Georgia math students stymied by accelerated pace and complex concepts expected in high school

Is the problem the difficulty of the content or expecting the students to master content through a discovery, learning task approach?

How many Georgia math teachers are free to explain concepts and use worked examples so that the students apply the concepts from a solid core understanding?

• Link
• Report this comment

Attentive Parent,
I agree. People seem to think rote is bad. But, when it comes to math, there’s lots of things that, if you do it often enough, the light goes on. And it is clear. And you know what? If the light doesn’t go on, but the student can still do the problem, maybe it doesn’t matter.

• Link
• Report this comment

I’m all for increasing the standards but the implementation of this ‘new’ math was horrible and will be Kathy Cox’s legacy. Thanks Kathy and good riddance. You failed the class of 2012.

• Link
• Report this comment

Michael–what does the implementation have to do with this?
It is simply a bad plan.
If this were a state where no one moved in or out (is there a state like that?), somewhere, sometime, it might have worked?
But, right now, should a child move into that state, there is no place to put them in our math system. Should a child leave our state–it’s the same situation. They know a little bit about everything, and nothing about anything.

• Link
• Report this comment

I went back to the traditional teaching style by leading the class using notes and examples after trying to teach “discovery” during the first unit of math 1. I have tried to blend a traditional approach and still incorporate some of the learning tasks the state has provided. I think the material is a little too advanced for the brain development considering the age of the students. I think the state did a horrible job training the teachers to only use the “learning tasks” and to teach using “discovery”.

Right now our school (and others I’m sure) are scrambling to develop the new math 3 support class. I am at home right now trying to organize how I am going to teach this course. I had to basically develop the materials I have used for the past 3 years so why should this year be any different. Already 10+ hour days due to this math curriculum and lack of planning by the state. I shouldn’t complain – I have a job.

• Link
• Report this comment

Mike Honcho Himself brought up such an important point…brain development. Much research on cognitive development would suggest that complex tasks involving abstract reasoning might be inappropriate for young minds still growing (and growing at different rates, just like with physical development). It seems no one with even a basic understanding of say, Piaget, was at the table when these decisions were made. Not necessarily related to how smart you will one day become, your brain goes through specific stages of of growth and development before it is baked. Wonder how much this comes into play?

• Link
• Report this comment

[...] Georgia math students stymied by accelerated pace and complex concepts expected in high school. [...]

• Link
• Report this comment

School starts next week! – I’ll tell you what we believe (and our school starts next Monday)

The new math 3 support class with be a review of math I, math II, and introduce the math 3 topics that appear on the GHSGT. This class is targeted at students who are in danger of not passing the GHSGT. We are unclear as to whether a true support of math 3 course exists this year. Maybe Maureen can check into this.

The state is now allowing this year’s sophomores and juniors to take math 1, math 2, math 3 support (this years new class), and math 3 their senior year. The idea is to help students in danger of not graduating. Students who take this route will not be admitted to a 4-year college or university immediately followng high school. These students will have to plan on attending a 2-year school and then transferring to a larger school. (All of this depends on the state allowing graduates to choose whether or not to attend college)

This is how leaders in my school have understood the situation.

• Link
• Report this comment

I have reviewed over the math and it does seem to better prepare the students for a more challenging future. However my only concern is how prepared are the teachers to teach this new curriculum? My child was a freshman last year and has never struggled to math. She was even placed in the advanced Math I. Her chief complaint was she hardly understood the work based on how the teacher was teaching it. We got her a tutor, another teacher(Middle School) and she understood it without any issues. How has the state prepared these teachers so they may efficiently educate our students so they do have a “fighting” chance to pass the Math I and Math II.

• Link
• Report this comment

There are several issues at hand here; but, the first issue is that the teachers are not teaching the standards that are going to be tested…they are teaching “what” and “how” they have always taught. Therefore, student performance on the EOCT isn’t good…not a slam at teachers…merely a fact. As a matter of fact, much of the problem with the new, conceptual math being taught isn’t the curriculum itself. It’s much more about the fact that our state department of education never allows adequate time and professional learning for anything to be implemented properly! Throwing the current math curriculum out now would be a big mistake!

• Link
• Report this comment

Hell the kids had trouble with the OLD MATH. Ga where we throw money at stupid teachers teachin even stupider students. Boy can I give some more of my money to kids that can’t balance a checkbook or teachers that can’t teach.

• Link
• Report this comment

DON’T EASE UP ON NOBODY! If these kids are allowed to lapse into their comfort zones, they’ll be domed to lifetimes of mediocrity…stand on em…DEMAND results! It is possible…it was 40 years ago, it still is, teachers.

• Link
• Report this comment

MORE MONEY is not the ANSWER. Asin countries do better with less money and technology in the classroon. What is our problem? Forrest Gump— STUPID IS A STUPID DOES.

• Link
• Report this comment

JUST for fun no teacher should be in a classroom teaching if she says I AXED you a question and I spect you to conversate with me.

• Link
• Report this comment

Look at the top 10 scoring States, even the top 40 scoring States, none of them teach this Math 123. The States that tried it 10 years ago all went back to Algebra, Geometry, Trig, Calculus. This is what Colleges are looking for. Many of us have children that will look out side the University of Georgia College System. Afterall, many of us were imported as the best and brightest.

Georgia must get rid of this failed Math if it is to attract business to the State. Sure the executives can send their kids to the $20,000 a year private schools, but what about their engineers and computer scientists? They will go to other States.

• Link
• Report this comment

Our daughter, an unfortunate member of the class of 2012, is going to be homeschooled this year, largely because of this math curriculum. Her freshman year, she was in Accelerated Math I (”Integrated Algebra I”). About halfway through the first semester, we saw she was in danger of failing so hired a tutor at $60/hour (another teacher at her high school). He told us that the material she was studying at that time he wouldn’t even be covering with his advanced Algebra II students until 2nd semester. She passed by the skin of her teeth and moved out of the advanced level for 2nd semester, and finished that class with a B (most of that semester was spent on Geometry, not Algebra). First semester of Math II (Geometry)she started strong when they were actually studying Geometry, but they soon moved into Trig and her grades started falling. She passed with a C, but 2nd semester – with it’s dizzying array of Trig, Algebra II, and who knows what else – was a complete disaster. We just gave up and decided to get her out of there so she could study traditional math.

She’ll spend this year in remediation, hopefully unscrambling her brain, starting with a full course of traditional Algebra I.

I can guarantee you the situation is worse than these statistics would indicate because they only report the scores on the end of course test and not the final overall grade for the course. My daughter somehow got a 60 on her EOCT, which she basically took with her eyes closed (randomly filling in the dots on the answer sheet). Her final grade in the class was 36.

• Link
• Report this comment

To the DOE: there are schools with poverty rates of 60 percent or higher. Have you ever taught at one? Have you ever visited and observed instruction at one? Have you ever tried teaching Algebra 2 concepts to a class full of Johnny Gym Rats, who escaped from the 8th grade & found their way to the 9th? Oh, and throw in some special ed kids who sit in one section of the room working with a co-teacher. Not to mention that there are around 30 in each class, and all the teachers are on extended day. The students who are serious about studying will and can learn just about anything, but must have to put up with daily distractions from other less serious classmates, and repetitive explanations of the most basic concepts.

