The state’s new math program: “Kids are failing left and right”

GIVE West, an alternative education school for students with disciplinary issues in Gwinnett County is on the top of the list for the highest % of students receiving A’s for new math.

• Link
• Report this comment

Jennifer..honey…you may wan’t to go back and read that chart again…they have a 100% failure rate.

• Link
• Report this comment

If she can’t pass accelerated math, what did Jessica O’Brien think was going to happen when she got to Harvard and had to take accelerated everything?

I went to private high school here in Atlanta and when I got to UGA, I saw my new classmates from schools like Walton and Parkview struggling on subjects that I covered my senior year in high school.

If the state is serious about education, they need to step up the rigor in the classroom.

• Link
• Report this comment

There is a problem when GIVE West in Gwinnett has 67% Math I students getting A’s and GIVE East has 100% Math I students getting F’s. What is GIVE West doing that GIVE East isn’t?

• Link
• Report this comment

No state should dictate how to teach. States have every right to determine WHAT to be taught.

I wish they distinguish the standards from the frameworks. The GPS does NOT specify how to teach.

• Link
• Report this comment

I don’t want to kill any dreams but is Harvard really the right choice for Jessica if she’s struggling so mightily in math freshman year? I’m sure if she has other outstanding qualities, Harvard could very well accept her but I don’t think Harvard classes are going to get any easier. And, from what I know, Harvard and many of the other ivies have core curriculum requirements that require you to take a number of math classes. Maybe if parents weren’t so dead set on sending their children to the Harvards and Princetons of the world, lower grades wouldn’t be such an issue.

• Link
• Report this comment

All of you criticizing Jessica have NO CLUE what the new math entails. It’s presented in a very abstract, higher-level thinking format, more suited to upper-level college classes. Not only is it not appropriate for most high schoolers, it’s also counterproductive.

I can’t tell you the number of kids who’ve come into my English class, in tears over their math grades! I’ve never seen anything like it. These kids (and their parents) hate this new math curriculum with the passion of a thousand suns. Our math teachers are highly qualified and well-trained, but the program is simply not workable for the vast majority of students.

• Link
• Report this comment

Wow!! Funny how it’s always someone else’s fault….

“What we are giving our students who struggle is an opportunity to feel as successful as our students who are mathematically talented.” – Janet Davis (State math program director)

WOW!! That statement says it all about government schools!! Words like “GIVING” and “FEEL SUCCESSFUL” is typical for government ran schools. How about words like “EARN” and “ARE SUCCESSFUL”.

GET YOU KIDS OUT OF GEORGIA GOVERNMENT SCHOOLS!!!

• Link
• Report this comment

[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Dr Math E Matics, Maureen Downey. Maureen Downey said: The state’s new math: “Kids are failing left and right” http://bit.ly/bVw7i7 [...]

• Link
• Report this comment

@Jack–
Most of the “government school” teachers on here are also bashing Davis. She’s either an idiot or just parroting the party line to keep her paycheck.

Last night, I tutored an 11th grader whose parents are shelling out $10K a year for a tony Savannah religious school. He didn’t know what “area” and “perimeter” are. 11th grader… and these are middle school concepts! This is a hard-working student who cares about mastering the concepts. He explained that most of his math teachers had been lackluster and at least one was a foreigner who was very difficult to understand. I wonder how many of his math teachers are actually certified to teach high school math in the state of Georgia?

• Link
• Report this comment

Brad -
My whole post was tongue in cheek, Brad. You will find that I do not support the educational environment at the alternative schools in Gwinnett or most anywhere else in the state. I am a huge advocate of reform from the top to the bottom for students being pushed out of traditional school environments. The 66% could be of any number of students enrolled in that class. It doesn’t matter to me whether there were 3 or 30 – I am a believer that grade inflation is just the start of the problems in alternative education in our state.

• Link
• Report this comment

@ Booklover

Good point…I am sure there are private and home schooled children in our state that are being taught by teachers that are not “certified”. The teachers are not the problem. It is the administration above the teachers that is the problem. I hope and pray that all the public school teachers that lost their jobs end up at private schools. It would be a win/win for all involved. Great teachers in a private funded environment would be wonderful for all our kids.

• Link
• Report this comment

@Jack–
Thank you for the acknowledgment. I agree that much of the problem is at the higher levels. I have a great administration but they are hamstrung by people above them, especially the “experts” at the State DOE.

However, teaching at a private school is not necessarily a win. All but the very best (like the $30K/year) pay teachers much less than public schools. Personally, I couldn’t afford to teach at a private school!

• Link
• Report this comment

Student mobility is another problem with the new math curriculum. My district encompasses a military base, and we have very high levels of student mobility. This is great for classroom diversity and discussion, but horrible for kids who are thrown into the new Georgia math curriculum after having been in a traditional math curriculum at the other four or five or whatever schools they have attended.

I am also concerned about our students who leave Georgia and go to traditional math curriculums in other states. A student who passed Math I here is not necessarily ready to take Geometry in another state, because he didn’t get all of the traditional “Algebra I” information.

But of course, the state DOE is not at all concerned with these kids.

• Link
• Report this comment

@Jack–
Please tell me which private schools pay more than the local public schools. I have friends working (or who have worked) in many private schools, and as I said, they all get paid less.

The only exceptions would be the few expensive schools like Woodward in Atlanta, for example.

I know neither Augusta nor Savannah have any private schools where the pay and benefits are as “good” as at the public schools… which isn’t saying much!

• Link
• Report this comment

“Some switched to general math their sophomore year, afraid of getting another low grade.”

I’d like to know which schools in the state are offering general math – there is no such course in our county, or in any other county that I am familiar with. There are math support classes, but students must get credit in Math 1, 2, and 3 in order to get a diploma.

• Link
• Report this comment

As someone who struggled with Math all through middle, high and secondary school I can understand the feelings of many who see high failure rates.

That being said, if math is your weak spot, concentrate on the weak spot. Study the weak spot more than the other courses. Even if you don’t have math homework, open the book and do problems from all the previous chapters you have already covered.

math is like a foreign language. There are rules of “syntax” that must be followed to solve equations. In order to become proficient in the language of math, I had to constantly practice in the language of math.

It’s not easy, but I can be done. Perhaps the issue is that the kids are assumed to have skills in math that they should have learned in grammar and middle school and oh darn, those skills are missing.

• Link
• Report this comment

Jenn…we are in agreement on the grade inflation in “alternative” environments. All the kids do in my county is take tests on a computer….take it however many times they need to until they pass it…and the county gives them credit for the class. I had a junior leave my class to enroll in alternative school. In 8 weeks he had passed enough of those tests to GRADUATE from high school. All he has to do next year is take one PE credit. Ridiculous.

• Link
• Report this comment

Public School Parent, we have plenty of highly qualified mathematicians teaching math. However, they don’t know how to TEACH math to others. Just because you’re good at something doesn’t mean you’re good at showing someone else how to do it.

• Link
• Report this comment

@clueless–
Sorry if I didn’t make my point clear. Some students are not ready for *abstract concepts*, such as “solve for x” in 9th grade. If you tell them “divide by 5,” they can do it, but until the light goes on as far as understanding abstraction, they can’t understand what it means to “divide by x.”

The problem with the Math I-II-III curriculum is that it expects ALL kids to get this concept in 9th grade. You can write a nice story problem about solving for x, but it doesn’t mean the student will understand the concept behind it.

I think the program is trying to force mathematical maturity on students simply by giving them more “exposure” to difficult math concepts. But until that “abstraction” light goes on, it’s all gobbledegook.

• Link
• Report this comment

Depending on the diploma course a student is following, a Foreign Language is required. For example, a student in the College Prep with Specialization Diploma Study is required to take 2 units of a Foreign Language. A student in the College Prep with Honors/Distinction is required to take 3 units of a Foreign Language. Also remember, that in the Univ. System of GA requires 2 units of Foreign Language for admission to any school.

• Link
• Report this comment

I would rather my child earn an “B” in a Gifted/Advanced Class than have them lower themselves into a General class in order to get an “A”. Colleges will also question why a student, who was in a gifted class, all of sudden dropped down in to a general class.

• Link
• Report this comment

I found the graph at the end of the article most interesting. The difference in passing/failing between freshman taking the different levels of mathematics was very interesting. It suggests that the students at the top of the skill curve aren’t having much difficulty with the new curriculum, but that weaker math students are.

The freshman this year who took Accelerated Math II received Cs or better 97+% of the time. They received A grades 40% of the time! I think this shows that the very high end math students are doing pretty well with the new math curriculum. The difficulty seems to be in the weaker math students taking less accelerated math classes.

I wonder how much that has to do with the math teacher’s being assigned? I would guess that the ‘best’ math teachers are being assigned to the Accelerated Math II classes because that is the most difficult course. I would bet that coupling the best math teachers with the best math students results in high pass and A rates like were reported. Slightly weaker math teachers are then teaching the weaker math students in the other classes, which would likely make it harder on the weaker students.

Am I wrong in assuming that it will be common for the stronger math teachers to be teaching the accelerated classes?

• Link
• Report this comment

@Clueless–
No, your lack of reading comprehension is showing. The 11th grader I was speaking of attends a private school, which does not have the new GA math curriculum. I was answering Jack’s assertion that private schools were uniformly better than public.

