Georgia math students stymied by accelerated pace and complex concepts expected in high school
One of the most well-informed group of posters on this blog has been parents and teachers concerned over the state’s new methodology for teaching math. I am eager to hear their comments on the statewide End of Course test results for Math II.
Only 52 percent of the students who took the End of Course Test for Math II in May passed, the state recently reported. Many students in metro Atlanta schools who took the tests squeaked by with barely passing grades, earning modest average scores of C’s and D’s for their districts.
The freshman class, meanwhile, fared somewhat better on the Math I End of Course Test, with 64 percent passing.
The benchmark scores reflect what several educators and parents have been saying all along: The new math curriculum, souped-up to get teens competitive for college, is leaving some students in the dust.
Tamela Cosby, an Atlanta Public Schools high school teacher, said only 20 percent of her ninth- and 10th-graders passed the final. They also struggled with the material in class.
“Since the course is a little difficult for the students, it’s not enough time to teach to mastery,” Cosby said. “They are not really understanding the material. For a lot of them, it’s the reading comprehension. They are not understanding what is being asked of them. It’s not just two plus two, there are word problems. They are not used to thinking in that aspect.”
About 80,000 teens statewide failed final exams in Math I and Math II in May.
Students in Cobb, Fulton, DeKalb and Gwinnett schools earned a C-average for their district on the Math II End of Course Test. The lowest marks went to Atlanta Public Schools and Clayton County Schools, sharing a D-average on both Math I and Math II End of Course Tests. Two more affluent districts at opposite ends of the metro area — Forsyth and Fayette — rose to the top of the class, however, with students earning the equivalent of B’s on both Math I and Math II exams.
Kelly Price, a curriculum coordinator in Forsyth, saw her district do well, but she understood the challenges.
“Some students were good at the other way of doing math because all they had to do was memorize and regurgitate,” she said. “They never applied or understood, but they were good at spitting it back out. Now, we are asking them to put the pieces together. That is a whole different level of demonstrating mastery.”
The state Department of Education is optimistic that math scores will improve over time as teens adjust to the accelerated pace and get more familiar with complex concepts in algebra, geometry and statistics, which are being taught to students sooner than ever before. They see the end goal of dramatically improving state SAT scores and churning out classes of grads able to compete globally for jobs and admission to top colleges without remediation as within Georgia’s reach.
“We have to have well-educated students no matter what they are going to do after high school,” said Janet Davis, math program manager for the state DOE. “Our students have to be mathematically able to function in a 21st-century society. They are going to have to be problem solvers in a very different world.”
Beginning with the Class of 2012, every student must pass four years of math to receive a college prep diploma even if he or she plans to attend a technical school or enter the work force after graduation.
Some teens on the path to graduation got off to a shaky start. About 39,400 students failed the Math II End of Course Test, which accounts for 15 percent of their grade. About 40,600 students failed the Math I End of Course Test.
For the failing and near failing, help could soon be on the way. The state may allow some struggling math students to take an emergency break to keep them from veering off course toward a timely graduation.
State math officials have asked the Board of Education to consider a measure at their August meeting that will allow low-performing students headed for Math III — an Algebra II and statistics course – to instead take the slower Math III support class full time to meet their third-year requirement. Support classes for struggling students, taken in concert with math courses, spend more time on explaining complex math lessons. They were designed to help students be more successful at passing math core classes.
“This is a bridge measure we could put in place for the first two graduating classes instead of continuing to push them on into Math III,” Davis explained. “Our goal has always been to make sure that our students are learning the concepts at the most rigorous level possible, but not at the expense of our students.”
If successful at Math III support for the year, students could then take Math III senior year, Davis said.
If the state board approves the option, it could soon be extended to students across metro Atlanta where math final test scores were mediocre.
Despite her best efforts, even Donna Aker, a Gwinnett high school math teacher, said her daughter earned only a D in her Math II course with tutoring at school and at home from Mom. Aker said her own classes of Math I freshmen didn’t fare much better. Only about 60 percent of them passed the Math I course — with D’s, not A’s or B’s, as they tried to recall facts and formulas she says some may not even use after graduation.