Our Math EOCT results and the students’ final course averages were close, as well as the pass/fail percentage. However, this isn’t saying very much as I had about a 40% failure rate for the course.

After 20 years of enjoyable teaching, this GRANOLA MATH FED TO ALL KIDS WITH A SHOE HORN is going to burn me slap out. I used to love teaching; however, for the first time, I’m considering teaching at a Technical College, or a small Community College. Hell, I would even consider teaching at a prison. Aside from a vast number of students being poorly served from this “experiment”, a great deal of math teachers are going to be taking early retirement, or just get out of the profession altogether. I know of a few already who have done one or the other.

• Link
• Report this comment

New math…as my Dad told a teacher years ago when they brought up new math.When 2 + 2 does not equal 4 call me.

• Link
• Report this comment

Giving these children accelerated exams is like moving someone in a house whose foundation did not pass housing inspections. Last I checked, you are breaking the law when you build the house on failed foundation. Thus one can say that we are breaking the law when we build that house (i.e. administer an accelerated exams) on a failed foundation (i.e. administer on students who perform significantly below the grade they’re in). And to evaluate teacher performance based solely on this is blasphamous! This and the fact most public schools don’t monitor parent participation in their child’s schooling is troubling to say the least. While private schools are not perfect, none of them (at least VERY FEW) have problems with the above mentioned issues with public schools. And in my opinion, things will not get any better as long as public schools continue to kick God out the classroom. I believe that it will take a miracle to get public schools out of this rut. And if this maricle doesn’t happen and happen quickly, then I think that the USA hasn’t seen difficult economic times just yet!

• Link
• Report this comment

Can’t add, can’t build, can’t find Arizona on a map – Americans: dumber than a bag of hammers.

• Link
• Report this comment

My niece is a senior at MIT with a GPA over 3.0. She did not have to take this math. At my request she has looked at it many times. She had the same questions that I do? What was the purpose of the change? How much training and support were teachers given to teach this math?
The problem is not the test. It is the content of classes.

We all know that Georgia does not exactly lead the nation in education. Why did we change to this way of teaching math?

• Link
• Report this comment

DOES THE “NEW MATH” HAVE PRACTICAL APPLICATIONS-?????..Where-??

• Link
• Report this comment

In 2007, a group of concerned parents met with county officials to “discuss” the implementation of the new math program. Our concerns:
1. How will students receive instruction in the new “discovery process”?
2. How will students who move into the county with prior math classes be assimilated?
3. How will students who move out of the state still retain their HS math credits moving into the traditional programs?
4. How will advanced students still take the equivalent of AP stat, AP calc, and post variant analysis still get those classes? (they won’t)
5. How will students who still don’t know their multiplication tables be able to pass Math III, IV?
6. How will students who fail Math I still be able to graduate?

Our prediction: this program will be a disaster for GA schools. Note, the questions still remain.

• Link
• Report this comment

I meant there are a number of students that DON’T actually grasp the concepts before moving to something else.

• Link
• Report this comment

I’m a HS math teacher. I teach accelerated maths 1 and 2, and those students have asked me numerous times, “why can’t you just teach us what we need to know?” I rarely use the state developed tasks anymore because they’re written by folks who have never taught high school students (i.e., GaTech professors – P.S. I graduated from GaTech). That and there’s just not enough time in the day/year to touch on all of the concepts the state curriculum expects us to cover. The bottom line is that colleges and politicians who think obtaining a college degree is the end all of a perfect society are the ones who developed this new curriculum. Kathy Cox (history teacher, albeit smarter than a 5th grader) wanted to go to Washington. This was her ticket because most of the folks in DC also think our future landscapers, construction workers, production line employees, and check out line cashiers will need college degrees to do what they do. Now she can help ruin the rest of the country with her “expertise.” Mark my words, Sonny won’t be far behind her after he leaves office.

Finally, until the culture of the USA becomes one that truly values and supports education, no changes will make a bit of difference in our students’ test results. In a recent Time Magazine article, a bar graph showed the TOTAL instructional hours per year vs. a selected test score average for various countries. I found it quite interesting that South Korean students (even going to school on average 200 days per year, averaging less than 4 hours of instruction per day according to the numbers) performed much better than USA students (who go to school on average 180 days per year, averaging around 6 hours per day of instruction). Hmmm, performing better with 200 hours (on average) less instruction per year. Can’t all be about the teacher or the curriculum…just sayin’.

• Link
• Report this comment

What have the two who are running for state superintendent saying about the new math courses? Are they for keeping it or replacing it?

• Link
• Report this comment

So, what to do with the 48% who did manage to pass the Math EOCT?

• Link
• Report this comment

Georgia School Czar Flunks Math

Georgia’s State Superintendent of Schools, Kathy Cox, has imposed a dramatically changed high school math curriculum without properly reviewing it with teachers and parents. She is replacing the traditional structure (algebra I & II, geometry, Trig, Calculus with Math 1, Math 2, and Math 3). Her new mandate may be well intended–but the devil’s in the details.

Problem #1: Forcing all students to be “average”

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…).

Big mistake. This minimalist offering will be too difficult for the lower rungs of math students (encouraging them to disengage) and too easy for the upper rungs (failing to adequately develop their abilities). Why institutionalize mediocrity?

Also, Cox spokesperson and Georgia’s math program manager Claire Pierce told me the new program was designed around gifted kids because Georgia was “having a problem with the gifted program”. That’s just not true according to Mark Smith, a Cherokee County school system employee assigned to review this math curriculum change. Mark pointed out that gifted kids from Cherokee County are doing great with admissions into top universities and colleges. It is, in fact, the lower end of the math students that are having the biggest performance issues.

Problem #2: Unrealistic goals for the students

Cox spokesperson Claire Pierce also told me that a goal of the new math program is to have 85% of 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. 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.

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 that 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.

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.

What can we do?

In a time when America is falling behind other countries and Georgia ranks near the bottom in national education, we clearly need to revamp the system.

We should return to a system where some kids receive vocational training and others receive college preparatory training. Why dismantle the system set up by Cherokee County School Superintendent Dr Frank R. Petruzielo that lets the most gifted kids work at a faster pace than other college-bound kids?

• Link
• Report this comment

I have a son who will be going into Math III next year. He is LD in math and will be in the support class. The math support class has been the one bright idea that has come out of this new curriculum. It has allowed him time to work through the concepts. He passed the Math II EOCT with a 72. I assumed the DOE would offer a Math III support class each year. It never occurred to me that they did not initially plan to offer a Math III support class. What were they thinking??? I’ve talked with his math teacher and she told me that he will be earning a Math III credit and a support credit next year. After reading Mike Honcho’s post, I’m concerned that taking the support class may hinder his chances of getting into a college. Math is his disability but he is strong in the other academic courses.

I can’t believe the State BOE is waiting until August to make a decision. Why? I’d love to see someone interview the BOE members and ask them this question.

• Link
• Report this comment

I surely would like to see these scores correlated to 8th grade CRCT scores.

• Link
• Report this comment

I also have a middle school student. The difference in his math experience and his older brother is night and day. They both had the same teachers. I think the difference is that the teachers are more comfortable with the material.