Though I do think private school’s math curriculums are better than this Math I-II-III crap. The problem is the lack of qualified math teachers in private schools.

There are, indeed, public schools that lack qualified teachers to teach the new curriculum as well. One school I taught at had a math position open all year…well, to be more precise, two teachers quit that position within the year (one went back to being an electrician because he made more money and had less crap to put up with) and the kids were left with a series of substitutes.

• Link
• Report this comment

High School Teacher- I said that we need teachers who both understand high level mathematics AND can teach it. And we have a serious shortage of folks with those qualifications. My niece teaches in a rural county and they can’t find high school math and science teachers at all.

The whole idea of Georgia writing its own unique high school curriculum still burns me up. There were so many, many ways that Georgia could have improved and strengthened the traditional high school courses without scrapping them and starting from scratch. Go to the top private high schools and top public high schools with the highest AP and SAT scores- they haven’t rejected the traditional courses yet they still are excelling..

And the lack of transferability of the courses and the difficulty of placing private school or out of state transfer students is just another huge mark against it.

• Link
• Report this comment

Perhaps they need to revamp 8th grade math as well…Perhaps create a better transition into the high school program…Perhaps kids need to spend more time with and working on homework (not gaming, sports and texting)…Perhaps parents need to spend more time with their kids on their homework.

It is hard to believe that with 90 as an ‘A’, they still are getting these grades…when I was in high school (yes here is one of “those stories”) 94 was an ‘A’. The normal math route took kids into the beginnings of integral and differential calculus before they graduated…and this was a government school! The majority of my senior class of 800+ went on to college. There are of course exceptions that need additional assistance which can and should be done through peer tutoring or after school programs. But these should be only the exceptions.

Oh ye of little backbone…apply thyself!

• Link
• Report this comment

I agree wholeheartedly with Tracey’s comments. The high performing countries really see math ability as a product of hard work not inherent aptitude.

The problem with her suggestion though is that many schools or districts are not using textbooks to teach this new math or the textbooks in use do not have sufficient worked examples and practice to foster automaticity in the math skills and an understanding of the connections among math topics.

The most common advice I give parents and teachers who contact me is to locate the Mary Dolciani PreAlgebra books. Mathematics: Structure and Method; the Brown, Dolciani Algebra 1 and 2 Structure and Method; the Jurgensen Geometry book in the same series, or the Richard G Brown Advanced Mathematics Precalc book.

All are available used and give access to worked examples, detailed explanations and illustrations, lots of word problems, and access to a sequential overview of all the math content in the Georgia GPS.

Parents, teachers, and students all later express relief that they’re no longer flying blind in their GPS math classes. Hopefully knowledge that these books exist can help more people currently frustrated or failing.

By the way this is the current version of the series the National Math Panel used as its Gold Standard reference when it did an overview of the inadequacies of US Algebra textbooks. Complaints about how bad things were in Georgia before shouls be referenced by the fact that the quality of too many traditional math books is quite poor.

• Link
• Report this comment

According to the article

The Atlanta Journal-Constitution used the following traditional grading system to analyze the data: 90-100, A; 80-89, B; 70-79, C; 60-69, D; below 60, F.

This doesn’t match up with what most counties use. In Cobb, 70 – 74 = D and below 70 = F. That would surely change the failure rates.

• Link
• Report this comment

I think the biggest problem with the State system is that it implements these new standards in the middle of a child’s education. You can’t start a child on one educational track and then decide 3/4 of the way in to switch gears. There is no doubt that the education system in Georgia is lacking, but if they want to make these massive changes they should start at the Kindergarten level. You know, the same way most colleges give you a course guide for your program of study when you enter and that is the guide you use until you graduate. At least that’s how it was done when I was in college, things may have changed in the last 17 years…

• Link
• Report this comment

I have taught Accel. Math 1 for 2 years now in Cobb County. As @Christopher mentioned earlier, if we are to make a curriculum more rigorous, there will have to be an initial drop in achievement. I have been witness to a significant increase in ability level from the AC Math 1 students from last year to this year. We anticipated this increase and expect it to continue more as the curriculum continues to “sink in”.

High school teachers in Cobb have had significant opportunities for training over the past 3 years which might be why we seem to be (at least currently) out performing the other metro systems. Credit Dr. Pratt, the math teachers and the other Cobb math curriculum supervisors with that.

Lastly, I’ll comment on the assertions that the new curriculum is too abstract. I absolutely disagree with this as the curriculum is set up to be taught around real-life situations. As teachers, we have the option to teach the course as the state suggests (with real life scenarios and word problems) or keep it abstract (as we taught the old curriculum). Is it more difficult to teach with a problem-solving, real-world approach? Sure, no one likes word problems because we have to actually use our brains to solve them; that applies to students and teachers. If we persist though, we’ll find that the kids really will come out better in the end for it.

Write an article again next year showing the difference that a year makes.

• Link
• Report this comment

Been reading alot on this blog about the new GA math curriculum. The “new high school Math” does not cover the basics at all; it brings in obscure math items that the student will never use again; incenter, orthocenter, mean absolute deviation. HS math must reinforce all the basics and introduce some higher math concepts and all the while the student should be prefecting the mechanics of working out math expression and equations. Algebra I-III broken down is about the two dimensional plane. Pre-Cal/ Cal the three dimensional plane.

Some students excel at math some don’t but the one size fits all that Math I-IV program entails hurts all students. Critical think skills come with age, experience, knowledge, and rational thought. Multiple tracks to graduation should be enacted for students that wish to pursue career ready alternatives.

Even the new national standards have career and college ready tracks. Algebra I is listed in those standards.

So many items to cover ; what are the candidates for state super saying and what will they promote on DAY 1?

• Link
• Report this comment

what i have found is not more rigor; just very obscure math items. Orthocenter, incenter, mean absolute deviation, etc…

• Link
• Report this comment

@Dunwoody Mom,

Re “In order to determine if this new approach to Math is working, don’t we need to wait and see what the SAT scores are for the class of 2012?”

The world has changed. A new TV show now gets a few weeks at most, rather than a whole season or more, to build an audience. I fear this is true for math curricula too. There’s scant tolerance for any bumps and difficulties during introduction. If all students aren’t immediately doing better across the board, let’s declare it a failure and throw it out NOW, seems to be the prevailing view.

• Link
• Report this comment

Good point, Another Cobb Math parent. There are a lot of contraditions in this whole episode.

We want to hold students to a higher standards, but we also expect them to do well. Some say the new math programs are not complex enough and others complain it is too demanding. Some say all teachers are complaining, but we see that’s not the case. Some say all students dislike the new math, but we see that’s not true, either.

About the only rational discussin is whether or not we should have only one track or a multi-track system.

• Link
• Report this comment

Booklover says that “some students are not ready to ’solve for x’ in the 9th grade. Well, maybe so, but that’s why they should probably get an F. 40, 50, 60 years ago solving for x or dividing by x was STANDARD in all 9t grade algebra 1 classes. It was standard. And one of the things that infuriates me the most is this use of the graphing calculator. I have tutored students at the junior-high, high-school, and college level in math, and I have been a college-physics instructor. Many of the students today don’t even have or use text books, which is preposterous, but the worst thing is that they are finding roots of equations, doing statistical calculations, solving trigonometric equations, doing analytic geometry, etc., by plugging into a (difficult to use) super-complicated calculator. They are never even presented with the analytical concepts underlying what the calculator is calculating for them — much less mastering the concepts. They’re never even shown the concepts in detail, or the derivations. There is no way that a product of this idiot “educational” method could ever step into a “real” math class at a good college — a class such as linear algebra or abstract algebra or differential and integral calculus or differential equations, and make a good grade, if even a passing grade. They simply are not learning how to do analytical reasoning. They’re learning how to use a great big semi-inscrutable (i.e., running mediocre software) calculator, and that’s all. It is not the students’ fault. It is the fault of this mentality that has developed among “educators” that the old-fashioned way of mastering the analytics and “doing it by hand” is now somehow — what? — politically incorrect?? I have a master’s degree in physics and B.S. degrees in physics and mathematics, and I have seen 8th-grade math books with content that I had to work really hard to figure out. It’s amazing, really. It’s total gibberish. The book spends 10 pages of useless blather trying to tiptoe around the edge of a concept, presumably holding the student’s hand, instead of just coming out and stating the point and deriving the formula. (BTW, they don’t require students to derive formulae any more. Do you remember how until the 1980s or so 10th-grade high-school geometry books required students to do abstract proofs based on Euclid’s axioms? I do.)

I know I’m rambling, but all of these things are related. It’s nothing less than the abject failure of our educational system. I feel very, very bad for these students. And it seems to me that most teachers just don’t get it. They don’t have the historical perspective and the intuition and clarity of vision to see that the system is failing the students.

• Link
• Report this comment

Come on guys…. I have been a teacher for 17 years. This math is killing them. How can you support students trying to do advanced math to fast. They learn enough to pass a test, then the next course, they fail because they have not mastered the first course. Georgia needs to take a step back and teach good ole basic math. Not all students learn the same way and it takes some longer than others.

• Link
• Report this comment

Come on folks, there has not been any “new” math since Newton developed calculus to explain his lwas of motion. It’s all in the packaging. Here’s an idea; how do they teach math in India, China and other countries that get it??

