No paywall. No pop-up ads.
Get access to The 74 for free when you donate during our fall campaign.
As students continue to suffer from math learning loss, some educators are calling for a return to a more structured teaching strategy known as “the science of math.”
Proponents argue that the “science of mathematics” is the counterpart to the well-known “science of reading,” which has recently brought about major changes in the way the subject is taught nationally, and that the “science of mathematics” calls for a more orderly and clear approach to teaching. .
Sarah Powell, an associate professor at the University of Texas at Austin and one of the movement’s most vocal proponents, said that while the circuitous learning methods that have become popular in recent years may “sound appealing,” children said it doesn’t help them learn the skills they need to succeed. At least not in mathematics.
“Some teachers are helping students succeed, and others are not,” she says. “I don’t want to waste my students’ time.”
But critics say the movement is poorly researched and revives ineffective techniques that should have been abandoned years ago. They also say they cannot combat the current math crisis, as evidenced by a series of poor test results at the local, state and national levels.
Powell said ineffective teaching practices are one of the factors contributing to student performance. She said many educators don’t get to the point quickly enough when delivering lessons, especially given the limited time they have to teach complex and often abstract concepts. .
Powell, who works in special education, said that last school year, her fourth-grade teacher asked her students to find a partner and start solving math problems immediately at the beginning of class, without any preparation. He said he observed. order.
“This can be a very intimidating strategy for many students, especially those who have never worked on multi-step word problems,” Powell says. “If you put an adult in a situation like that, they’re going to get really frustrated. And putting a student in a situation like that, especially if the math foundation is weak or in some cases non-existent, can be very frustrating.” It’s not fair.”
Instead, she said, teachers should first explain the problem and give students the vocabulary they need to solve it. Therefore, instead of starting with students staring at a diagram on paper and asking themselves or each other where the boundaries are, lessons about boundaries should begin with the teacher providing a definition of the term. she said. In this case, it is the distance around the outside perimeter of the shape.
“I want teachers to review potentially important vocabulary and say, ‘Let’s do a problem together,'” she says. “If you allow students to explore, some students may not explore or explore incorrectly, so try to be more systematic instead of open-ended.”
About 25,000 people are members of the Math and Science group on Facebook, where they discuss best practices, share helpful websites, and provide feedback on lesson plans. Powell is currently working with about 100 fourth- and fifth-grade teachers in Austin this year.
Nick Wasserman, associate professor of mathematics education at Columbia University Teachers College, said there has been much debate over the education of mathematics for decades, as evidenced by the math wars of the 1990s.
Part of the problem, he said, is that educators may prioritize different aspects of mathematics and draw different conclusions from the same research. However, even considering these arguments, research shows that this is a core tenet of inquiry-oriented approaches when students are asked to reason and think mathematically.
“Of course, there are times when teachers provide direct instruction, and we are not opposed to that,” he added. “But it’s also very important to have times when students are asked to think and reason for themselves” mathematically. An important element of this is giving students tasks that they can work on themselves, without the teacher teaching them how to think. The important part is this relationship with thinking and reasoning. ”
Michael Greenlee, a learning specialist with the Charles A. Dana Center who also works at UT Austin, said the “science of math” should be approached with caution.
Greenlee, a regional director for the National Council of Mathematics Supervisors, questioned the validity of the idea, adding that because of its roots in special education, it cannot be applied to all students.
He also claims there is a political agenda behind it, supporting those trying to fight Common Core (what they erroneously called “new math”).
“Common Core provides a clearer picture of what math actually is,” Greenlee says. “People see it as the new math because it verbalizes out loud the brain processes and scaffolding strategies that students should use.”
Mr. Powell scoffed at the politicization of the issue and criticized the Common Core standards, introduced in 2009 and aimed at defining a rigorous set of English and math skills that all students should have at the end of each grade. He said he supports it.
The standards, particularly Common Core Mathematics, were initially widely accepted, but later sparked fierce backlash, including from those who saw them as an intrusive mandate from the federal government.It was so confusing for parents that it was sent return to classroom To understand new techniques.
Greenlee said the “science of mathematics” has nothing to do with the “science of reading” and unfairly links it to the earlier movement. He also said that the “science of mathematics” assumes that teachers are using certain methods when they are not.
“The reality is we don’t know what teachers are actually doing in the classroom,” he says. “In fact, my experience in my work with large systems and school districts is that teachers are not doing what research shows they should be doing. You’re not teaching it properly.” They themselves don’t have the background knowledge to be able to teach it properly. ”
Joe Bohler, professor at Stanford University and one of California’s leading architects of recent times Updated math frameworkmany educators said the “science of math” debate was making the situation worse.
“They’re rolling their eyes at this,” she said, adding that those pushing the concept have cherry-picked data.
She said research has shown that students learn better through activities and gain greater mastery of terminology and methods.
“But when you take the lead and tell them first, they often can’t really engage conceptually, because their brains get so wrapped up in these methods and rules that they can’t conceptually You can’t even think about it,” she said.
Mr. Boler is not a champion of the Common Core standards. She calls the Common Core standards outdated. But she said this “old is new” tactic that immediately divides children into “right” and “wrong” is not the answer.
“Why aren’t we teaching our kids the math they’ll need for the world ahead?” Bohler said students will develop data literacy and build mathematical models to study the most pressing problems. He added that students should graduate from high school with the necessary skills. “They don’t learn that in school. They just learn the calculus part. If you’re given a real-life situation and asked to create a mathematical function, they can’t do it.”
This lack of knowledge puts students at a disadvantage compared to students from other countries, she said.
“When I recently interviewed high school seniors, they had never seen a spreadsheet in their 12 years of school,” she said. “The United States is far behind the rest of the world in teaching children about data and data tools.”
Such knowledge would have been extremely useful during the pandemic. She said much of the information shared about the virus is done using graphs and statistics that cannot be understood by those who don’t understand the data.
But Elizabeth M. Hughes, associate professor of special education at Penn State University, said educators don’t have to choose sides in the debate.
“I often see things on the internet that essentially ask, ‘Are you familiar with the team facts?’ or ‘Do you understand the team concept?’” she said. “The reality is that students need both. They need to understand the underlying structures of addition, subtraction, multiplication, and division, and be able to perform them accurately and easily. Students need new ideas. You need to be able to explore and develop solid plans to solve known problems.”
And rote memorization may be wrongly demonized, she says. Students must remember math facts easily and accurately.
“It shouldn’t be a controversial idea,” she said.
Wasserman said teachers can find success through a variety of strategies, including a combination of guided instruction and student exploration.
“It’s good to give students definitions,” he says, but teachers also need to give students assignments that “force them to wrestle and grapple with some of the nuances of the concept.” Told.
Get articles like this delivered straight to your inbox. Sign up for The 74 Newsletter