• Link
• Report this comment

The EOCT stats combined with the on the ground analysis encapulized by partipants in this blog add up to one simple thing, this Math I,II,III system currently in place is ruining the quality of education for a whole generation of kids.

Who among the those responsible for overseeing this foolishiness has the courage to pull the plug on this failed experiment??

• Link
• Report this comment

I believe the math 3 support class will the be class SOME students will take their junior year. It should support those students who are in danger of not passing the GHSGT. These students will take math 3 their senior year. Through this sequence, students will just have limited college choice. A 2-year college is not a bad place for students to start post-secondary education. The vast majority of students will take math 3 thier junior year and math 4 their senior year. Math 4 is basically a pre-calculus class.

• Link
• Report this comment

My perspective is that this mess starts back in first grade, when children are not required to master basic arithmetic facts. Year after year, we allow them to “rediscover” that 4+5=9, which hinders their ability to do any more advanced problems. Yet we pass them along. I’ve had 5th grade math push-in for 2 years now, and I would estimate 20% of the kids were ready, just in terms of arithmetic, to go on to 6th grade! When the math curriculum director says the kids need to be “exposed” to the concepts of 5th grade, THAT is the problem. When the math curriculum director expresses shock over the idea of holding kids back who don’t master basic facts, THAT is the problem. When the math curriculum director thinks a teacher can ameliorate 4 years of deficit in math by doing 20 minute “needs-based” grouping, THAT is the problem.

I shudder for the middle and high school teachers who are supposed to teach more advanced CONCEPTS to kids who have not mastered basic facts and procedures.

• Link
• Report this comment

After spending $1000 dollars for summer school and a tutor I feel like the school system has failed the students. Not every student will attend college so why not offer business math, bookeeping and such for those who can’t master the new math. Math teachers need to go back to teaching not directing.

• Link
• Report this comment

Maureen, could you also find out if students choosing to take the math 3 support option will be limited in their post-secondary choices. Will this affect their chances of going to college?

• Link
• Report this comment

Teacher&mom – I do not believe 4-year colleges/universities will accept students who only comlete math 3. However, students can transfer into these schools from a 2-year college.

• Link
• Report this comment

I agree Catlady. Math in Georgia sucks from day one. Too many kids do not have the a strong grasp of basic addition, subtraction, multiplication, division, etc. We are introducing our children to too many topics and having them master nothing. This “new” math needs to go.

• Link
• Report this comment

An earlier poster mentioned “brain development” as it applies to learning math. This is very important and shows up in math (and science to a degree) more than other subjects because of the PRECISION of the subject (one’s opinion has nothing to do with the right answer.) Research has shown that the human brain doesn’t fully develop until one’s early twenties. Also, 31 years as a teacher/coach/administrator has taught me that individual brains develop at vastly different rates, even if the individual aptitude will be the same at age 23. This is why grouping students by chronological age is a fundamentally flawed idea for organizing education.

I’m not well versed on the new approach to teaching math but it seems similar to what the social sciences went through in the 1970’s with attempts to implement “inquiry” learning based on the work of Edwin Fenton and others. Never gained much traction, though marvelously conceived. I suspect that the new math will recede into the “dustbin of history” for the same reasons: (1) it’s attempt to base all learning on thinking skills that many young brains aren’t yet capable of using (there’s a REASON why grad school classes are taught differently than 6th grade!) (2) it’s attempt to avoid the drudgery of rote learning by making “immediate relevance” the absolute highest positive value and organizing principle of learning. We teachers had a name for this— “students efficiently trading ignorance” because they neglected learning fundamental facts.

Final note on math. I believe that each individual has a specific tolerance for “abstraction” (knowledge unable to be verified by “real world” experience.) Just a theory. I reached mine in the third calculus class at GT in 1968. My son, a college math major, is nowhere near his. Most people reach this level much sooner. The new approach to teaching math seems to seek to overcome this with its “problem solving, integrated” approach. I don’t think it will work for most students for reasons having to do with the human brain. Happily, most people don’t NEED math skills beyond algebra in their daily life. But, life’s more fun with knowledge!

• Link
• Report this comment

MAUREEN!!! I’m not a “flamer” but your citing GT math professors’ opinions is an example of the PROBLEM! What works at the collegiate level with that level of aptitude will NOT work in general education. My son, a math major at Georgia Southern, would say to struggling 9th grade math students: “just buckle down and learn it, you dummies!” He has a talent for math as do the people who design math curricula. But, their way of thinking doesn’t work for the vast majority of people who don’t have such aptitude.

• Link
• Report this comment

A few questions

1) Will the admissons director at a large out of state school(i.e.Duke,UVA,or Penn State) scratch his or her head when they see a transcript that says “Math 3″ instead of “Calculus”? Will the student that has mastered Math 3 have his or her application thrown to the bottom of the stack, because college admissions does not have the time to decipher what it is. When there are 1000’s of qualified applicants with transcrips that are easily understood, why would someone in college admissions spend time trying to equate Math 3 to traditional Math(Calculus or Trig)?

2) Is this why the highschooler working at the local Kroger’s cannot calculate 75% off on a $3.00 product ? (true story)

• Link
• Report this comment

@Reality – yes, I was really trying to say that improving Math at the ES/MS level was the more logical approach rather than just all of sudden changing the approach at the HS level.

• Link
• Report this comment

Gwinnett Parent,

The answer in most cases is they will take a student with the proper class over a Georgia kid taking Math 123. I am in the process now with my own kid and good schools are overwhelmed with applications. Also the math 123 program has bad stigma since it has failed in NY and Washington.

• Link
• Report this comment

@ concerned,

I’m glad you are concerned, but they would have bought textbooks anyway as the change (more or less) coincided with the state’s adoption cycle. It’s just a matter of which book. Now any school system has a choice to buy books or not – with or without a new curriculum. There is nothing in the GPS that says we cannot use the old textbooks.

Moreover, a lot of complaints about “Frameworks” refer to the teaching materials the DOE created that are FREE to any teachers in any system. So, if they want to use those materials, they could have done so, too.

• Link
• Report this comment

I wish people would stop saying things like “most people don’t NEED math skills beyond algebra in their daily life (sic).” and ” it (taking higher mathematics) damages the self-esteem of kids that would be better served by a vocational program.”

NEARLY EVERY ADULT USES HIGHER MATH EVERY DAY! Can you imagine a plumber who could not estimate the pipe size, material, and flow through capacity needed to repair your toilet? That’s the same math (done in one’s head) that mechanical engineers use. What about when you decide whether or not to pull out into traffic? That’s the old “if two cars are approaching each other at different speeds” word problem. And how much will my kids’ school clothes cost for school year if I buy them on sale? Yep, discounting and budgeting. How much flour and sugar am I going to need to quadruple that cupcake recipe for the bake sale? Proportions and ratios, one variable equations. If I want build a new cat scratching post for Felix, how much wood and carpet will I need? 3-dimensional geometry.

The point is, math didn’t come out of nowhere – it came from people needing a way to systematically describe and solve problems they faced in everyday life. The Pythagorean Theorem arose from the need to estimate wealth, which was measured in fields of grain (SQUARE fields) more easily. Calculus has roots in pratical needs, too, not just for culling pre-med students and distinguishing fields of engineering.