• Link
• Report this comment

I am sure some admin will blame any failing on the math EOTC on teachers. Totally forgetting about the level the student was at when they got to Math I or II. HS teachers saddled with students that have not passed the 8th grade CRCT but are expected over the course of a school year to work miracles in an experimental math curriculum. Throw on top of that ESL teachers who have to overcome language, student lack of prior knowledge, and the “word intense” new math; all some admin will do is throttle their ESL departments on why their teachers could not do any better.

• Link
• Report this comment

@DD

someone is not reading correctly….. never said NEW said OBSCURE if you need me to define the word I can do that for you…..

• Link
• Report this comment

TAZ raises an important issue when evaluating Georgia’s new math program. Which is more relevant to the curriculum in the classroom-

The math content in the GPS? or

The math problems in the Instructional Frameworks?

Does this vary between schools and districts in this state?

Are the CRCTs and EOCTs based on the math content in the Standards or the learning tasks in the Frameworks?

It appears that this ambiguity, planned or not, has created a great deal of uncertainty in Georgia classrooms as to precisely what kids are to learn in a given grade and what and how teachers are to teach.

• Link
• Report this comment

This Kathy Cox Math is Failure! Stop blaming the kids. Stop blaming Jessica, we personally know her and the other kids at Campbell Highschool. The First thing that needs to be asked is why are the states that perform in the top 10 on the SAT not using this Math, or have already rejected it aka NY state over 10 years ago. Second, why are the top Prep Schools in the Area, Westminster and Marist teaching the Standard Math track Algebra, Geogmetry, Trig and Calucus. Where do the graduates of these schools go on to.

I have a Masters degree from a top ranked Engineering Program out of State, I was recruited as a best and brightest by one of Atlanta’s top firms out of Graduate School. I can not help my child with this curriculum. If I can not help my child with the curriculum, then what happens to the students who parents haven’t graduated from high school, don’t speak English as a first Language?

Wake up and Look at the NY TIMES Series “THE CHOICE” in order to get into any top 25 Schools these days students need to graduate with straight A’s. So why is Georgia sacrificing our high school students as experiments on a Math program that has already failed and been thrownout in other states.

Now with the teacher cut backs, Schools like Campbell High School in Cobb County have fired 10 Math teachers, including some of the best ones that dared critize this screwed up mess.

I am a Liberal who says, just give me a voucher so we can take the layed off great teachers and start our own private schools and teach a proper curriculum. That way, we don’t have to have the ESOL, The Special ED buses with one kid on them. The thugs and their parents who can afford hair weaves, fake nails but apply for free and reduced lunches.

• Link
• Report this comment

@cobb parent

I have to say you understand it very well

• Link
• Report this comment

Maureen,

Why are you not pointing out that KATHY COX played with the cut rate to inflate the pass rate in math and science?

BTW the cut rate is the number of rate answers need to pass. She lowered the standard by about 30% and if you use the old standard 90% of kids failed.

One more thing Kathy Cox lowered the math standards for gifted students and raised them to high for non-math oriented students.

• Link
• Report this comment

I love mystery poster’s washing machine comparison. It’s perfect. Let’s get those high school math students computing standard deviations by hand! It was good enough for us parents. While we’re at it, what’s with those newfangled electric lights in the classrooms?

More seriously, I’ve always been anti-calculator myself (and I remain anti-calculator for elementary and middle school levels), but I’ve been impressed by the use of the graphing calculator in high school. When I went to high school our textbooks only had artificially easy problems that could be worked by hand, with the help of tables and slide rules. We couldn’t tackle realistic problems because we didn’t have the computational resources. That’s all changed, and it’s a change for the better, just like the washing machine is a change for the better over beating the clothes on rocks in the stream.

• Link
• Report this comment

Carlo31 ,

I wrote this years ago!

Georgia’s State Superintendent of Schools, Kathy Cox, has imposed a dramatically different high school math curriculum without properly reviewing it with teachers and parents. She is replacing the traditional structure (Algebra I & II, Geometry, Trigonometry, and Calculus) with vaguely-titled Math 1, Math 2, and Math 3.

There are currently four math tracks available to high school students. They vary in difficulty to accommodate a broad range of math abilities. Under Cox’s proposed change, freshmen, sophomores, and juniors will now only have two tracks (Math 1 and Advanced Math 1, Math 2 and Advanced Math 2…). Cox’s new mandate may be well intended-but the devil’s in the details.

Lobbyist-Driven Education Policies

Politicians like Kathy Cox have been promoting programs like this to help fund their political campaigns instead of being straight with parents. David Chastain, Director of Georgia Libertarian Party, claims Kathy is bought and sold by the educational lobbyists who represent the companies that provide the consulting, textbooks, and testing materials needed to implement the new program.

Kids would be better served if we had far fewer heavy-handed state and federal mandates (which they aren’t responsible for implementing or funding), and instead gave more money directly to the local school district and let local voters hold them accountable. In fact, if we eliminated these kinds of pork-filled bureaucratic misadventures we could raise the proportion of education funding that goes to classrooms (versus administration) to 65%. Please click here for more information.

Problem #1: Cox punishes gifted and advanced kids

As part of her new math program, Cox wants to stop giving gifted and advanced middle school math students the chance to earn high school credit in math (algebra). Currently, these advanced junior high courses (that Cox wants to eliminate) make Georgia students eligible for college math courses in their junior year, which helps them get placed in the top colleges.

The Atlanta Journal Constitution reports that Cherokee County School Superintendent, Dr. Petruzielo, said this aspect of Cox’s new math program doesn’t make sense. “One of the things Cherokee County is proud of is the number of kids in middle school who take algebra. Next fall we will have ninth-graders in high school taking algebra for credit. Why not have seventh- and eighth-graders take algebra? And if they can pass the end of course test, why in the world would they not get credit?” In fact, 95% of Cherokee County’s junior high Algebra 1 students pass the Cox’s own, state-required, EOCT test.

Problem #2: Students will suffer under unrealistic goals

Cox spokesperson and Georgia’s math program manager Claire Pierce told me that a goal of the new math program is to have 85% of Georgia’s students graduate having completed the equivalent of Algebra II. I believe this goal makes the same mistake as President Bush’s unpopular No Child Left Behind (NCLB) program: not all high school students should prepare for college. As reported by the AJC, it is wildly unrealistic to expect that they should, and it damages the self-esteem of kids that would be better served by a vocational program.

It’s more likely that 85% is the proportion of students she wants to buy new textbooks for, as a favor to her education-industry campaign donors.

Problem #3: Unrealistic goals for the teachers

I support high (yet realistic) expectations. But Kathy Cox’s unrealistic plan to graduate 85% of our high school students with the equivalent of Algebra II will destroy the morale of math teachers. Georgia’s high school classrooms face an explosion of immigrants with very poor English skills, pregnant teens, drug users, and kids with parents who don’t support academics.

Finally, Cox needs to double check her math-if currently 44% of Georgia’s high school students drop out and only 29% (nationally) graduate with math proficiency (which doesn’t include Algebra II), how can she possibly meet her 85% goal? The only way is to hide watered-down standards behind the vaguely titled Math 1, 2, and 3.

Problem #4: A rushed and careless policy

Cherokee County’s Mark Smith says Cox’s new math program hasn’t been reviewed with any colleges except those within Georgia’s state system. Meaning no one knows if or how colleges from other states will accept it. “This is a sea change in the way registrars look at stuff,” Petruzielo said. “I’m not comfortable [with the new courses]. We wouldn’t want our kids to be at a disadvantage.”

The state has also failed address how to handle students transferring into Georgia public high schools. Since the new curriculum is mandatory, advanced students transferring into our systems could be forced to sit through math classes they have already mastered. The same holds true for middle school students who have taken advanced math courses.

• Link
• Report this comment

mystery poster, I like your analogy, but I think a washing machine is a bit too strong.

I prefer to use a food processor. There is absolutely no need to slave over slicing and dicing when all you have to do is throw some food in chute and ~viola~ you have what you need all julienned, quartered, or whatever. However, there are times when a food processor is too much for your needs. If you simply want to add a carrot to your salad, you can get out your vegetable peeler or paring knife.

Kids these days don’t know how to use the paring knife for the simple stuff (i.e. multiplication). Rather, they have to use the food processor.

• Link
• Report this comment

Dunwoody mom: Most colleges will accept you without those courses but you have to take them in college right away. At least in the two year colleges that is true.

