing evidence-based insights related to curriculum, instruction, and teacher education for achieving these learning objectives; and determining the implications of these findings for policy, practice, and future research.

The committee found that, although virtually all young children have the capability to learn and become competent in mathematics, for most the potential to learn mathematics in the early years of school is not currently realized. This stems from a lack of opportunities to learn mathematics either in early childhood settings or through everyday experiences in homes and in communities. This is particularly the case for economically disadvantaged children, who start out behind in mathematics and will remain so without extensive, high-quality early mathematics instruction.

In fact, well before first grade, children can learn the ideas and skills that support later, more complex mathematics understanding. There is expert consensus that two areas of mathematics are particularly important for young children to learn: (1) number, which includes whole number, operations, and relations, and (2) geometry, spatial thinking, and measurement. A rich body of research provides insight into how children’s proficiency develops in both areas and the instruction needed to support it. The committee used this evidence to develop research-based teaching-learning paths to guide policy and practice in early childhood education.

Examination of current standards, curricula, and instruction in early childhood education revealed that many early childhood settings do not provide adequate learning experiences in mathematics. The relative lack of high-quality mathematics instruction, especially in comparison to literacy, reflects a lack of attention to mathematics throughout the childhood education system, including standards, curriculum, instruction, and the preparation and training of the teaching workforce.

Standards Help Minnesota Vie With Top Nations

This from Ed Week:

Thirteen years ago, Minnesota was a state with no academic standards in mathematics and science and what some observers said was a mixed record in grounding students in crucial academic content, such as number skills and algebra.

Since then, the state has set clear guidelines for schools in both subjects, and it also appears to have tuned up what gets taught in math classes. To state officials, the benefits are clear. As one of only two U.S. states to participate in a prominent international measurement of academic skill, Minnesota is scoring at or near the level of many of the highest-performing countries on that exam, and its scores in some categories have jumped significantly since it first took part in 1995.

The state's participation in the 1995 and 2007 Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study has given researchers information to dissect the factors that yielded the state's impressive gains in some areas, particularly early-grades math...

See also: ("Pressure for International Benchmarks Builds," Jan. 7, 2009.)
(Minnesota's SciMath frameworks)

Draud's CATS Task Force Produces Attractive Math Bill

Math Reform gaining quick support,

Farris wants time to implement

Video from Mark Hebert at WHAS.

This from H-L:

FRANKFORT — The state Senate Education Committee approved a joint resolution Thursday that would revamp the way math is taught in Kentucky schools.

Education experts and sponsors said the measure would make Kentucky math standards "higher, clearer and fewer." The proposed curriculum standards would boost achievement, better prepare students for mathematics in college, and mean fewer youngsters would need remedial help, they said...

...Kelly, who outlined the proposed resolution, said it grew out of a state task force that studied Kentucky's Commonwealth Accountability Testing System, or CATS.

Alice Gabbard, diagnostic intervention director for the Kentucky Center for Mathematics, said Kentucky's standards now require teachers to cover many "big ideas" in math as rapidly as possible. As a result, many students don't get the depth of understanding they need, she contended.

Gabbard noted that the tiny nation of Singapore has a curriculum that covers only about 52 percent of the material on the International Math and Science test. Yet Singapore has some of the world's highest math scores.

"That is maybe a good lesson that we don't have to teach children a whole lot of content every year in order for them to become proficient and have high achievement," Gabbard said. "If we have (Kentucky) teachers who are just covering these topics quickly in order to cover other topics, then we have students who are not well prepared."

Sen. Tim Shaughnessy, D-Louisville, said he liked the proposal, but questioned whether new standards could be ready by August.

Interim Education Commissioner Elaine Farris said preparing teachers to use new math standards would take time.

"We agree with the concept and we already have begun some work on narrowing the standards. But it's not as easy as some people might think," she said.

Hat tip to Kentucky Votes.

From SJR 19:

Be it resolved by the General Assembly of the Commonwealth of Kentucky:

Section 1. The Kentucky Department of Education is directed to revise core content standards in mathematics for grades prekindergarten through grade 12 and concurrently develop objectives for each standard with teaching tools to accomplish each objective for use by the classroom teacher. The revised content standards and related materials shall be concise and shall be based on the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics "Curriculum Focal Points for Prekindergarten through Grade 8 Mathematics" and "Principles and Standards for School Mathematics." These revisions shall be completed no later than August 1, 2009, and shall consider the 2008 findings of the National Mathematics Advisory Panel.

Section 2. The Kentucky Department of Education is directed to revise Kentucky's assessment program in mathematics to ensure that the revised concise content standards are measured and mathematics assessments produce scores that are valid and reliable for individual students. Assessments in mathematics for school year 2009-2010 shall measure the revised content standards.

Kelly and Winters Proffer Math Reform

Senators Dan Kelly and Ken Winters filed SJR 19 (BR 804), the bill to which Sen David Williams referred this week.

The Joint resolution calls for the following:

Direct the Kentucky Department of Education to use the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics report recommendations to revise mathematics core content standards and materials in grades prekindergarten through grade 12 by August 2009, and revise math assessments accordingly by the 2009-2010 school year.

I suspect the adoption of NCTM standards would be well received. But somebody will have to tell me what "revise math assessments accordingly" means.

If this is leverage to support a new version of Senate Bill 1, it may be enough to kill an otherwise good idea. But if that phrase is open to interpretation by KDE, perhaps not.