If you aren’t familiar with Montessori math – have a look. It is tactile in the lower grades, and teaches concepts as well as memorization. Designed for mentally disabled children, Montessori methods in mathematics through 8th grade have been very successful for gifted and “average” kids as well.

• Link
• Report this comment

@HS Math Teacher, 1:47 am: we parents need to hear exactly this kind of comment. Thank you for giving us some insight into what really goes on.

To you teachers who really care: I believe many parents feel, as I do, that our community local is performing well (relative to most schools in GA) because of the teachers and in spite of the system. I regard our school as a little oasis in the desert that is APS, and feel it’s only the teachers who keep us from being swallowed up by that desert.

One teacher at our school (not my kid’s teacher) recently confided in me that, in her class last year, just two special-ed/IEP students (who did not have paras or other helpers because their parents didn’t know how to ask for them, and APS won’t supply this kind of help unless you force them to, practically at the point of a gun) and one student with severe behavior problems… combined to create an almost unworkable teaching environment for her and her other students.

I wonder if the other 15 sets of parents in that class know how adversely their own children were affected by the three children who disrupted class and consumed all the poor teacher’s time?

We have an IEP child, and are sympathetic to all parents who do. But we would never allow our child to consume such a disproportionate amount of a teacher’s time and energy that it held back the rest of the class.

Part of building effective classrooms is removing obstacles and disruptions, no matter what form they take. Hard to do — and heartwrenching, too, perhaps–but necessary.

• Link
• Report this comment

Lynx – I totally agree that math is used every day… if the teachers weren’t expected to teach to the test, I think they could more appropriately teach math concepts as they will be used in the world. Context is everything, and with so much math shoved at the students so quickly “for the test,” they are missing the opportunity for realistic application exercises.

• Link
• Report this comment

Stubborn pride and insulated, detached thinking at the DOE. Thanks for ruining multitudes of teachers’ careers and welfare of students who were subjected to this grandstanding experiment. You guys couldn’t pour pee out of a boot.

• Link
• Report this comment

I also think we have an issue with educational elitist like Kathy Cox. I happen to be very good at math yet had struggles with writing and reading skills via my dyslexia. Like most people we all have stuff we are good at and other stuff we struggle with. This is why a one size fit all system is irrational.

Also I have tremendous respect for people who have skills I do not have. People with dyslexia tend to be good executives according to studies because they learn at an early age to depend and work well with others to survive in school.

The educational elitists tend to look at anyone that is not in their box as less than them and or cannot understand why they do not fit in the box. We need leadership that is focused on working with a students God given skills not rejecting them for fitting into a size fit all box.

• Link
• Report this comment

CherokeeMom: as a retired educator, I’m embarassed for my profession. I experienced too many similar stories as yours, especially during my time as an administrator.

I will say this, though. Unless your daughter plans a career in music (which you don’t seem to indicate,) I’d dial that down a bit right now and concentrate on the math whether she likes it or not. Her career goal (extremely subject to change at this point in her life) will require her to attend an institution of higher learning with serious math requirements. If she were my daughter, I’d focus on providing the foundation she will need for the next level. It’s called “focus.” My son was a talented basketball and baseball player. But, he is a much more talented math guy (doing a DOUBLE DEGREE in math and philosophy. Sports had to be dialed down (his decision) for the longer term good.

Finally, although the school behaved badly in your case, it is impossible for any school system to “customize” its programs to meet ALL the specific needs of each and every child. The taxpayers simply wouldn’t stand for the expense it would entail.

• Link
• Report this comment

As someone that went through the old method and tried to tutor those on the new math system, I know it is annoying. We would have kids come in to Mu Alpha Theta (Math honor society) tutoring or ask for tutoring in band and only those taking Calculus BC felt confident enough to even attempt tutoring. When I did this, I found that they had even messed up all of the variables, which made tutoring even harder. I found out that instead of using degrees, they were simply placing it as x. Then, when they used radians, they still called it x. Can we go back to the old symbols we used to differentiate so that those tutoring know what to use? Also, the extra symbols helped me remember what I was looking for. I tried to show how to make charts of known data only to find that these problems did not lend themselves to my logical form of attack. Without logic, we are all lost.

On top of being a tutor, some of my teachers tested out some of the lessons on my class, just to see how we did. We wondered how you could ask some of these questions of freshmen. We understood the material thanks to being in H Analysis, but we knew it was dreaming to think a freshman would know it after one lesson. Same when they tried us on Stat.

And I agree with Cobb Mother all the way up there. If the private schools are still using the old math system, then why should we switch? One of my friends went to a top private school and got an amazing education. It led to a full ride scholarship based on the fact that he was one of the top four students in his class at college. My own public school pushed out 6 National Merit Scholars in 2009 and 4 in 2010, using the old math. Since this is based on PSAT and SAT scores, I doubt the old math was what hurt them. In fact, from what I remember, each said it was the english portions of the test they had trouble in. They had upper 700s in math. Hmm… Guess we will need new english next. As one may be able to tell, english was where I suffered slightly on the SAT, just like my classmates. Anyone wish to tackle another horrendous overhaul of a major subject?

I also think we should look at some of the other outcomes as well. Some of these students are going to move into Calculus and Statistics at the AP level. If there is a dip in those scores, seeing as that is a national test standardized so scores should be consistent from year to year, we know there is a problem with the new math. After all, it is the basics that can lead to large problems in Calculus. I don’t know how many times my teacher reminded us that the calculus was one step and actually quite easy, the rest was basic algebra that we had somehow messed up. We should see how these students fair on the national scale overall. My biggest worry when I saw this new system was trying to figure out who would be funneled into which AP and when. AP Stat sophomore year and Calc BC senior year was nice, and allowed me to enter college with 12 units of math. From what I saw, my friends taking new math would only get one opportunity to take an AP math course, which may also skew the comparisons as more fight to take calculus.

In about a week I will go visit my old math teachers and see what they think about this. After all, they should have had another course of new math freshly started by then, and they are always honest about what they think. They never were able to fully explain the logic behind the switch to us once they showed us the assignments. And yet again, without logic, we are lost.

• Link
• Report this comment

@ both EnoughAlready and AJinCobb. I see a point in both arguments. We have to learn how to use calculators so we can do some examples real world examples. However, we must also learn to be independent of the calculators to prove we understand the concepts, not just which buttons to push. During my high school career, my math teachers would have no calculator quizzes and calculator tests. The quizzes tested concepts only. The tests had some real world problems and some concepts. The concept problems would have some twist so they couldn’t be done on the calculator (inverse of a 3×3 matrix with an x in the middle must be done by hand, sadly, and that was only freshman year). In Calculus, the original tests were allowed multi-functional calculators, just like the AP exam would allow. Retests, however, were done using only a four function calculator. Again, the numbers were easier as concepts were being tested more than real world applications (after all, you are probably taking the retest because you made mistakes on concepts, not basic math). Therefore, while I agree students should learn to use the calculators on all concepts, we should also learn to do all concepts by hand. Sometimes it is just quicker and easier to do it by hand. Also, it is good preparation, as the AP Calculus exams includes 4 sections, 2 with calculator and 2 without.