“This is a true college-bound curriculum we are teaching — not all children are going to college,” said Aker. “I just don’t think that the one-size-fits-all approach is the way to go.”
It was a different story in Forsyth. Price said she is pleased with her district’s scores, adding that they will curb anxiety parents and students had about the state’s accelerated math program.
Price attributes Forsyth’s success to staff development and teachers sharing information on lessons that unlock the mysteries of math for struggling students. Math support also was used to help slower learners achieve better results.
Why are other students struggling in math? Aker, a 28-year veteran teacher and co-president of the Gwinnett County Association of Educators, says the math is aggressive and fast, which can intimidate slower learners; teachers are still learning the pitfalls of the curriculum, and they have to cover more ground.
Aker also said parents should be pushing their kids to work harder at home and at school.
Weisu Nugent of Atlanta says the new math curriculum will benefit students if they stick with it and study hard. She says her daughter, an 11th-grader at Druid Hills High, is soaring in accelerated math classes.
“If a child doesn’t have the habit of studying, when you reach a certain age, it gets more difficult,” she said. “It is hard for them to start high school math because when they reach high school, a lot of the kids don’t have a solid foundation. You have to practice every day.”
State officials predict that math final exam scores will climb. The new math curriculum was introduced to sixth-graders in 2005. The Class of 2019 will be the first to have had the accelerated math exposure from kindergarten through 12th grade.
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2013 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
277 comments Add your comment
CCSS
July 31st, 2010
12:20 pm
If Mass and CA want to keep their standards because they think theirs are better than the CCSS, then that’s their choice. The CCSS is far better than the state standards that exist today in most other states. Unless we think our current standards is so much better than the CCSS, then we should be pleased that we are moving to the CCSS.
grade inflation
July 31st, 2010
12:26 pm
I don’t know why people are so upset here. Isn’t a C an “average”? Should we expect the average to be around 70 out of 100? Are you all living in Lake Wabagon (sp???)??? If the average is an A, shouldn’t we be suspecting something is wrong?
nutty shell
July 31st, 2010
12:49 pm
@Dekalbite
the state does pay new Math teachers at Step 3 which equates to 5 years expeirence, however; it is an unfunded mandate so no one actually gets the pay. We are still 2 years away from dropping Math 1234. The GA DOE can save face by claiming we have to follow the common core and thats the reason we are going to a more traditional sequence of math to more align ourselves with other states. Another question for Mareen I have is: If a student finishes Math 3 and wants to be duel enrolled what Math can that student take at college that would count as Math 4?
ScienceTeacher671
July 31st, 2010
12:58 pm
@international studies, many/most other countries don’t try to educate everyone, and they don’t send ALL their students to academic high schools – some go to work, some go to vocational schools.
Therefore, especially at the high school level, we are comparing apples to oranges by comparing US students to those in other countries.
But you knew that.
ScienceTeacher671
July 31st, 2010
12:59 pm
I DO think that trying to educate everyone, as we do in this country, is a mistake. If we only sent the students with the aptitude and motivation to academic high schools, I bet our international comparisons would look a lot better.
ScienceTeacher671
July 31st, 2010
1:00 pm
educate everyone = educate everyone for college.
Really Amazed
July 31st, 2010
1:07 pm
If common core standards start as soon as Nov. wouldn’t math change then as well??? Why two years away, why not smack in the middle of the school year…well everyone today we are going to the common core standards. Which is back to traditional math. In a way this whole RTTT could be a good thing. At least it would bring back tradional math. It has to be better than what GA has in place now. I am not saying that this would be a good thing down the road with the gov’t setting all currc. but come on anything is better than what we have now!
tracking
July 31st, 2010
1:14 pm
Science Teacher,
The tough question is when/who should make the decision (and how). Many European countries start tracking students around 12 or 13 years old through a formal testing. Although there may be some possibilities for moving across the system, students are usually stuck in a track once they get in there. In the US, the system was much less formal. Students are often tracked based simply on teachers’ assessment.