• Link
• Report this comment

I was extremely disappointed in Ms. Dodd’s math article. She had an opportunity to investigate into the math curriculum, but failed to do so. Consider the following:
1. She failed to explain that math and science are closely linked in high school. If you want advance science, then you must take advance math. Not explaining that little ditty has caught many students unaware. Forget Harvard. They may have issues getting into UGA.
2. Although Ms. Dodd touched on the quick pace of the math (that it is much too fast and jumps topics, not allowing students the opportunity to master the subject), she didn’t investigate why Cobb (and other counties) are forcing kinds to use an elective for Math support, thereby killing other programs that colleges like to see on student’s transcripts (i.e., foreign language, band, etc.). In fact, Georgia Tech REQUIRES 2 years of a foreign language for admission. Nicht sprechen sie Deutsch? Don’t bother to apply.
3. Ms. Dodd also stated, “The Cobb County School District has, perhaps, done the best in metro Atlanta under the accelerated curriculum, scoring the highest rate of A’s in Math I.” However, did she pick up on the fact that not one Cobb School was listed under the 10 metro Atlanta schools with highest percentage of A’s in Accelerated Math I? Nope, she missed that obvious disconnect.
4. Did Ms. Dodd explain how grades were calculated? Were students even required to take the EOCT? If so, what was the cut rate? Or, was the EOCT simply thrown out due to the abysmal scores. We know several schools that have taken the circular-file route… and yes, I am in Cobb County.
5. If this revised curriculum is so stellar, why are the PSAT scores a secret? Ms. Dodd should file a FOIA request for the current 10th grade PSATs and see how they did in math? They have been using this new math since 6th grade, so if this math is better preparing the students, we should see an increase in the scores, right?
6. Did Ms. Dodd even explore which other states have been down this road before and ditched this integrated, math smoothie?
7. Did Ms. Dodd ask why 9 out of the top 10 U.S. HS still use traditional math?
I think she has more investigative work to do.

• Link
• Report this comment

@DD

New-appearing for the first time.

Obscure- of little or no prominence, note, fame, or distinction

Not sure what set you off on your attacks or attempts to insult other bloggers. Perhaps just trolling; whatever the reason, the facts still remain that the “new” Math is not benefitting (to be helpful or useful to) students in GA.

Great to know you are so self righteous that you could not admit your error. I am sure in a battle of wits you always walk away knowing you are the victor.

• Link
• Report this comment

Yeah, what John Konop said…great post, or repost.

One point that’s often overlooked…there is a significant number of HS freshman who have never deservedly passed math in middle school, but were simply promoted for reasons having nothing to do with actually learning mathematical concepts. And by the time these students hit the 9th grade, the free ride is over, and there is little anyone can do about it. They’ve made their bed, and they’re dropouts just waiting to happen. Back in the day they might have been able to pursue a vocational degree, but…

…unfortunately, the politically correct crowd, infected with a warm and fuzzy NCLB mentality, has put forth the completely irrational notion that EVERY student should go to college. It’s insane to force every high school student to take four years of math. It’ll be interesting to watch the HS dropout rate over the next few years.

But the good news, for all those fretting over the curriculum, is that this “new” math will be obsolete in a few years. The only constant in education is that there is ALWAYS some new, improved, tested, rigorous, inquiry based, differentiated, researched based, blah-blah-blah…curriculum right around the corner. And there’s always someone to sell it. And there’s always tax dollars to pay for it.

I bet Kathy Cox is glad to be leaving the state.

• Link
• Report this comment

Maureen-

I remember the story on the 10th grade PSAT as other posters and I asked you to look into how the 10th graders at the AP merit high schools did as compared to previous years.

We had been told the scores across the state for 10th graders were about the same. Most of us know parents in the high achieving well-known metro schools and were consistently being told the scores for the 10th graders from families with a solid record of high achievement were down and that those schools especially were seeing declines.

AP merit high schools would thus serve as a proxy for the effect of this math curriculum so far on the highest achieving students.

We never heard anything further from you and it’s clearly not a part of this AJC story.

A group of Cobb parents made a comparable request of the Georgia DOE. Again silence.

This silence makes it hard to believe the anecdotal accounts are false. The math GPS has a particularly harmful effect on the higher achieving math students.

What a tragic way to close the achievement gap.

• Link
• Report this comment

“By prolonging the exposure of all students to complex math, the state expected to help increase Georgia’s average SAT score, which ranks near the bottom among states.”

It takes more than “exposure” to complex math to increase the number of students we have mastering higher level math skills. Unlike all other subjects (except science – in particular chemistry and physics), math is a vertical rather than a horizontal subject. If you do not lay the foundation and build, you will never master the more complex content.

For example, if you do not understand addition, you will never understand multiplication which is nothing but repeated addition. If you do not understand subtraction, you will never understand division which is repeated subtraction. If you cannot add single digit numbers, no one can teach you how to add double and triple digit numbers. Math is like a house. You cannot build the walls without a foundation to attach the walls to and you cannot put a roof on a house with no walls.

English, Reading, History, Political Science, etc., and to a much lesser extent some Science content are what I would term horizontal. You can understand much of the content simply by being a good reader. Understanding math is much more dependent on direct instruction and less dependent on independent reading skills.

A wonderful book that has a chapter dealing with Asian children’s math fluency is Malcom Gladwell’s book Outliers. Chapter 8 entitled “Rice Paddies and Math Tests” has some very provocative ideas. Here is a link to an excerpt to this chapter:
http://www.gladwell.com/outliers/outliers_excerpt3.html

Fascinating reading for teachers or laypeople who are interested in how children acquire math skills.

• Link
• Report this comment

I have been researching our “new math” in Georgia in which we have an integrated approach (Math I, Math II, Math III, and Math IV in high school and for starting for some in middle school) versus a traditional single study approach (Algebra I, Algebra II, etc.). In our math curriculum, all of the math subjects are intertwined in the same courses, rather than seperated into their own course as they have been for years.

The Race to the Top Application states that Georgia is the only state in the country in which an integrated math curriculum is required for all public school students whereas a few other states have an integrated approach as an option. The overwhelming majority of states still use a traditional approach to middle and high school mathematics.

In my research, I found that the National Mathematics Advisory Panel was established a few years ago to review the research on mathematics education to determine what the research stated could improve math achievement. This report was published in 2008. This document is a well-respected review of the research and was published under the United States Department of Education. Well it seems that the NAMP stated on p. 22 that

“A search of the literature did not produce studies that clearly examined whether an integrated approach or a single-subject sequence is more effective for algebra and more advanced mathematics course work. The Panel finds no basis in research for preferring one or the other. An analysis of high school mathematics standards, and one state’s standards in particular, suggests that high school students enrolled in mathematics courses using an integrated approach to mathematics may find it more difficult to take advanced mathematics course work (e.g., calculus or precalculus) in their senior year than high school students who are able to enroll in an Algebra II course in their sophomore or junior year.”

This begs many questions. Why would the Georgia DOE change the curriculum from a traditionl single-subject approach to an integrated approach if there is no research to support that it is better? If we are trying to increase student achievement, shouldn’t we have invested in those instructional practices that are supported by research? Over the last few years, millions and millions of dollars have been spent on implementing the integrated curriculum if you consider all of the person-hours devoted to training, re-scheduling the building, re-establishing graduation requirements regarding this new math, etc. Was this one big experiment that had no basis in research? Have we wasted our time and resources on an unproven approach when we could have been focusing on instructional components that are known to increase math achievement?

The questions continue. This year’s 10th graders embarked on the new math curriculum in their 6th grade year. Every year since then, they have been the guinea pigs. Their teachers during each year have been implementing a new math curriculum for the first time. Have we implemented one big experiment or gamble on this generation of students?

The Georgia DOE might state that they followed the lead of other countries in implementing an integrated approach. The National Mathematics Advisory Panel addresses this by saying, “The curricula of most high-achieving nations in the TIMSS study do not follow the single-subject sequence of Algebra I, Geometry, and Algebra II, but they also differ from the approach used in most U.S. integrated curricula. Instead, Algebra, Geometry, and Trigonometry are divided into blocks. The teaching of

each block typically extends over several months and aims for mathematical closure.”

Did we try to imitate other nations and unfortunately develop something that falls far short and that is not supported by research?

The Georgia DOE has been somewhat elusive in their reporting of results of their new math curriculum. When they brag on improvements in 8th grade math on the NAEP, for example, they lump in the years that included the old math curriculum with the new math curriculum. The gains are even modest when that is done. What about the results of any end-of-course-tests? Have those been published and analyzed?

Have we fallen for one big experiment and wasted huge amounts of tax dollars and more importantly wasted our students time in the efforts of trying something new?

• Link
• Report this comment

DD-

I was part of a panel of parents asked to review some of the proposed textbooks for Math 1 several years ago. The textbook saleswoman kept insisting that “as you all know, math is all about the vocabulary”.

I take it you would agree with her.

• Link
• Report this comment

Are you kidding me? This new curriculum is a joke. They only cover three or four topics for the entire year. There are few applications. The problem is the fact that these topics are not connected. They go from basic statistics to congruent triangles to quadratics. The poor excuses for textbooks have minimum practice problems and even fewer applications. Give me a break! It’s a terrible curriculum. Go back to teaching Algebra I, Algebra II, Geometry, Trigonometry, and Calculus. If the teachers would actually teach the material, grade the homework for accuracy, and give assignments and tests that actually have students apply the concepts, student achievement would sky rocket! Trust me. Been there, done that! This curriculum is embarrassing, and the ones suffering are the students. I can’t wait to read how many will be taking remedial classes in college!

• Link
• Report this comment

Dekalbite…thanks for the link…fascinating stuff. I’ll be checking out the book. I’ve always wondered why Asians seemed to excel at mathematics…I just attributed it to their high regard for the value of education. And it’s provocative in that it suggests that one race might be superior to another at certain tasks, which will get you a charge of racism from many. But the fact is its not about race at all…it’s about the culture (specifically, the language), and how something as basic as language can impact the understanding of mathematics.