Also, there was a teacher at my school who used only the calculator. We once had her take over my class whilst we were preparing for a no calculator quiz. When we asked her for help, she told us to put it in the calculator. When we told her that would not be allowed, she told us to put it in the calculator. We became frustrated and formed a study group at the back of her class, tutoring her own students in the same type of class so that they would know how to do it by hand. Of course, we were the accelerated class and hers was honors, but still! I understand the need for a teacher to teach both methods, and, to be honest, that is what I am used to.

• Link
• Report this comment

I have a statistic…not more than five (5) students in 100 will ever use even 10% of this new math malarkey. Follow the money. It’s all about the money. Make sure that the students can count, multiply by heart up to the 12s, and do long division. Percentages could also be useful in their lives. But, this high level, esoteric math which bores the pee-wodden out of the average students should be jettisoned. I agree with Stockbridge on matters like this. Heck, my granddaddy didn’t get past the third grade, and he made some darn good Tennessee Whiskey.

• Link
• Report this comment

AJinCobb

July 30th, 2010
11:08 am

I’m very familiar with graphing calculators and have used them throughout college. However, to instruct students in highschool, to use only calculators in class and on test is just stupid. These kids can’t grow up relying on computers and calculators to do the work for them.

And for your information AJinCOBB – I have a computer science degree. So, there isn’t a piece of technology I am unfamiliar with or do not understand the concept of how to use it.

• Link
• Report this comment

…very good….

• Link
• Report this comment

high school teacher

July 30th, 2010
11:34 am

The Kroger example is exactly my point with calculators and computers. These kids can’t perform the basics without a calculator.

And the sad thing is that people like AJinCOBB don’t understand why children need to learn without the help of technology. I’m not advocating that students not use technology or calculators in math, science, etc… However, these students need to learn to perform the concept outside the use of calculators and computers.

• Link
• Report this comment

John Konop: I’m not a math guy (just the opposite… retired history teacher who was decent in math). I don’t think that everyone needs to be “good” in math. However, I’m an old guy who believes that the cluttered, self-centered, disorderly adolescent mind benefits from the precise, structured, sequential nature of math as an academic subject. Everyone doesn’t have to be “good” at sports, but everyone benefits from the healthier bodies that sports promotes.

• Link
• Report this comment

Cherokeemom, what is happening to your daughter is happening to MANY students across Georgia. Students planning to graduate in 2012, after only two years of high school are already behind on their credits because of the additional math classes (i.e., math support, repeated classes, etc.) I fear our statewide graduation rate will plummet in 2012.

My son is in the class of 2012. He’s always been very strong in math, scoring 900 on his 8th grade CRCT. After ending the year in Accelerated Math I with a “C”, we enrolled him in regular Math II for 10th grade. After all, we are planning on HOPE’s help with college. Math II was a disaster. The teacher tried very hard, but was over her head. Many, many of her students failed, including my son, and went to summer school. I though summer school would help shore up my son’s weaknesses, but summer school, too, was a disaster. I don’t know what the school will chose to do with the kids who failed math II again in summer school, but even if my son has to retake the class, I still want him to press on with Math III. At this point, my son who has always loved math, hates it. Fortunately, he still makes very high grades in his other subjects, and his love of science is still intact. We are just going to have to live through the math. I really worry for the kids who are below average in IQ, because I don’t know if some of them can pass these classes, no matther how hard they try.

• Link
• Report this comment

John, I agree with the “one size fits all” failures of our education system. But, try (gently) telling a parent today that their son/daughter is not “college material” (at least not now) when society perceives the “college route” as the ticket to success in life.

I always used this silly example to explain this to my students: What if every single person in America made a perfect score on the S.A.T. and received a Ph. D.? Our education system is a success! SOMEBODY would still have to collect the garbage, market dubious products, stock the shelves of stores, dig ditches, etc. That SOMEBODY would have a Ph. D and all the school glory he or she would ever want. But, adult life wouldn’t change much.

• Link
• Report this comment

William,

It same issue we I deal with employees. But I do think honesty is the best for all in the long run. Nothing is worse than be forced to compete in a arena that is not your game day after day.

• Link
• Report this comment

Most math teachers I know don’t think it’s the course content that’s killing EOCT results, but the frenetic jumping around between topics mandated by the curriculum combined with the discovery method of teaching. In other words, there is not enough consistent exposure to a topic to learn it and the teaching methods are absurd.

• Link
• Report this comment

Most GA student, no matter how dismal their numbers, have more math sense than our Muslim President…OFailure.

• Link
• Report this comment

For all of the comments about graphing calculators….Why do these classes use graphing calculators throughout the course only to tell the class a day or two before the EOCT that only standard calculators are allowed for the EOCT. You have students who may only know how to solve the problems with the graphing calculators suddenly having that taken away.

What is the logic in that?

Also, Maureen, could you please ask the state what the cut scores were for Math I and Math II? That might shed an even more dismal light on these results.

• Link
• Report this comment

@Enough Already….The real problem was when students who used Graphing calculators throughout the course were told a day or two befor the EOCT that only standard calculators could be used on the test. I wonder how much this contributed to the low scores.

Also, Maureen, please ask the state for the cut scores for the Math I and Math II tests. This may reveal even more in about these dismal results.

• Link
• Report this comment

I DISAGREE COMPLETELY that the problem is the STUDENT’S ABILITIES. The problem is the MATERIAL. It is impossible to understand. It is poorly written, impossible to teach, and does not match in any way what kids in other schools around the country learn, so it does not transfer. Any kid transferring in or out of GA schools is completely messed up by this ridiculous experiment. GO BACK TO ALGEBRA, GEOMETRY, TRIGONOMETRY, CALCULUS, etc. Colleges don’t know how to count this junk, either. GET RID OF IT. I said so the first time my kid came home with this ridiculous math four years ago. The teachers hate it, too. They know, and will tell you “privately”. It is only still here because of politics.

• Link
• Report this comment

Most colleges require 4 units of Math for admission. After the completion of Math III, there are a myriad of Math class opportunities – Calculus, Advanced Trig, AP Stat, AP Calculus

• Link
• Report this comment

@jack daniel,

The content of the “new” math courses aren’t any different from the traditional Algebra I, II, Geometry, Trig, Pre-calculus. However, it may still be true that most people would not use any more than 10% of what they learn in those classes. But, is that the point of education? I imagine we use maybe even less than 10% of what we learn in English Lit, Music, Phys Ed, etc.

@ john konop,

You seemed to like about bragging your son, but students can start taking Accelerated Math 1 in Grade 8, or maybe even Grade 7. If you start Accelerated Math 1 in Grade 8, you will be done with the Math 1,2,3, and 4 by the end of their sophomore year, leaving 2 years for taking AP Calculus and any additional advanced math course – at HS or through a joint enrollment. So, you are creating an issue where there is none.

• Link
• Report this comment

Obamath

Today 1+1=7
Tomorrow 1+1=0
Yesterday 1+1=4

Thats ObaMath.

• Link
• Report this comment

Would it be possible to direct all Dr NO’s posts to the filter? It’s unpleasant to have to read prejudiced political trash while trying to participate in an interesting discussion of the important topic of high school math education.