In the past (and unfortunately even today) certain groups of people are at disadvantage because of the quality of the system is poor from the very beginning. Thus, no matter what system we impose, those students are already at disadvantage – which is what some people want.
So, how should we set up an equitable system that bases the decision solely on students’ ability?
international studies
July 31st, 2010
1:16 pm
Maybe, but probably the best that could happen is they would be at the level ES students are. So, the fact still remains, that the quality of US HS education is a huge problem and it isn’t just because of ES/MS education.
Really Amazed
July 31st, 2010
1:22 pm
@international studies, then why do people keep asking me why I send my children to private school here in Georgia????? I want to ask why they would still send children to public here in Georgia with all of this BS going on!!! I think I will just say/respond…because I read the AJC get schooled blogs and very rarely read anything that positive about these wonderful GA public schools!
ScienceTeacher671
July 31st, 2010
1:24 pm
international studies, if you compare just the honor students from your high school with all the students (including special needs and those who just don’t care) from my school, whose school do you suppose will look better?
international studies
July 31st, 2010
1:40 pm
Private schools as a whole aren’t doing that much better than public schools. Just with public schools, some private schools are good and some aren’t.
The reason people still send their kids to public schools is either they think the schools their kids go to are doing ok or they don’t have a choice, that is, they can’t afford it. You should be happy that you have the choice and the means.
Really Amazed
July 31st, 2010
1:53 pm
Yes, I agree you have to truly do your homework for private as well as public. I understand about not being able to afford it. We bust our behinds to send our children to one. Most parents I talk to just complain about their child’s school and truthfully, can afford it more than I can. They just spend their money on vacations, fancy houses etc.instead and say they can’t afford it! You only get one chance with educating your children. Remember this is GA! Not all of us live in east cobb! When I last checked even east cobb has to teach new math!
catlady
July 31st, 2010
2:27 pm
“stymied by accelerated pace and complex concepts expected in high school”–is that really what the problem is, high school math teachers? (This is really a question.)
ScienceTeacher671
July 31st, 2010
2:36 pm
catlady, if you were doing math at a 4th or 5th grade level and didn’t even know your “times tables”, would you be a little bit “stymied” if someone suddenly threw you in an Algebra I class?
catlady
July 31st, 2010
4:04 pm
How well I know it, brother! I just wondered if it is what you and I think (lack of mastery of basic skills) or what Ms.Downey implies–going too fast and being presented with concepts that are too difficult. For example, my basic math skills are good. However, I would be badly challenged to do calculus at a whirlwind pace, because calculus is difficult and because i would need time to “get it.” Throw in lack of skills and basic math vocabulary/concepts, and it is thrice stymied.
I’ve worked for the last 2 years with 5th graders who have to count on their fingers to do 3+4. Heaven help them when they have to multiply 34×36! Not just the lack of multiplication facts, but all that place value stuff and then the adding! Hurts in finding area of a rectangle,too. These kids have NO CHANCE in learning to do “complex concepts”. Yet we are not allowed to require them to learn these facts, nor can we drill on them!
I am not talking about MR kids here, but when 22 of 26 cannot do first/second grade math, “Houston, we have a problem” and it isn’t pace or complexity of concepts!
Attentive Parent
July 31st, 2010
5:14 pm
Catlady & ST-
Georgia has said repeatedly that we were involved from the beginning with the devt of the Common Core math and that the final math standards are clsely related to the GPS.
It is hard to read the new Model Teaching Standards CCSSO is pushing as part of the Common Core commitment and not immediately see almost a perfect reflection of the Georgia math and science learning frameworks.
Maureen and others understand that the need for this Math 3 Support Class with core credit could be a “canary in the coal mine” moment that the US should be looking to before every state adopts this fatally flawed model.
There is a great deal of money and political power involved in these national standards not to mention the social vision they represent of equal outcomes.
The complex topics at to great a pace is simply a deflection so that the warnings will not be heeded in time.