For those who don’t like to click links, here’s a short excerpt. Try the exercise provided and see how you do.
————————
From: Malcom Gladwell’s “Rice Paddies and Math Tests”

Take a look at the following list of numbers: 4,8,5,3,9,7,6. Read them out loud to yourself. Now look away, and spend twenty seconds memorizing that sequence before saying them out loud again.

If you speak English, you have about a 50 percent chance of remembering that sequence perfectly If you’re Chinese, though, you’re almost certain to get it right every time. Why is that? Because as human beings we store digits in a memory loop that runs for about two seconds. We most easily memorize whatever we can say or read within that two second span. And Chinese speakers get that list of numbers—4,8,5,3,9,7,6—right every time because—unlike English speakers—their language allows them to fit all those seven numbers into two seconds.

• Link
• Report this comment

Maureen,
I will email the article’s aithor about this, but re:
“The grades were retrieved from a data file provided by the state Department of Education. Where there wasn’t a letter grade, The Atlanta Journal-Constitution used the following traditional grading system to analyze the data: 90-100, A; 80-89, B; 70-79, C; 60-69, D; below 60, F.”

THIS IS NOT THE CURRENT GRADING SCALE USED IN COBB, where the grading scale is as follows:
90-100 A; 80-89 B; 74-79 C; 70-74 D; 69 and below F
Cobb reports grades numerically, so if the author counted all of the students from 60-69 as passing, the chart in this article is way off!!! I really thought the failure rates here looked low. Kids have in fact been failing left and right–more so, I believe than this article presents.
Can we get some clarification on this data?

• Link
• Report this comment

This new math course is a mess! MAth is foundational and these 1,2,3,4 Math courses throw that to the wind. In addition to that the book is useless. I have a large amount of math in my background and work in a technical field, but I cannot even use the book as a refresher to help my child. I have to pull out college text books or the internet to review concepts.

What is even worse is there is only one math path. My daughter who wants to major in journalism does not need calculus especally in the 10th grade. This math is a complete and utter failure drop it now before you mess up more children’s futures

• Link
• Report this comment

@mistake in the data:

I’m not a teacher but a sample of the websites of the first two North Fulton schools that popped into my head (Centennial and Northview) shows the following in the School Profile of both:

Grading Scale
A = 90–100
B = 80-89
C = 70-79
F = 69 or lower

The difference between this and the Cobb scale appears to be that Cobb breaks the 70-79 range into C and D, while Fulton doesn’t use D and instead calls any mark in the 70s a C. In both cases, 69 and below is an F.

• Link
• Report this comment

@Another Cobb Math parent, that is the same grade scale our county uses, and so far as I know the other coastal counties use the same scale as well.

It would be interesting to know what the cut scores for the math EOCTs are….

• Link
• Report this comment

Colleges have NEVER accepted HS credits for anything. Only exceptions are if students get 3 or better in AP courses. Colleges don’t care if students have taken trig or calculus in HS – unless they got a passing grade in AP Calculus test, they don’t get any credits. Moreover, moer colleges now require, or at least highly recommend, that students take the placement test to determine which math course students should start.

• Link
• Report this comment

All these students who do so well on the GHSGT and EOCT — they are curved and inflated. If you really want to know how your child did on an EOCT, ask for the raw score, which will give you the number correct and number of problems on the test. See what that grade comes up then! The GHSGT is a joke. A sixth grader can pass it. All we’ve done is lower the standards so that pompous parents can brag about how ’smart’ their little Johnny is.

• Link
• Report this comment

“And it’s provocative in that it suggests that one race might be superior to another at certain tasks, which will get you a charge of racism from many. But the fact is its not about race at all…it’s about the culture (specifically, the language), and how something as basic as language can impact the understanding of mathematics. ”

Yes. It’s all about culture and also about geography. The book is written by Malcom Gladwell. I’ve read his other books “Tipping Point” and “Blink”, both great books, but “Outliers” his best in my opinion. His premise is that no one makes it to the to of their field on their own. Much is owed to timing, luck and having someone to help them. This book has so much to say about our desire to think merit always wins out, and if we see someone successful, they must have done it on their own. In particular parents of gifted kids and parents with children in sports will also enjoy “Outliers”.

As the end of the book, Malcom Gladwell, a Canandian, talks about his Jamaican mother who is of mixed race – black and white and her marriage to a Jewish European. He credits her lucky break to be educated in England that laid the foundation for his I saw an interview with him on the Daily Show the other night. He is such a unique thinker.

• Link
• Report this comment

Maureen,

I want to thank you for all the work you put into these wonderful articles and blogs, and providing us a voice on here. I am thankful to have this forum to vent, learn from others (whether I agree or not) , and to communicate with the community.

Bloggers: Please continue to be blunt, always tell us what is on your mind and do not be afraid of political correctness. Not everyone will agree with each other and that is wonderful! I do not want to live in a world where we all agree on one thing. (but a balance would be nice)

Educators: Support each other. Some are tired and frustrated, and some are content and happy. If you see someone in your building having a bad day, take the time to talk to them and hugs (as corny as this sounds) can have a positive impact.
In my own little corner of the world, I am starting to see “survival of the fittest” and “every man for himself” especially in this dark economy. We are all fragile and need to have hope for the future. Everything will be ok and you are appreciated!

• Link
• Report this comment

Maureen,

Why has the AJC not reported about this?

Over the past few days, Georgia State School Superintendent Kathy Cox has spent considerable time on the airwaves touting the successes of Georgia high school juniors’ success on the science portion of the Georgia High School Graduation Test. “For the first time in history 90% of juniors passed the science portion of the GHSGT. That has been one of my goals since coming into office in 2003,” said Cox.

While these numbers may be reflective of numbers on this test, they are an inaccurate and inappropriate description of the reality. Give me a couple of minutes to explain to you what I see as a real problem with the current direction of education in Georgia. This direction is not coming from the local school districts; this direction is coming from the State Department of Education in Atlanta.

90% of juniors would not have passed the GHSGT in science had the State not lowered the cut score. The cut score is the number of questions that must be answered correctly in order to achieve a “passing” score on the test. These tests are not graded in the traditional manner of As and Bs and so forth.

In 2008, students had to answer 47 questions out of 70 (67%) correctly in order to pass the GHSGT science exam. In 2010, that number dropped to 34 correct responses out of 70 (48.5%). Well, that’s one way to raise pass rates, lower the standard for passing!
In fact, across the board in each content area, with the exception of social studies which was low to begin with, the Georgia Department of Education has lowered the standard to pass. See chart below:

Subject 2008 Cut Score 2010 Cut Score

English/Language Arts 34 correct responses out of 55 questions – 61.8%

31 correct responses out of 55 questions – 56.3%

Math 37 correct responses out of 65 questions — 57% 35 correct responses out of 65 questions – 53.8%

Science 47 correct responses out of 70 questions — 67% (GPS/QCC based)
34 correct responses out of 70 questions — 48.5%

Social Studies 39 correct responses out of 80 questions — 49% 40 correct responses out of 80 questions — 50%

• Link
• Report this comment

@Public School Parent

“I went to a college fair this spring and tried to ask every out-of-state recruiter, especially those with engineering schools, if they were familiar with Georgia’s new high school curriculum. Most said students would be fine so long as they completed Algebra II, Pre-Calculus and either Calculus or AP Calculus. When I said we don’t have most of those courses any more they looked at me like I had two heads.”

No wonder they thought you were confused. Of course we still have that content.

I’m going to be very interested and somewhat anxious to see how the class-of-2012 veterans of Accel Math III, my offspring included, make out next school year as juniors in AP Calculus. That will be one proof of the pudding.

• Link
• Report this comment

This is what CCSD is paying $90K for:

“Once it reached capacity, the facilities manager said no more people could be allowed in,” Jay Dillon told the AJC Friday night.

In light of Maureen’s recent comments, I can see how someone who says such things is worth more than a fully qualified genetics or robotics teacher: such insight, such power of language, such amazing ability to get right to the heart of the matter. Indeed, CCSD is lucky to have someone of such calibre: not.

Fulton county is equally blessed to spend big bucks on one of Dillon’s proteges to provide spin for the evil Cindy Loe. Their PR person was on the radio this morning explaining why there is no more music program in elementary schools. She’s such a gem and worth every penny of her inflated salary: not

Meanwhile, teachers are being let go. These are people who made a difference, unlike PR types who are essentially corporate spokespeople.

Sharon Anderson, Fulton schools’ department chair for orchestra, lost her job as a result of the cuts. She was among 50 instrumental music teachers who were laid off.

“I was forced into retirement,” Anderson said. She had been with Fulton Schools for 33 years. Earlier this week 270 fourth- and fifth-graders played a goodbye tribute concert for her and the other band and orchestra directors.

I’m sure you all agree that we need PR much more than we need teachers. Superintendents and school boards certainly do. A school system is NOT a business, so why don’t we stop acting like it is?

For all you slow ones out there, let me repeat: a school system is NOT a business and should have no need for PR.

• Link
• Report this comment

Northview ex teacher
I think you meant to post to another blog, but I’m interested in your quote from Jay Dillon…do you have a link to that article?

• Link
• Report this comment

Three points here. I teach science in DCSS and have some familiarity with the new math curriculum. First, many, many teachers do not understand the curriculum and don’t teach it wholeheartedly, but rather, with criticisms and caveats. Second, the math books make important errors which, unfortunately, some teachers just pass on because “that’s what the book says.” Third, ask your 9th grade student what he or she is studying in math: most will answer “I don’t know”, which is a sign to me that one of the most basic aspects of teaching, that of preparing students’ minds for what they will learn so they can put it into an intellectual context, is missing. Kids should know what they’re studying in math: it helps them organize their thinking.