• Link
• Report this comment

Maureen your statement regarding the Fordham Review is not accurate. Even the DOE has stopped touting the ranking. I spoke to one of the writers of the review, his response “what GA has in place is not what we reviewed” Give them a call, they will talk to you. They are well aware that GA skewed information to get the result they wanted. Check the score for ability to implement. It’s true that GA has scored poorly for some years, but giving everything a face lift is not going to fix the problems. And no it isn’t just parents whining because the math is now harder. Maureen if you want to be part of the solution then how about bringing back grouping by ability, giving teachers the resources including time, to teach, do some investigative reporting on the waste in the education system, would love for you to start with Cobb County. Stop being a cheerleader for the DOE and show that you care about the kids. Look at the bloggers, most realize this math is doing a disservice even if their own children are doing well. these are parents and teachers not blaming each other but the implementation/curriculum/and lack of choices.

@ William Casey thanks for calling Maureen out on her couple of professor friends that like the new math and approach. Teaching at that level is not the same.

For the record my children did fine with the new math, we pulled them from public because we had to teach them math everyday – they were not learning it in school. We could tell the foundation was not going to be there for higher math.

• Link
• Report this comment

With respect to graphing calculators-part of the focus of math so that it could be more accessible to student populations that had not traditionally performed well in math.

The idea developed that if you made the point of algebra the visual image (the graph) you could provide “democratic access to powerful ideas”. That’s a nice utopian philosophy unless what you change to ends up being not math at all to a meaningful degree”.

Here’s a quote that should help illustrate why the change in emphasis was made”

“if a broader range of real life problem solving situations are emphasized, and if one recognizes a broader range of mathematical knowledge and abilities that contribute to success, the a broader range of students will emerge as capable”.

In other words, traditional math and science created a hierarchy based on interests and aptitudes and that’s not consistent with an equal outcomes philosophy. So we just change the nature of math and science instruction and even the very concepts themselves.

Here’s a quote

• Link
• Report this comment

AJinCobb-

You seem to want to sneer at the posters which is not especially nice or pleasant to read.

In case you have not noticed, although many of the fundamental concepts of traditional high school math are woven into the learning tasks or illustrated with one or 2 examples in a textbook, this new curriculum skips around a great deal.

Math is a sequential subject.

Math 1,2, 3 was not designed sequentially. By the time you get back to related concepts, the earlier knowledge is forgotten.

So then it’s back to modeling functions with that graphing calculator.

• Link
• Report this comment

A one size fits all approach is stupid. Not all kids can achieve the same level in math or any subject for that matter. We seem more concerned about not hurting kids feelings because they aren’t in the same class as others, than we are about helping each kid reach his or her OWN potential. When I was in school we had accelerated, average, and basic level classes and everyone was assigned to a class based on his skill/performance. What is wrong with that set up. Not every kid is meant for college, so why make them flunk a bunch of classes they don’t need? It would be a better idea to give them a good foundation of skills that will help them in whatever vocation they choose, rather than let them waste time in a class they can never pass. And for the accelerated learners, why hold them back so the others can catch up. We need to push gifted students to further excel. You can’t do this putting everyone in the same class.

• Link
• Report this comment

I am voting for Attentive Parent!

• Link
• Report this comment

“Math and science are areas where knowledge is cumulative.” YES.
“Math is a sequential subject. ” Not necessarily. There are many math topics where the sequence really doesn’t matter. There is nothing in nature of mathematics that says we have to study Geometry after Algebra I. How can we argue that we wait too long before we discuss a related topic in Mah 1, 2, 3, and 4 while ignoring a 1-year gap between Algebra 1 and 2? What about geometry? Why is it ok for students not to see geometry for a year (or more) before they take the formal study of geometry?

Some teachers teach well and others are mediocre, at best.
Some students “succeed” in some contexts, but not necessarily in others.

It wasn’t like our students were succeeding so much in the traditional HS courses, either.

• Link
• Report this comment

Once again, thank you all for this wonderful blog!! I will keep busting my behind to keep sending my children to private with traditional math. Sure do wish Georgia could/would get it together for our children’s sake! This was one of the very reasons to begin with that they are still in private. My son is such a wonderful math student and didn’t want to mess things up! Although I bet he would have been fine. Just wasn’t willing to gamble with his future!

• Link
• Report this comment

Back in time, we took Algebra I, then Geometry, then Algebra II. That was all the Math that was required when I was coming up through the DCSS.

• Link
• Report this comment

@ Atlanta Mom

Implementation has a great deal to do with it. If you read the article it states that the 2019 class will be the first class to have the accelerated program from K to high school. These students should be much better prepared for the high school courses than those students of today.

Kathy Cox should have delayed the implementation of the “new” math until students had the opportunity to learn the required skills taught at lower levels. Instead she pushes forth the high school implementation plans before the students are prepared enough to be successful.

• Link
• Report this comment

I would love to thank the Atlanta Journal & Constitution for putting this vent column up on their website. It does give us teachers, parents, and concerned citizens of Georgia the opportunity to get our frustrations out, to share ideas, and to be heard. And I thank Maureen Downey (love the Irish) for bringing up this topic, over and over. She is willing to take some on the chin for the good of openness and clarity.

Now, with that said, and knowing that people who have the highest decision making power at the Georgia Department of Education get wind of such cesspools of thought, how much more does it take to get you into action & create a less demanding track of education? The recent crack in the armor of Math III Support counting as a Carnegie unit….are you freaking kidding?!?!?!? There are kids in school that will never be employed, much less rise to the level of short order cook at a convenience store!!!! Do you think that all kids want to learn about, care for, or are capable of learning the intricacies of Conic Sections?!?!?!?! I’m not complaining about the curriculum. Smart, motivated kids can learn just about anything they put their minds to. I’m talking about the bottom of the barrel that some schools in the north end of the state don’t have to worry about.

I just got through going over about 30 different school systems “average EOCT scores” from around Georgia (not just South and Middle Georgia), and all I see are C’s & D’s for Math I & II. Last year, they were so horrendous, they weren’t released. Almost all of the schools that had C’s were in the low 70’s. The highest C was a 76. This year, cut scores were lowered to around 50% of questions answered correctly, and we still have crap for grades. As I mentioned earlier, my average Final Grade for the year of the students I taught in one of these Japped-up courses was just 5 points higher than the average score for the EOCT. Both sucked to the highlands of my native Scotland.

The prevalent thought seems to be…”Well, we think that everything will get better over the next few years.” EVERY YEAR MEANS A DAMNED LOT, WHEN YOU’RE ONE OF THE KIDS IN THE “EXPERIMENT”!!!! NOT EVERYONE HAS A 100K DOLLAR A YEAR JOB WHERE YOU LOOK OUT THE WINDOWS OF THE SLOPPY FLOYD BUILDING AND SAY…TISK TISK…MAYBE THE KIDS WILL GET SMARTER IF WE FORCE THEM TO BE.

• Link
• Report this comment

john konop, Gwinnett Parent asked if the new math curriculum was the reason that the high school kid at Kroger couldn’t figure out 75% of 3.00. I replied that kids couldn’t count change even when they were being taught on the old curriculum. Not sure why you think I am implying anything with that response.

• Link
• Report this comment

john konop,

Don’t put words in my mouth (on my fingers???).

Some people may want to keep certain groups of people “in their places,” but I want to give all children opportunities to pursue the careers THEY want to pursue. Mathematics, like it or not, is a gate keeper, and we need to keep the gate open as long as possible for all students – no matter what the color of their skin may be or how rich their parents might be.