Attentive Parent
July 31st, 2010
5:27 pm
Catlady-
How much do you know about Project Follow Through?
I was reading a more detailed discussion of the study this morning and was struck by the fact that the child centered models shown not to academically benefit economically disadvantaged K-3 students are precisely the same as what APS mandated in that charter agreement on the Riverwood discussion.
They are also the same as methods pushed by Georgia in math and science since the Learning Frameworks were published in 1995 and are reflected in the current learning tasks in the Instructional Frameworks.
We do not learn from evidence when we have it and we are set to enact nationally a model shown repeatedly not to work.
They say it took the Titanic sinking to standardize acceptable practice in seafaring and the Thalidomide disaster for the FDA to look to peer reviewed random controlled studies and not just opinions on drug efficacy.
What national disaster lays ahead if we continue to ignore what has been shown to work in education and to push models that not only work poorly, they actually promote misunderstanding.
Harpoon
July 31st, 2010
5:31 pm
It would be interesting to know who made the money on this one. Who sold this crap to the State and how much were they paid for it. There is generally graft and fraud behind anything of this magnitude. Where are the independent investigators when we need them?
where?
July 31st, 2010
6:39 pm
Attentive Parent,
You keep referring to Model Teaching Standards, but where can we find it? I went to the CCSSO web page and searched for it, but nothing came up.
ScienceTeacher671
July 31st, 2010
7:57 pm
Attentive Parent, if, as Catlady & I believe, the problem is that many students are lacking basic skills, no standard or teaching method in the world short of intensive remediation is going to make a difference.
The “complex concepts” excuse could also be a deflection to draw attention away from flawed standards and frameworks, or it could be a deflection to draw attention away from the fact that we are socially promoting far too many students and that students can be far, far below grade level and still score “proficient” on the CRCT.
Then there’s always the deflection that the teachers we have are too stupid to understand this new math, much less teach it properly, and it’s really hard to find good math teachers….
ScienceTeacher671
July 31st, 2010
7:58 pm
Still missing a post from about 12:55 p.m.
And Harpoon, I agree about the need for someone to follow the money.
Attentive Parent
July 31st, 2010
8:01 pm
Here are the Model Teaching Standards:
http://www.ccsso.org/Documents/2010/Model_Core_Teaching_Standards_DRAFT_FOR_PUBLIC_COMMENT_2010.pdf
I had linked before on previous threads and am very alarmed especially as part of the sales job for Common Cpre was “we won’t tell you how to teach it”.
Attentive Parent
July 31st, 2010
8:08 pm
Here is the accompanying document to the Model Teaching Standards. It really details a troubling vision of teachers as no longer being autonomous. Further the classroom curriculum is seen as a major venue for dispensing propaganda.
http://www.ccsso.org/Resources/Publications/State_Policy_Implications_Model_Core_Teaching.html
ST- I agree with everything you are saying. I’m trying to provide information to help parents and teachers. It’s one thing for a peer to point out a problem with teacher training. It’s a bit obnoxious if it’s a parent.
I really do try to be respectful when making a point. The facts are usually sufficiently damaging in themselves.
Results
July 31st, 2010
8:20 pm
Easy solution – A straight forward, no-nonsense basic math skills test ( I know more testing) for the students who failed Math 1 and 2. I agree with Science Teacher, Catlady and Attentive Parent many student could be lacking basic skills. SO LETS FIND OUT
Teacher&mom
July 31st, 2010
8:40 pm
Attentive parent- I’m going to settle in for the evening and read the links you have posted. I’ve already noticed Pearson Evaluation Systems is acknowledged on page 4. Surprise, surprise…..
ScienceTeacher671
July 31st, 2010
8:47 pm
Attentive Parent, I was being sarcastic about it being the fault of the teachers, although the staff development probably could have been greatly improved.
Attentive Parent
July 31st, 2010
8:52 pm
I only wish I was being sarcastic when I make reference to “Hula Hoop Math” as an APS prof devt class.