• Link
• Report this comment

This is a fascinating discussion.

Some criticizes the new program has too much stuff, and others say they don’t contain enough. Some say they are too complex and other say they aren’t challenging enough.

Some argue that this approach isn’t “proven,” or even claims “disproven.” Yet what proof do we have that the traditional approach was working? Where does GA rank in the US? Where does US rank in the world in math? Why do we want to go back to the old system that brought us to where most people felt something has to change? If that’s not where we want to go, where exactly do people like john konop, attentive parent, etc. wants us to go? Just going back to Algebra I, Geometry, Algebra II once again and expect some miraculous improvement seems to be irrational – wasn’t it Einstein who said something about such an expectation?

• Link
• Report this comment

@so where to? AND, everybody quotes dubious data to support their point of view. All data is stated as fact. For all the 30 years I have taught math some group has said what we are doing is “too hard,” and some group has said we need more rigor. Every time we raise the rigor we hear that “not everyone will be able to get it.” For those that are against Math 1-4, you are correct there need to be some changes in breadth of content and speed of delivery. For those for Math 1-4, I can tell you that my students come to me knowing more math and leave knowing more math than any other students I have encountered in my 30 years of teaching.

I can assure EVERYONE that the Algebra 1-Geometry-Algebra 2 sequence did NOT always work, either.

• Link
• Report this comment

Many years ago, when common sense was the norm in our schools, they realized there is a natural progression to things. They also knew that you must build a good foundation and mastery of the basics is the foundation.

That is why FIRST grade was the beginning of school. That is why they arranged classes in a certain sequence. That is why forty something years later, I can still visualize multiplication tables.

THAT was the system used to produce the scientists and engineers who put a man on the moon while using slide rules and “supercomputers” that are the equivalent to today’s handheld calculators.

Today, political correctness permeates our society like the plague. Politicians push unfunded mandates upon the schools while the educrats play games with “researched based” programs that cost billion$ and are abject failures.

And our schools graduate illiterates and we haven’t set foot on the moon since 1972.

• Link
• Report this comment

When I read the changes made to Science GHSGT, I laughed. They’ve basically watered down this domain to a middle school level science class…..but the science scores should rise and the DOE can pat itself on the back for “raising the bar”

• Link
• Report this comment

@TAZ: You wrote:

“Let’s be realistic. Why should we figure out trig values or lgoarithm using tables any more? We take advantage of tools we have commonly available.”

Oh for heaven’s sake, guy. I’m not talking about logarithm and trigonometric TABLES. That would be like advocating the use of abaci or slide rules in the classroom. Come on, insert your head into reality and take a sniff. I’m talking about understanding the rigorous mathematics underlying trigonometry and the natural and common logarithms, not 1945 log and trig tables. Jeez, why am I having to explain this to you?

You wrote:
“If you find it [the graphing calculator] difficult to use, well, that’s probably your age, not the tool.”

Your presumptuousness is quite amusing. It’s pathetic, really. It so happens that I have 18 years of professional experience with state-of-the-art scientific and financial computing, including NASA remote sensing, DOD massively parallel supercomputers, and Wall Street numerical analysis and computer simulation for derivative products. I would but you dollars to donuts that I understand computers better than you do. Having said that, I repeat: These super-calculators confuse the students. The students need to actually UNDERSTAND the mathematics that the calculators are doing for them. They are not understanding it, because they are not being taught it. And I believe that the calculators are actually a hindrance.

You wrote:
“Students don’t derive formulas? Please go read the Grade 5 math standards – students are expected to derive area formulas.”

I have no earthly idea what you are talking about. They plug numbers into area formulas. Do they derive the formula for the area of the circle of the ellipse? No, of course not — of course, the fifth grade is too early for those derivations, but they NEVER see the derivations anywhere through the 12th grade. You are talking nonsense. Do you understand what “derivation” means?

You say,
“They are never even presented with the analytical concepts underlying what the calculator is calculating for them,” but please go read the standards for Math 1. If they are not dealing with the concepts, well, maybe that’s teachers’ problem.”

Yes, I indeed said that they are not learning the analytical concepts underlying what the calculator is blindly doing for them, and I will say it again, slightly reworded. They are not learning very many of the analytical concepts. I have seen these text books, and I know first-hand what I’m talking about. Apparently you don’t even understand what I’m talking about.

• Link
• Report this comment

@ worldrimroamer,

You say the textbooks and the curricula are a part of the problem, but you admit you haven’t even read the standards. So, how can you distinguish the problems with the standards from the problems with teaching? I know teachers here would hate it, but I am putting the blame on teachers. Clearly the DOE and local districts must share the blame for the lack of professional development opportunities.

• Link
• Report this comment

Yes that was a typo. I figured it was not worth a separate posting to correct. It should have said mid-1990’s.

The problem with links is that some of what I’m describing is getting purged off data bases within 24 hours of mentioning it on Get Schooled. Even though I keep hard copies and download it’s very tiring to see how desperately people are trying to sanitize the story behind the new math curriculum.

Maybe you work for the DOE as they tried to tell me a few months ago that they’d never heard of those frameworks either. That was really frustrating as 9 then current DOE employees worked on those frameworks and 2 former DOE employees came out of retirement. The then DOE Curriculum Coordinator was even the GIMS Co-Director. So much for the whole “we don’t know nothing” stance.

I’m going to assume you’re asking in good faith so here’s a link to the description in the Spring 1996 UGA Research News magazine.

http://researchmagazine.uga.edu/96ws/gims.html

Interested Readers- please save or print if this interests you. I am not exagerating the extent to which these data bases are being purged of everything contra to the official story.

There are continuous references to these frameworks through the adoption of the GPS and after indicating they remained in use especially on local school district data bases . Later the learning tasks and activities for the GPS get added to the DOE’s data base. Old timers in Georgia education have repeatedly confirmed, when asked, that the GPS math frameworks are just a repackaged, supplemented version of the QCC frameworks going back to GIMS.

To this day the frameworks remain such an essential part of the Georgia math curriculum story that the RTT letters of intent the participating districts had to sign stipulated that these districts had to agree to base their professional development on using the frameworks.

Not making sure the teachers knew and could teach the content but “using the frameworks”.

• Link
• Report this comment

maureen can we get the authors of the article to clarify their stats. Clearly the failure rate was under-reported given the error in the grading scale they used.

• Link
• Report this comment

@DD
Your aggrorance knows no bounds. Thrice you have erred. First your understanding of new and obscure where called into question. Since you can not seem to understand by point of obscure let me put it in words you may understand: Obscure – the normal person would not see these terms in any part of their everyday lives or in the business they conduct. Second, you could not admit to yourself you misspoke when I attempted to clarify new and obscure. Lastly, for whatever reason you decide to personally attack a person you know nothing about. You use the term “ignorant” to descibe my take on GA math. Perhaps I am very well versed in Mathematics, literature, music, and several other subjects that would lead me to determine that the curriculum for Math that GA is using at this particular time is not a benefit to students.

Maybe just maybe you are not right on this one. Where I am no Cyrano; it seems you would cut off your nose to spite your face. Have no fear though my panache is very mush intact.

: )

• Link
• Report this comment

@wishing-I don’t know where you got your information, but Accelerated Math 2 is WAAAAAAY beyond Algebra 1 and Geometry!

• Link
• Report this comment

This new curriculum is a disaster. Not all students are alike, and not all students are going to college. It makes as much sense as making them all wear a size 9 shoe.

• Link
• Report this comment

Once upon a time, someone criticized the new GA math program because it contained “obscure” ideas like “incenter,” “orthocenter,” etc. Of course, s/he didn’t realize that those ideas aren’t really obscure in the world of mathematics. Now, s/he wants to claim that those are ideas that “the normal person would not see these terms in any part of their everyday lives or in the business they conduct.” That may be true, but that means s/he was criticizing the new program because it includes words that “the normal person would not see these terms in any part of their everyday lives or in the business they conduct.” I don’t know about her/him, but I have rarely, if ever, use “quadratic formula,” “cosine,” “polynomials,” etc. in my everyday life or in my business. In fact, if the practicality is the criterion, I don’t see much point in teaching math beyond 6th grade.

I just wonder if s/he knows what “incenter” and “orthocenter” are. Oh well…

• Link
• Report this comment

A lot of people say colleges are not for everyone. I wonder how many would agree that high schools aren’t for everyone, either. What is the level of mathematics that people believe *most* students can master.

• Link
• Report this comment

… not enough students were learning. That’s the reason we had the “new math” movement in the 60’s. Then, after the “back to the basic” movement, not enough students weren’t still learning. So, how often do we have to keep going back to the “traditional” approach which hasn’t proven to work for more students?

Once you learn something, there is no point in going back to “hands on.”

• Link
• Report this comment

Multiple tracks to graduation.