• Link
• Report this comment

I agree with much that has already been said, especially about some students not being ready in 9th (or even 10th!) grade for the abstract concepts as presented in Math I. Furthermore, I agree that the authors of this “curriculum” clearly have no knowledge whatsoever of developmental psychology and therefore shouldn’t be authoring textbooks for developing brains.

Student mobility is a HUGE issue in my district because we encompass a military base. The comment from the GA-DOE about not even CONSIDERING student mobility and transition is very, very telling. How are 10th grade students coming from other states supposed to adjust to this math system? What about the kids who leave after 9th or 10th grade?

• Link
• Report this comment

Veteran teacher, #2: If you’re tired of hearing the same complaints, from the “same people”……then…….GET YOUR LITTLE ASS OFF THIS VENUE, AND GET READY TO HAVE A BANG-UIP YEAR AT YOUR SCHOOL!!!!!!

• Link
• Report this comment

What kind of math do we need, Maureen, to count up the almost $6,000,000 in legal fees for the DeKalb County School System? This, by the way, is a much more interesting topic. This math stuff is quite boring.

• Link
• Report this comment

college prof,

WOW, play the race card when you get caught. You arrogant attitude about education is hurting poor people of all races the most. People with money can hire tutors or use private schools while you and Kathy Cox fail at your science experiment with kids.

This is not about race; it is about educational elitist like you treating people with less money like rats in a lab. The irony of you playing the race card; while playing sick games with students with less money!

• Link
• Report this comment

Truth hurts, huh?

• Link
• Report this comment

@Iggy

I would also recommend students need more plain number sense. Decimal place, how to read numbers. Most tech jobs require an understanding of tolerances (measure). PSI, load, current, converting metric to standard and back again. Remember what happened to the Hubbel because of faulty measurement. Also didnt we lose a space probe because of incorrect miles to KM conversion.

Like the Dodge/Jeep commerical has stated when Americans build something it makes us feel good. I know some want to say we are becoming an infomation society but we still have to BUILD stuff here in our country. Tanks, ships, planes, trains, etc….

I got to say also America got two things right:

FREEDOM and CARS
got a hemi

• Link
• Report this comment

I am still very confused. If Georgia wins RTTT won’t they be forced to go back to what math the common core standards are?????? I believe traditional math??? Does anyone know the answer to this or is this another surprise that one day in the middle of the school year they will announce? Just when the teachers finally figure out and are use to intergrated/combo meal math.

• Link
• Report this comment

Maureen, I haven’t had much time today but would like to quickly address the question “2. Our students were not doing well on national and international comparisons on the old math. Do you think we need to change at all and, if so, to what?”

IMO, the problem was not the old math curriculum. The problem then was the basis of much of the problem now: Our students don’t learn basic skills in elementary school, but they get socially promoted anyway. They have no foundation upon which to build when they reach high school.

That’s one reason I’d like to see a correlation of EOCT scores with CRCT scores. I’d bet that most of the students who are failing have been behind since 3rd or 5th grade.

• Link
• Report this comment

If the problem was the traditional progression of math courses, why is it that most of the students attending such schools as MIT had the traditional sequences?

• Link
• Report this comment

Seems to me this country’s infrastructure, architecture, factories, recreational facilities, even its ever-changing technologies were all designed and built by people who were schooled in the traditional maths. Today’s teachers who are presenting it to today’s students (with few exceptions) studied the “old fashioned” maths.

If the current courses are to be successfully taught, the teachers expected to teach it must first master the concepts and then master the best methods of presenting it to the students. Just my opinion, but I think it’s a valid one. Teachers must be comfortable and competent in their subject area and I seriously doubt if many math teachers across our state are.

• Link
• Report this comment

I’m having trouble finding the 2009-2010 EOCT results. We are the state, district and local results published?

• Link
• Report this comment

Looks like we are not the only ones wondering what is Fordham thinking with its Common Core recs and why?

http://www.educationnews.org/commentaries/97110.html

I would add that it’s important to understand the Philanthropy Roundtable and how it works in education to really appreciate who the vested interests are.

Would it surprise anyone to know that Chester Finn, the President of Fordham, is also on the Board of Philanthropy Roundtable or that Fordham gets a lot of Gates money?

I have long admired Finn’s work but I think he has spent too much time in the echo chamber on this issue I did not find his explanation of his contrary 1997 views on national standards to be persuasive nor was he forthcoming that he had previously taken the opposite position in print.

Curious.

• Link
• Report this comment

To those with a strong interest in the Common Core Standards, here’s a link to the Pioneer Institute Report detailing why they will be a step backwards for Massachusetts and California.

http://www.educationnews.org/ed_reports/thinks_tanks/97124.html

• Link
• Report this comment

It would be interesting to know if the students in the accelerated math classes had better scores on the EOCT’s in Math1 and 2. Why don’t they seperate the scores?

• Link
• Report this comment

@science teacher,

US students have traditionally performed about the middle of the pack or a little below in international studies. As much as HS teachers blame MS/ES teachers and MS teachers blame ES teachers (and all teachers blame parents), in the more recent international studies, ES students perform (relatively speaking) better in math and science than MS/HS students. For HS teachers, it is the easiest excuse to blame their counterparts in MS/ES, but the results of these international studies seems to show that the problem may be at MS and HS levels.

• Link
• Report this comment

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?

• Link
• Report this comment

@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.

• Link
• Report this comment

educate everyone = educate everyone for college.

• Link
• Report this comment

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?

• Link
• Report this comment

@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!

• Link
• Report this comment

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.

• Link
• Report this comment

“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.)

• Link
• Report this comment

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!

• Link
• Report this comment

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.

• Link
• Report this comment

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.

• Link
• Report this comment

Still missing a post from about 12:55 p.m.

And Harpoon, I agree about the need for someone to follow the money.

• Link
• Report this comment

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.

• Link
• Report this comment

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…..

• Link
• Report this comment

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.

• Link
• Report this comment

A fascinating talk…

http://www.ted.com/talks/ken_robinson_says_schools_kill_creativity.html

• Link
• Report this comment

Attentive Parent…the CCSSO looks very similar to the Class Keys.

• Link
• Report this comment

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!!

• Link
• Report this comment

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.

• Link
• Report this comment

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”?

• Link
• Report this comment

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.

• Link
• Report this comment

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.

• Link
• Report this comment

Some administrators (and teachers) mistake what students can do with what they understand…

• Link
• Report this comment

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.

• Link
• Report this comment

@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!

• Link
• Report this comment

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.

• Link
• Report this comment

stuck

• Link
• Report this comment

I have so much to say on this subject that I could use up one page of the blog all by myself; however, I’ll resist the temptation and just add this: As a person with vested interest in this subject I believe the biggest problem with it is there is no alternative. I respect the initiatives of Fulton County and how they have incorporated the old curriculum with the new. I’d like to see all of the school systems doing that as well. The DOE is digging a hole for the state that it’s not going to be able to get out of. We now have students in Math I – Integrated Algebra – that have been trying to pass it for three years. So what do we do with kids who are passing everything else, are passing the standardized tests, but can’t complete the Math 123 program? The ONLY choice they have is to drop out. Is this really in our kids’ best interest? I can’t remember a time – ever – when we didn’t offer students some other choice. As we’re seeing with the new conversation with Math 3 and its support class, “something” is going to have to be done. What a fabulous way to welcome our new freshmen to the 2010-2011 school year: Welcome. We wish you much success. Oh, BTW, if you don’t pass Math 1234, plan on dropping out.

