EducationNews.org

The National Math Advisory Panel (NMP), which was formed two years ago, released its final report on March 13, 2008.One of the principal messages of the report is that "the delivery system in mathematics education … is broken and must be fixed."Such a statement is hard to ignore, so it was only a matter of time before someone on the Hill would look into what it would take to fix the broken system.The first to enter the fray was the House Committee on Education and Labor which held a hearing on the report on May 21, 2008.

It's not exactly like the Hill has heard about the math education issues for the first time.(See http://www.hoover.org/publications/ednext/3220616.html for some background on this). Mathematicians, educators and parents have been testifying in front of Committees for years about fuzzy math.But after attending last week's hearing full of praises for math coaches, technology, and interdisciplinary studies, the only thing I felt was missing was the ritual chorus line kick and singing of Kumbayaa by the Committee members.

I don't know what report the Committee was talking about, but what I heard that day didn't sound like the NMP report I've been reading.Skip Fennel, former president of the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (NCTM) and a former panel member lead the charge in testimony.While the NMP report talks about the need for more content knowledge among the teachers of mathematics, particularly at the elementary school level, Skip seemed to think that professional development of teachers and math coaches to help teachers were recommendations of the report.Or at least he made it sound that way.In fact, while the report does talk about the use of full-time elementary math teachers in light of having teachers who know the content they have to teach, it does not mention coaches or professional development programs.

And with all due respect to math coaches who know their stuff—particularly in light of the coaching experiences in Virginia led by Dr. Haver of Virginia Commonwealth University and the only mathematician who testified at the hearing—what I hear about coaching from teachers is generally not very heartwarming.A friend of mine is a 3^rd grade teacher who reports "The best thing that has happened for me as a classroom teacher with a math coach is that the math coach mostly leaves me alone. He's a nice young man, but he's an idiot."This is probably one of the more positive statements I've heard.

Another crowd pleasing testimony came from Dr. Wanda Talley Staggers, Dean of Manufacturing and Engineering, Anderson School District Five, Anderson, South Carolina.She is involved in a program called "Project Lead the Way™".Pardon my cynicism but it's hard for me to not notice the trademark symbol after the title. This program provides pre-engineering type classes in middle and high school that can only be taught by teachers who have been certified by this trademarked program.Dr. Staggers trains such teachers, and testified that "After six years of training high school teachers during the Project Lead The Way™ Summer Training Institutes across the nation, I have heard overwhelmingly from teachers that they come away from the experience with a rejuvenated interest in teaching."

Maybe so, but the key is whether the students in Project-Lead-the Way™ courses will learn any math or simply be entertained.The program is based on the premise that students don't take a lot of math because it's too removed from the real world.The solution? Hands-on project-based courses that involve the students.In order to take such classes, however, they must be enrolled in regular math classes—thus a carrot and stick approach. The program has not been field-tested or validated, and is too young to have data showing whether this strategy is likely to work.Plus problem-based learning, tends to be rather discovery-heavy despite teachers' best and stated intentions that they use a "balanced" approach—the type of balance where someone's finger is on the scale.

Chairman Miller (D-CA) saw the value of this type of program and made a leap from math connecting to applications of math, to math connecting with everything.He rhapsodized about a school he saw in Oregon that became a math academy through an interdisciplinary approach.All courses were interrelated—students had to understand the mathematics of history: distances between cities, depth of the oceans. He lamented that in order for this to happen, teachers needed to know the math.If not, what you're left with, in his words is "simplicity, separation, and drill and kill.There's nothing in the law that requires that." Never mind that the reason we have such separation and disciplines is not to simplify it, but because each topic is complex.Instituting interdisciplinary approach is just another way of dumbing down the content of all courses, not to mention math. But if, as Congressman Miller asserts, there's nothing in the law that requires discipline and practice, perhaps there should be.

On the subject of connections, Congressman Kildee from Michigan lamented that he persevered in math and got A's in it by virtue of "pride and memorization" though he said he couldn't make the connections to its application or have "Eureka moments". Mr. Kildee was born in 1929, and my guess is that he is probably fairly proficient in math even if he couldn't make the connections.  If you're reading this, take heart Congressman Kildee.A retired mathematics professor, who I know, also from Michigan and born in 1924, says he learned lots of things before he understood them--memory seems to be bottomless.

So while it is likely that Congress will write authorizations to spend money on hands-on problem solving classes and interdisciplinary approaches, in the end, my money says Mr. Kildee will in all probability possess superior math skills than the next generations of high school graduates to benefit from Congress' largess. And since I'm in a betting mood, my money also says that if he were ever to teach elementary school he would not need help from any well-intentioned math coach.

Barry Garelick is an analyst for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency in Washington, D.C. He is a national advisor to NYC HOLD, an education advocacy organization that addresses mathematics education in schools throughout the United States.He is taking courses to get his teaching credential so he can teach middle or high school math when he retires.

Published May 30, 2008