I would also recommend researching the new common core standards (CCSSI). If GA would adopt those that would be a great step toward helping students and aligning courses with colleges. In them it details career or college ready and on top of that it mentions that for students that excel in math and science: STEM (science, tech, engine, and math) advanced courses be offered to those that can handle it.

http://www.corestandards.org/Files/K12MathStandards.pdf

thrown in the link if it helps

• Link
• Report this comment

I’ve got some experience with this curriculum and I am looking forward to the opportunity to vote for a state school superintendent who will remove the current math currculum and one-size-fits-all graduation requirements. I have heard that Kathy Cox called this math curriculum her “baby” and it was here to stay. Well she isn’t here to stay so maybe we can rid ourselve of this cobbled up mess of a math curriculum a little sooner that we expected. I would love to see a math curriculum developed with the input of real math teachers. Get some input from those of us in the trenches as well as those who teach mathematics at the college level. The people at the state office will tell you there was input from math teachers around the state. At the first training of Math I a few years ago I was in a room of more than 40 teachers who seem to believe this new curriculum was a bad idea. I think the majority of this states high school math teachers feel this curriculum is already a failure. If our state school superintendent really believed in this curriculum she would want to stay and fight for it. I believe she knows it is a failure and now she is ready to get out of Dodge. Now let’s get someone in there that can fix all of her messes.

I hear the new “national standards” closely resemble Mrs. Cox’s “baby”. I’m not sure about that, but I believe we could have improved our standards while maintaining traditional math courses.

While I have serious issues with the current mathematics curriculum, I have even greater issues with the low expectations we have for our current high school students. We no longer hold students accountable for their behavior or actions. Some of the current practices I am aware of are: No grades below a 50 (even if students don’t do anything), students being allowed to retake tests over and over again, low cut scores for passing of end-of-course tests, and on and on.

• Link
• Report this comment

@wishing

I am hearing the same thing about passing students along. Teachers speak of meeting AYP and so the school will not be placed on “needs improvement” they move the student through.

• Link
• Report this comment

Jessica, I’ve always tried to view the world as “half full”…it’s not always (in fact, seldom is) easy. In the case of your fellow students’ performance on the math 2 curriculum, I suppose I would prefer to view that part of the world as 1/10 full rather than 9/10 empty.

The point I am trying to make, Jessica, is that the difficult things in life are more-than worthy of our best efforts. Please don’t allow the nine students out of ten, whose performance was not up to standard, to decide the level of difficulty in math 2. If one student in ten could pass the course, THEN SO CAN YOU…and so can the other students in that 90%. You all must try harder. I know it’s not easy…it certainly wasn’t easy when I wore your shoes and sat in your desk many years ago.

Jessica, the fact that you have chosen to share, with the reading public, your views means that you care. You can do it, Jessica.

• Link
• Report this comment

This is an interesting, and very relevant – I have a 10th grade son – discussion. Personally, talking with my son, I really don’t have any concern with his mathematical progress. He seemed to have learned just about all traditional Algebra II topics – he was in Accl Math II. He was doing geometric proofs last year. I think he has done much more on statistics than I ever did in my own HS – and I am really glad for that since statistics is probably the most “real-life” mathematics today’s students as a whole need.

I am somewhat confused about the exact nature of the issue. As I understand it, the Georgia Performance Standards simply list what students are to learn in respective courses. I understand that each course has a mixture of algebra, geometry and statistics, but I don’t necessarily see anything wrong with that idea. After all, mathematics through middle schools are organized that way. There are many other countries doing it that way with no negative effects on their students.

On the other hand, I hear a lot of issues about the way math is to be taught. What’s not clear is if that is also dictated in the standards. Some people seem to say it is not, while others imply it is. Either way, is the problem the way math is taught, or the way math courses are organized? Those seem to be different issues.

Then, there seems to be another issue about whether or not there should be multiple tracks for HS students. That’s a separate issue, isn’t it? Some of the “solutions” seem to be too simplistic – probably driven by the frustration those individuals felt about the program – whether as teachers or parents.

• Link
• Report this comment

@just a dad

Multiple tracks is tied directly to GA math. All students in the state of GA must take Math I-IV. It is a one size fits all type of program.
Please if I could recommend going to the common core site and look through all the math they think would be best for schools. In it you will see that the think tank that developed it thought about those students that just do not perform well in math and also those that excel at it. I feel comfortable in saying since your child was in Accl math 2 he would be a success no matter what class he is in and more than likely would need STEM classes.

Just because a student may not do well in a particular subject does not mean they will not succeed. Actually, the solution is simple; do we stick with the one size fits all and does not align with any other state or do we adopt a common sense approach (common core) that does align with other states and provide a pathway for each and every student to succeed.

• Link
• Report this comment

Reading the comments are very interesting. 1. The teachers are adequately trained. 2. The Class of 2012 should all be under the New Curriculum. 3. The teachers are to teach lessons on higher levels with the premise that the students were prepared for the courses in middle school. 4. Teachers were highly monitored to ensure they were teaching the course as they were trained. Math support courses were used to help the students that are behind in the regular course. 5. Accelerated courses are only given to a small number of students if any in most metro schools. (requires MANY teachers) 6. New Curriculum assumes the students can all read on level and can comprehend everything they read. (English teachers teach this everyday, math teachers dont) 7. 2008-2009 Scores were not released to the teachers to average into the final grade which is 15% of their final grade. (My system didnt get them. Check the state site for the information) The GPS is not better than the QCC. It is just another attempt by the state to have students taught at a higher level but feel that the teachers should have the option of teaching the course differently than the script we are given on the website. Students will have a better understanding of the standards if we are allowed that option.

• Link
• Report this comment

I agree with Teacher&mom @ 12:19.

• Link
• Report this comment

@just a dad-WOW, yours may be the best post of the numerous blogs on this topic. You have clearly defined where the lines in arguments get blurred due to the emotion displayed by many posters. I am teaching math, and my kids are learning math. Are there some things I would like to change? Sure, and please know that I have been working through proper channels to provide my input on each matter. As for the EOCT, the vast majority of kids in my classes scored within 5 points of their class grade. There were four that scored far less than their course grade, and their track record shows that these students have not done so well on any standardized test. They were very upset, and I told them to keep learning and not worry about what a single test says.

Also, I know that many people do not want to hear this, but a high failure rate on the EOCT may not indicate problems with the curriculum. We have many students who do not take any EOCT seriously. Kids are not stupid. 15% of the grade is not that much. In fact, unless the student scores significantly higher or lower than the course grade, the EOCT is not likely to change the final grade more than one point. Over 30 years of teaching, I have rarely seen a final exam of any type significantly change many students final grades. Anyone who thinks that all the kids are trying their best on EOCT tests is uninformed.

• Link
• Report this comment

Regardless of the merits of the state’s math plan, the implementation has been horrible. Kathy Cox should not have implemented this curriculum without adequate financial resources to make sure that teachers would have solid professional development.

Leaving it to the school systems –HUGE Mistake.

Veteran Teacher — I agree with you about the EOCT and student’s motivation.

Justadad — It sounds like your son would do well on either curriculum. While this mixed curriculum may have worked well in other countries (where they probably don’t educate all children), versions of it have failed in many other states.

• Link
• Report this comment

What kids (and parents) need to realize is that if they don’t buckle down and LEARN this stuff, when they get to college they will need to take remedial courses or suffer low grades in their majors because they don’t have the right foundation. How does paying for 6 years of college sound?

• Link
• Report this comment

@theedge, There may be all kinds of reasonable criticisms of the new math curriculum. However, the idea that admissions at Georgia Tech, an in-state public university, won’t be able to recognize the math courses on an in-state public high school transcript, is beyond ridiculous. This is just not a problem.

• Link
• Report this comment

It just seems some person’s that post are from the GA DOE and using talking points that are discussed at meetings?

• Link
• Report this comment

As I understand it, the state of NY used to (not that long ago) had their HS math courses organized in the manner similar to GA. Did their students have difficulty convincing colleges about the nature of their math courses?

Also, as I understand it, there are other places in the US, students are given options of taking either the traditional courses or the integrated courses. Do the students who take integrated courses have any difficulty with college adminissions?

Your argument would be much stronger if it wasn’t just a speculation.

• Link
• Report this comment

I pointed out that I heard a rumor that I have not yet been able to confirm. There was one post from somebody attending a college night and the addmissions representatives as they said “Looked at them like they had two heads” when the math ciriculum was described. From the results at my daughters school the new Math is a failure. Whether it is the course and materials the teachers or the students I am not sure. Probably a combination of the three, but an unnecessary experiment on the backs of the class of 2012. I will be looking for private schools this summer.

• Link
• Report this comment

I’m not so concerned about the kids staying in-state for college; those admissions offices know what’s up.

But not all students are going to stay in GA for college, nor should we expect them to. “Math I, II, III, IV” on a transcript still looks like a special education track to me (IIRC, this IS what they called the sped maths back in the midwest in the ’90s when I walked uphill both ways to school).

What about our students who go out of state or the region for college? Do you think the admissions offices at, say, UC-Berkeley or University of Wisconsin or, gosh, Harvard, are paying all that much attention to GA’s math curriculum? Are out-of-state admissions counselors really going to spend all that much time translating Acc Math II=Kinda Algebra II? Nope, they are just going to take the kid from Kansas with the “A” in Algebra II because they know what that means.