At least it was in the beautiful locale of Atlanta Botanical Gardens.
ScienceTeacher671
July 31st, 2010
8:53 pm
Results, I think it could be done without additional testing by correlating CRCT and EOCT scores. If some of the things I’ve heard are correct, you’d have to consider math and reading skills to determine whether or not students were able to read and comprehend the test well enough to answer the questions.
The “quick and dirty” method would be to separate out the scores for the students who took math with support, those who took it without, and those who took accelerated math.
tangentially relevant???
July 31st, 2010
9:05 pm
A fascinating talk…
http://www.ted.com/talks/ken_robinson_says_schools_kill_creativity.html
Thank you, but...
July 31st, 2010
9:14 pm
Thank you for the link to the CCSSO document, however, I’m not really sure what the fuss is. It is just a collection of wonderful sounding ideas with a little to no practical uses. It can be interpreted in anyway you want it, and that’s a pretty common feature of a compromise document.
Teacher&mom
July 31st, 2010
9:21 pm
Attentive Parent…the CCSSO looks very similar to the Class Keys.
Really amazed
July 31st, 2010
9:54 pm
Wow!! Tangentially relevant, I know many children and parents that would benefit seeing this one!!!! This is great! Too bad that to many want to put ADHD on med. These are usually the brightest students out there!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
North Fulton Parent
July 31st, 2010
11:01 pm
It appears that GA DOE only publishes test results for EOCT and CRCT. Interestingly, these are the two tests that are developed by GA DOE…and the scores required to pass are defined by the GA DOE. If EOCT scores for Math I were low last year, did GA DOE modify the test for the Math I students this year? Bottom line is that these tests are not an independent assessment to determine how well GA students compare to the other students across the nation. Further, GA DOE has failed to provide data to demonstrate how well EOCT and CRCT scores correlate with ITBS and PSAT scores.
What is required is national test scores that demonstrate performance relative to the other states. Where are the ITBS and PSAT scores? What is the trend for GA students over the past 10 years…has our ranking relative to other states changed in the past 3 years (of course, we could never be ranked any lower)? The students graduating in 2012 have had 5 years of this pathetic math program. Lower grades have had several years of the new integrated math. After 3-5 years of any new program, we should have sufficient data to be able to determine the impact. If GA DOE is not publishing this data, or expending funds to capture this data, one might expect that the data does not support GA DOE’s advertised benefit to the students!!
sharpie
July 31st, 2010
11:53 pm
blah, blah, …. blah blah BALH…. balh quadratic equation blah blah
ScienceTeacher671
August 1st, 2010
10:08 am
North Fulton Parent, for the past couple of years, 8th grade students have not had to take the ITBS. Before that, if one compared the ITBS and CRCT scores of a student who passed the CRCT with a minimum “proficient” score in reading or math, that student’s “grade equivalent” on the ITBS would be about 4th grade, 5th month.
So...
August 1st, 2010
10:22 am
do we need to compare GA students to students in other states? If so, wouldn’t it make sense that there is an agreement on what to be taught in which grade before we start making any comparison? If so, doesn’t it make sense to have something like the Common Core State Standards?
ScienceTeacher671
August 1st, 2010
11:15 am
If we don’t compare GA students to students in other states, how will we know whether or not “we will lead the nation in student achievement”?
Results
August 1st, 2010
12:17 pm
Totally agree, the testing needs to be from an independent source. I have trouble trusting a system that is allowed to “cut their own tests” and allows students who don’t have at least 70% correct to pass.
Attentive Parent
August 1st, 2010
12:20 pm
Based on comments from parents, Fulton still does the ITBS in 8th grade and changed back to direct instruction of the content and away from the learning tasks after a decline in ITBS scores. I believe they dropped Investigations and Connected Math this year for the same reason.
Cobb switched ITBS from 8th to 7th grade to make it harder to compare and then came up with some argument about how national renorming made previous comparisons no longer possible. Mathematicians who read the explanation said it was bogus.