Hat tip to David Adams at Kentucky Progress.

Son of Senate Bill 1

This from Bluegrass Politics:

Williams considers changing state’s math curriculum

and ending CATS

Kentucky should consider changing how math is taught in its public schools and ending its student testing system, Senate President David Williams said Monday...

Williams reference the CATS assessment is fairly well understood. Sen Dan Kelly advised KSN&C that some revised version of Senate Bill 1 from the last session is to be expected.

But what about Williams' math comment?

Given his history since about 1991, I tend to be skeptical of anything Williams suggests. Expect the worst - is how I've been conditioned to respond. But is it possible he has co-opted a useful and not-too-costly reform idea, here?

True, we don't know what Williams really means, but it's likely he is referring to the National Mathematics Advisory Panel's report: Foundations for Success. If so, he will find those ideas widely supported by math teachers.

One hopes Williams will do us all a favor and present his ideas in two separate bills - so that one can support the math changes while rejecting his attempt to waste money changing CATS, without improving student assessment.

The National Mathematics Advisory Panel was created by President George W. Bush to advise the nation on the best use of scientifically based research to advance the teaching and learning of mathematics. The panel was charged with making recommendations on improving mathematics achievement for all students, with a focus on preparing students to take and succeed in algebra.

Much of the report was embraced by the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. The following are recommendations made in the report, and NCTM's response to those suggestions.

• Streamlining the Curriculum
• Factors That Boost Mathematical Achievement
• The Importance of Effective Teachers
• Research and Teachers' Judgment Should Influence Instruction
• Improving NAEP and State Assessments
• Building Research Capacity

Extensive reports of the panel’s task groups on Conceptual Knowledge and Skills; Learning Processes; Instructional Practices; Teachers; and Assessment are also available at the panel's website.

This from Steven Leinwand in Education Week:

Moving Mathematics Out of Mediocrity

The logic for the importance of improving school mathematics programs is reasonably unassailable. The country’s long-term economic security and social well-being are clearly linked to sustained innovation and workplace productivity. This innovation and productivity rely, just as clearly, on the quality of human capital and equity of opportunity that, in turn, emerge from high-quality education, particularly in the areas of literacy, mathematics, and science. Applying the if-then deductive logic of classical geometry puts a strong K-12 mathematics program at the heart of America’s long-term economic viability.

But the problems with mathematics in the United States are just as clear. A depressingly comprehensive, yet honest, appraisal must conclude that our typical math curriculum is generally incoherent, skill-oriented, and accurately characterized as “a mile wide and an inch deep.” It is dispensed via ruthless tracking practices and focused mainly on the “one right way to get the one right answer” approach to solving problems that few normal human beings have any real need to consider. Moreover, it is assessed by 51 high-stakes tests of marginal quality, and overwhelmingly implemented by undersupported and professionally isolated teachers who too often rely on “show-tell-practice” modes of instruction that ignore powerful research findings about better ways to convey mathematical knowledge.

For 20 years, we have tinkered at the margins, merely adjusting parts of the system while ignoring the fact that the basic structure has remained largely intact and underperforming. During those 20 years, we’ve raised achievement a little and narrowed gaps a bit. But even as the need for broader and deeper mathematical literacy has grown, our traditional approach still rarely works for more than a third of our students, and it fails even more when it comes to critical-reasoning and problem-solving skills. It shouldn’t be all that surprising that on the 2006 Program for International Student Assessment, or PISA, 15-year-old U.S. students placed an unacceptable 25th out of 30 countries tested.

Fortunately, the solutions are as clear as the problems. The answers do not revolve around costly new initiatives. Moving beyond mediocrity does not have to mean new textbooks and supplemental programs, or a slew of new calculators and computers, or jumping on the latest bandwagon of benchmark assessments. Instead, our attention needs to focus on how effectively existing programs are implemented, how available technology is integrated and used to enhance the learning of skills and concepts, and why assessments that steal valuable instructional time must provide relevant information that is actually put to use to inform revisions and reteaching.
In short, it’s time to turn to the real basics of what we expect students to learn, how we convey that, how we measure student learning, and how we support teachers and reduce their isolation...

You Go, Girls.

This from ABC News:

Math Study Finds Girls Are Just as Good as Boys

Sixteen years after Barbie dolls declared, "Math class is tough!" girls are proving that when it comes to math they are just as tough as boys.

In the largest study of its kind, girls measured up to boys in every grade, from second through 11th. The research was released Thursday in the journal Science.

Parents and teachers persist in thinking boys are simply better at math, said Janet Hyde, the University of Wisconsin-Madison researcher who led the study. And girls who grow up believing it wind up avoiding harder math classes. "It keeps girls and women out of a lot of careers, particularly high-prestige, lucrative careers in science and technology," Hyde said.

That's changing, though slowly. Women are now earning 48 percent of undergraduate college degrees in math; they still lag far behind in physics and engineering. But in primary and secondary school, girls have caught up, with researchers attributing that advance to increasing numbers of girls taking advanced math classes such as calculus.

Hyde and her colleagues looked at annual math tests required by the No Child Left Behind education law in 2002. Ten states provided enough statistical information to
review test scores by gender, allowing researchers to compare the performances of more than 7 million children...

Thanks Dorie.

The Math Problem

Three minutes of Math from Abbot & Costello:

From TeacherTube