(An analogy here would be the GACE teacher exam…does anyone really believe it’s harder than the praxis? Riiiight. GA has its own teacher exams because, sadly, too many of our colleagues were failing the praxis. I took the GACE in English 6-12 and it was a JOKE that didn’t even align with the state curriculum. One question on Shakespeare. ONE! But five questions on Restoration Literature.)

Make no mistake, this WILL hurt our students’ chances of getting into elite universities outside of Georgia.

Some posters on here, and the state DOE, need to broaden their horizons and realize that some districts have high student mobility and not all of our students are going to just stay in GA forever!

• Link
• Report this comment

We moved from Georgia to Arlington, in Northern Virginia last year and daughter completed 8th grade accelerated math this year in 6th grade. She’ll finish Algebra 1 and Geometry in Middle School. 52% of kids at least complete Algebra 1 in middle school. Teaching the “old standards” seems to work just fine in this area, even with one of the nation’s most diverse student populations – students come from 127 countries and speak 105 different languages. The district is 48% white, 26% hispanic, 13% African American, and 11% Asian/Pacific Islander, with 32% on subsidized meal programs. Programs for limited English students have been in place for years, and there is never a let up in commitment to these students. Languages taught from 7th grade on include French, Spanish, Latin, German, Arabic, and Chinese.

Students in our district are eligible to test for the Thomas Jefferson School of Science and Technology – the top public HS in America according to USNews and World Report. This top school recommends in preparing for the entrance test, “write every day on any and all topics and learn to do math without a calculator.” What is the difference between Northern Virginia and Atlanta metro area? Parental and institutional commitment to get every child to perform his or her best, year after year. This district’s improvement plans map the progress made over the years from a mediocre district to an outstanding one. Tinkering with curriculum is not the answer, Georgia.

• Link
• Report this comment

The vast majority of high school seniors do not take AP Calculus.

At my school of approx. 250 graduating seniors, we typically have two AP Calculus sections of maybe 23 students, several of whom are ill-prepared and only put in the class so that it can run. So maybe 20% of the class is taking AP Calc. (Some more academically rigorous metro schools may have higher percentages, but I’ve never seen a school, aside from a math magnet, have even close to 50% in AP Calc) All the other students, under the revised/new/however-you-want-to-distinguish-it curriculum*, will be in Math IV.

* (If you’re blathering on about semantics, you’re missing the point. I don’t think any of us here think the “new” GA math is the same as the “new math” of the 60s. Geez.)

We certainly won’t have *more* students taking AP Calc with the current Math I and II grades students are earning!

So what does Math IV mean to an admissions counselor at an out-of-state school? Nobody seems to know. I will contact a friend who is an asst provost at a university in California (and he used to be an admissions counselor at Tulane) and see if he can give me some info.

If he even knows how to categorize this curriculum as anything other than “counterproductive.”

• Link
• Report this comment

Veteran teacher, 2: I’m a 9th grader. We certainly do care about the EOCTs! I go to a very rigorous public high school, with many students who take IB and AP courses, and I think that most of us try our best on them. 15% of your grade can have a huge effect if you’ve got a borderline grade, especially one that could make the difference between passing or failing, becoming an honor graduate or not, or even being able to get HOPE or not! However, you’re partially right about some EOCTs. Most of us have extremely high Language Arts grades, so even if we did terrible on our EOCT’s it wouldn’t affect us at all. We didn’t care, we didn’t bother studying, and we all did great anyway – no one in my gifted class got less than a 93% on it. So for some classes they don’t matter, but for math, no matter what level we take, we were worried about the EOTCs. And they were tough. Hopefully the state will throw out some of the impossible questions and curve the grades, because that’s what makes them feel all special, right? Does anyone else get the feeling that Cox made the CRCT’s and EOTC’s easier this year so she could go out with a bang and make up for the cheating scandal last year? I do.

• Link
• Report this comment

I am curious how college admission offices really make their decisions. Do they put more emphasis on some information than others? For example, would there be a magic score on the SAT that above it will be (more or less) automatically admitted? Also, would there be a line below which students will not be considered? I imagine a large school which gets thousands of applications would probably have to do something like that to cut the application pool to a manageable size by doing something like that. What would they look next? GPA? Recommendations? Students’ own writing? For which students would they really look that carefully about their HS transcripts? Would they care what courses they took if students have 1500 on SAT (on English and Math only)? I doubt it. If you are in the range of getting just about 500 on SAT math, you probably don’t belong in any “honors” math course, and you barely passed Algebra II.

I think the math departments may be more concerned about what math courses you had in HS simply for the purpose of placing students in the correct course, but more and more of them are using a placement test and don’t care what HS courses you took.

I just don’t see college admissions being such a big deal in the current discussion on the state’s math program.

• Link
• Report this comment

@J-I had many students who took the EOCT seriously, also. I did not mean to imply that every student blew off every EOCT. However, many students do spend less that 10 minutes on the test, obviously Christmas Treeing the responses. Sadly, I have many collegues throughout the state who report the same thing.

I salute you for caring about the quality of your work, and I assure you that students like you are ALWAYS welcome in my class!

• Link
• Report this comment

@AMAZED, it’s BC and I’m really looking forward to finding out as well!

As I wrote before, I have mixed feelings about the new curriculum, since the implementation has been rough on the class of 2012. On the other hand, I’m in sympathy with the aims of the new curriculum. I just don’t know enough to know to what extent those aims are being achieved.

I’m also amazed that some people think that it’s unacceptable to change the curriculum — regardless of any pedagogical considerations — because they think college admissions officers will be confused by the names of the courses. This kind of concern is just bizarre to me. Because I’m trying to be objective (in my own mind, anyway) rather than just going “Baa, new math bad!!” it seems that some posters think I’m a GADOE plant!

• Link
• Report this comment

Sorry, I meant “teacher recommendations” not evaluations!

• Link
• Report this comment

I agree with Another Cobb Math Parent. The whole idea of college admission as a reason for criticizing the new curriculum is rather lame.

None of the current 10th graders had “traditional” math courses since Grade 6. So, none of them were A/B students in the traditional math courses. Unfortunately, they had to take the series of “first year” experiences, in part because teachers weren’t prepared to teach the new program. Certainly that wasn’t necessarily students’ fault, and to some degree, it wasn’t teachers’ either – they are just too busy to be teaching something while preparing for something else in the next school year.

Even if students are thinking about not majoring in math/sci fields, they should take 4 years of mathematics as virtually all colleges require a math course as a part of general education. The more math courses you have, the better off you will be. If students hate math, I feel sorry fo them for not having better math teachers.

• Link
• Report this comment

Well said. I agree with all you have said. I also teach the accelerated courses and there are too many standards and not enough time. We were fed a line of bull by the state and now they don’t have the brain power to fix it. I’m hoping new state leadership will bring about some change. Somebody sent KC to DC to work in a THINK TANK! This curriculum was her baby and I wish it would go away with her.

• Link
• Report this comment

My daughter is finishing up her 10th grade year. She has always been a smart student and made very good grades up until her eighth grade year. She had pre algebra. And after getting her CRCT scores that year and finding out she failed by only a couple of questions, I was very shocked. So I asked her why this happened and she said that what she was taught was not even on the test. And so everyone that was in her class ended up failing it too. And come to find out that more than half of her eighth grade class failed. So they all had to go to summer school and re take the test. Later on in the summer we got her test results back and she had passed it and moved on to 9th grade. This was when the math got changed so the new math was all layed on her class. In her math I class she never failed a test or quiz. And at the end of the year she ended up with a 94% in there. Now this year was a very difficult year. Her math II teacher was new. And as the year started I noticed her grades dropping and asked why. She Said that her class was very loud and a big distraction and so it was hard for her to concentrate. And she also said that when the class talks her teacher will just go to his desk and sit down and not teach at all for the rest of the class period. She is a very good note taker, and whenever it came down to a test day she would be good about studying. So whenever she got a test she said that none of the stuff that he taught on the notes were on the test and nothing made sense. Then later I finally figured out why her grades were slipping more and more. Every test she took, she failed. And she told me that the whole class did too. Earlier this week she found out her EOCT score and cried when she got home. Before the eoct, she studied and studied her butt off trying to get it all down. And ended up failing. She said that everyone in her class made in the 60’s. Even the smartest people. She also said only two passed with 75’s and they admitted to guessing on absolutly everything. I don’t about what others think, but what I think, is that this problem has to deal with the teacher, and this curriculum. If she fails her final then she fails the class and will have to be in math II again and she will also have to take math III along with her other 3 advanced classes. More than half of the sophomores failed at her school. And I don’t think that it’s right to keep them back in the same math. Things need to be changed. So that these students, including my daughter can be able to be succesful and go to college and earn the career they choose.

(also, I got my nephew that’s going to be in his third year of college to help her with some things in math recently, and he had no clue what to do)

• Link
• Report this comment

I am a concerned parent as well’ I assume this applied to the kids in middle school. My son Derrick always maintained honor roll throughout his entire schools years and for the first time last year in the 7th grade he couldn’t get pass a C average and he’s usually a math wise. The math assignments was so hard that no one in the entire house could help him and a few of us had college degrees, not to mention my oldest son just graduated from High School last year and he wasn’t even able to help him. They should never give a kid that young something so hard that they can’t be helped at home. The teachers probably didn’t know it themselves there for they can’t teach it, which is probably why the kids are failing. Did you give that some thought’ Who are they competing with.

• Link
• Report this comment