And ST is correct. No Georgia district has to test with nationally normed tests anymore. How convenient.
So-
If the emphasis of Common Core were to be how to best teach the content, there would be truth in what you are saying. Of course, then there would be no reason to have pressured Massachusetts, California, and Minnesota to actually lower what was to be taught in math.
There are actually parts of the math standards that are verbatim taken from the fuzzy Investigations and Connected Math textbooks. If you combine all the references to the vague “understand” and the type of activities laid out in the Model Teaching Standards and the express incorporation of the controversial 1989 NCTM Math standards and the Justice Dept moving towards mandating an inclusive classroom to avoid civil rights allegations, it’s virtually impossible to see the intended emphasis as learning the math content.
And then there’s the planned national subjective tests to measure what is being learned.
Too many coincidences that all lead in the same direction means there’s a plan to actually go there or at least try.
understanding
August 1st, 2010
12:50 pm
Isn’t what we want for students to UNDERSTAND mathematics? Why are we so afraid of using that word? I know a lot of people say “it’s vague” or “it can’t be tested.” How different is that perspective from “teaching to the test”?
@AP,
Can you tell us exactly where those places where the CCSS are exactly the same as Investigations and Connected Math?
ScienceTeacher671
August 1st, 2010
4:47 pm
Last time I got graded on creating a lesson plan, we weren’t allowed to use “understand” as one of our goals. The goals had to be a bit more explicit as to what the student would do to show that s/he understood the topic being presented.
understanding
August 1st, 2010
5:15 pm
I think that’s the whole problem in education. We can teach kids to do something WITHOUT understanding it. If our goal is for them to UNDERSTAND something, then we should say so. Most teachers can tell whether or not students actually understand the concept or just doing something by (more or less) blindly following a memorized procedure.
to make things worse
August 1st, 2010
5:27 pm
Some administrators (and teachers) mistake what students can do with what they understand…
Mill Creek Mom
August 1st, 2010
5:53 pm
Many great posts here. Lots of ideas put forward about what should or should not be done or what the problem is or is not. When it’s all said and done this is what I know based upon my own family’s experience. My son is a rising sophmore at Mill Creek High. Nearly 50% of the freshmen failed the 1st semester of Integrated Algebra (Math1). They had so many kids fail that they took the kids who were “close” and enrolled them in both 1st and 2nd semester at the same time. (But not before they got all the kids together and blamed them for the problem.) My son was one of those kids. The explanation given was 1st semester really had little to do with 2nd semester. I’ve heard several folks say math is math, and I’ll admit right up front I’m not a math major but from my own recollection there is a certain order in which you do math because the concepts build upon one another. But no in these classes. They skip all around the textbook and jumble up the concepts and move at lightening speed. These are the main flaws of the curriculum in my mind.
Anyway, my son is in 1st and 2nd semester at the same time. He passes 1st semester (the second time) with a B (80). His 1st semester score was 63. That tells me one thing. He is more than capable of doing the work, but not at the current speed it’s being taught. They learn a new concept every day and so there really is no time for mastery. He did pass second semester with a 73. So with fear and trepidation we move on to Integrated Geometry. He is an excellent student in every other class and has big goals for his life. A great kid but this thing had done a number on him. His future probably does not include the Hope Scholarship. I think there’s one other poster who mentioned that this could be the state’s answer to their lack of funding for Hope. I also have no doubt that besides seeing fewer students qualify for hope, our dropout rate will skyrocket.
So while all those in a position to make a decision espouse their theories and opinions, there are some great kids being victimized by a ridiculous idea by ridiculous people who probably couldn’t pass the EOCT if their life depended on it.
How do we get this changed???? I appreciate Ms. Dowd’s articles and her attempts to keep this issue in the forefront, but how do we enact change? Call our legislators? The Secretary of Education after November???
I’m at a loss. I just know I have a child who is struggling and it’s heartbreaking. As well, this has had a big impact to our family’s bottom line due to the cost of a tutor we’ve employed nearly all year and will continue to employ. Thankfully, we have some resources to do that but what about all those families who cannot afford one for their child?
Let’s not stop talking about this and hopefully someone will begin to listen.
Results
August 1st, 2010
7:42 pm
The way these students were thrown into this math was thoughtless. We transfered into this “new math” from a private school and it totally destroyed my childs freshman year in high school. So instead of having good memories from freshman year, we will remember countless hours struggling with math. Georgia education changed a once confident student into someone who now questions their math potential.
Mike Honcho Himself
August 1st, 2010
7:54 pm
My guess is change will have to come from the ballot box. Voters must require direct answers from state school Superintendent candidtates. The current regime won’t even talk to teachers or system superintendents about the shortcomings of math 1,2,3,&4. Most math teachers will tell you this current curriculum needs to be changed. I think parents are going to have to lead the way.
South Ga Teacher180
August 1st, 2010
8:23 pm
@CCSS
July 31st, 2010
12:20 pm
I have been away a while….missed ya science teacher671!!
You must be drinking the IE2 & Charter KOOL-AID…there is no research that backs up that CCSS will increase student achievement…they have just rolled out and the crap all over them. The only thing that has been preached to Non-Classroom educators by the Cox/Perdue agenda State BOE is the fact that there has been legislation creating the blueprint to hijack the curriculum in Ga, thus brain washing our educational leaders that if they move to this IE2 & charter commission, they will always have funds available to the children of the great “brainwashed” state of Georgia. The ONLY thing that has been presented so far is that the State BOE has release a white paper explaining how compatible the GPS’s are with the CCSS’s. The “experts” have assured us UNIFORMITY in hopes that PRACTICING teachers will not notice that there is NO REAL achievement data to back it up.
Well, my question to these “experts” is how long have you been teaching in the classroom since the passing of No Child Left Behind? UNIFORMITY WILL NOT EQUAL ACHEIVEMENT. If you look at how they ( the experts) evaluated the comparisons of the GPS’s with CCSS’s, they SAY that the ELA and Math GPS’s match 80%…hell if the Math GPS’s are this screwed up, we will hammer the nail in the coffin with thousands of failing students with the last 20% that is not compatible.
You know that we have to generate a test to make sure the “experts” are right? It will take at least 4 years to generate one. News Flash: the”experts” will be wrong at the expense of the taxpayers and the poor students who do not have a chance in hell….TEACHERS: shut your doors and do what works! Play the game when an administrator walks in and then goes back to what you know works for the betterment of your students!
Jen
August 1st, 2010
8:40 pm
My daughter has now failed the same math course 4 times. She has had to take the course after school and in summer school. Unfortunately her graduation and college future are now at stake. This is a child who was in gifted all through elementary school and has a high superior IQ in math calculations, and high average IQ in her other tested areas, she also struggles with ADD. We are at a loss!!! My daughter who was wanting to attend SCAD, (she is a brilliant writer, and artist) had the hopes of an art career not a math career and she is now having to think about getting a GED working to support herself through a community college and settling on her dreams of attending SCAD because she cannot graduate! I think if you have a program that has to have support classes because it has such a large fail rate deserves a big fat FAIL! Thank you Mrs. Kathy Cox for your destructive hand in my daughter’s future !!!
catlady
August 1st, 2010
10:37 pm
ST, your comments are on the mark!
AP, I really appreciate what you are sharing on this blog. Tomorrow mid-day (when I hide inside the house) I will be doing some reading!
Let me share what worked for me. I did not “understand” math till I was in college and took “Mickey Mouse Math for Teachers”. But it didn’t matter. I learned “the rules” (it never occurred to me to find out WHY those were the rules or how they got the rules) and applied them to the problems, both computationally and in practice (word problems).
The only time it caught up to me was in 2nd semester statistics when I was working on my PhD. Now, most students don’t plan to go to that level in their education, so I think “understanding” and “discovering” isn’t what it is cracked up to be. Only if you are going to be a mathematician would it be an issue, IMHO. Otherwise, just accept it, like magic.