• Link
• Report this comment

There definitely seems to be a big problem with the current curriculum. I know when I was trained to teach math 1, all of the concerns of current high school math teachers were basically ignored. These concerns of 3 and 4 years ago are today’s realities. Unfortunately, there is nobody at the state level that seems capable of dealing with the problems. I believe the new math 3 support is there best effort of helping students who are struggling with this curriculum.

I’m no neurologist, but I think the fact that topics of algebra one are now taught in middle school is a big problem. In the early 1990’s, I wrote an article review about teaching algebra one in 7th and 8th grades. My professor spent a great deal of time arguing that average 7th and 8th graders do not have the brain development to handle algebra. Is it possible that this new math curriculum is just too much to soon for far too many students? If I recall correctly, the brain research from my undergraduate and graduate work does linke abstract thought and brain development.

I wonder if the writers of this curriculum looked into the research of brain development and abstract thought? Maybe brain development research lead to the traditional math curriculum and why average students of my day took algebra 1 in the 9th grade. Only the truely gifted students took algebra 1 in middel school.

These are just some random thoughts I have.

• Link
• Report this comment

Yall, maybe we are on to something…maybe the current curriculum , as it is written, may be suitbable for those students who are truly gifted or very bright in their aptitudes and might be the curriculum could be used as the accelerated curriculum for Ga, because most of the kids in the state of Georgia do not have the reasoning capacity to do this kind of math at this time….I am not saying that they are not smart enough, I am saying that they are just developmentally ready for this type of manipulation.

This is like trying to teach a 9th grader about quantum mechanics when they have not every had the first physics class in college…we are setting up a new wave of illiteracy in this country…we should leave this up to the local BOE’s to teach this and go back to “old-school”

The state and their infinite wisdom needs to be careful, and it may already be to late for the class of 2012, but we will be graduating more kids that cannot think because we have not taught them how due to the policy of the so-called experts who are no longer in the classroom.

• Link
• Report this comment

With all these overtly superior/intelligent opinions its no wonder nothing ever get accomplished. You people are too busy slapping one another on the rear-ends and coming here seeking some self-gratification.

Pitiful.

• Link
• Report this comment

Alot of math issues. Our agency does alot of math tutoring and credit classes. One on one with great success. It is unfortunate that students have to resort to one on one to really get the concepts, but most students, athletes need this to stay on track for their scholarships. We are glad to help students and schools keep students on track with the math, but we really need to reconsider what this new math is really doing to our students, all students.

• Link
• Report this comment

Maureen stop filtering me, you know I have a clue!!!

• Link
• Report this comment

As a current high school Mathematics I teacher, who teaches all support and remedial classes (by choice), I have to say I see a lot of blame shifting. Everyone (teachers, students, parents, state) blames the other groups; each stating something that is out of one’s area of control.

Teachers are not adequately trained nor prepared to teach the curriculum. The curriculum does not sufficiently allow time to develop mastery. Students refuse to work for prolonged periods of time and choose to disrupt class. Parents complain that students have too much homework yet do not adequately provide for their child’s educational needs. The state dictates when, what, and how teaching is conducted leaving teachers no room for creativity. Children arrive without the necessary competencies and have too many gaps. The list goes on and on, yet it is what it is. Each student arrives in my classroom with a unique set of skills, interests, personal issues, abilities, and understandings, and I must get them to understand as much of the curriculum as possible in the limited time given.

From a teacher’s perspective, there are more concepts that can be adequately taught in a semester or even a year. In the semester long Mathematics I course, I had to teach, on average, three to five different topics each day just to talk about all of the topics in the standards. Sometimes that meant spending 10 minutes on something that really needed a week to master, in order to allocate more time for foundational topics (like factoring). Under the standards of algebra, geometry, and statistics and probability, there are 38 elements, each with multiple components [i.e. graph the basic functions (there are 6 in Math I) using multiple methods]. Some of these concepts could be mastered, with diligence on both the student and teacher’s parts, in an hour, while others require more than a week. Teachers need the ability to decide what teaching methods are effective and how to reach different modalities. Unfortunately, there is no time for trial. If a student does not learn the material, there is no time in the curriculum to try something different. There is also no time in the curriculum for remediation of concepts from previous years. The Georgia Mathematics I curriculum assumes students have mastered all concepts from previous years AND have no need for reminders.

So what do I do? I work with my students. I find out what they remember from the previous years, do some remediation at the beginning of the year, and take the time to practice some critical skills, such as solving a multi-step equation. I focus on the critical areas which are needed for success in subsequent years. That means, yes, I brush over some areas and expunge others – I have to, if my students are to grasp the basics of factoring, square roots, and polynomial operations, all of which are needed to be successful in Mathematics II. Are they necessary to have a fulfilling and productive life? No, in fact many of our students will never see a square root or factor a polynomial outside of a mathematics classroom. Statistically somewhere between 15 and 35% of high school students attend college. Many of those never need anything beyond basic college algebra. So what’s the point? The point of mathematics is not always about the calculation but the skills and understandings which are pertinent to everyone. Organization skills, explaining processes, persistence, logical argument, interpretation and evaluation of information, accuracy, and learning from one’s mistakes are all skills students learn in a high school mathematics classroom. These are the skills we need every US citizen to have; skills which are learned through the hard work and determination it takes to accurately make calculations.

With regards to the state tasks, I use them judiciously. Some of them are very poorly written, others are unintelligible, and some hold no interest to my students. At a Mathematics I training session, 40 math teachers could not finish the first page of an 8 page task in an hour, yet the state determined that students should complete the whole task in 2 days (3 hours). When teachers cannot understand the directions or the expected process with a state provided trainer, how can we expect students to find success. I have re-written several of the state tasks in order to make them accessible to my students. Some of them just need clarification and some need re-organization. Scrap them and salvage what you can use, which changes from class to class and year to year. Yes, it is a lot of work on my part, but it is worth it.

Regarding textbooks, several of the previous posters are accurate. There are only a few approved textbooks for use in Georgia at the high school level; all of them have problems. The one I have worked with is exactly as has been previously mentioned; terrible as a resource for parents and students and was pieced together from three other books. There are few examples, often not directly relating to the problem sets and little explanation. I created videos demonstrating how to solve certain types of problems, handouts with examples and explanations, graphic organizers, and decision trees all to provide more support for my students and their parents.

By the way, there is no “new math”; mathematics has not changed, just the manner in which it is organized and taught. Some of the “new” methods of teaching mathematics comes from “recent” research on learning: brain-based learning, multiple intelligences, hierarchies of learning, etc. Some of it is garbage; some of it works. Everything in the Georgia Performance Standards at the high school level was there in old Algebra I, Geometry, Algebra II, Trigonometry curriculums, with the addition of statistics and data analysis; it is a matter of organization and time. The old set of courses were much more linear allowing students to build and continue to practice earlier learned skills. The integrated curriculum has not approached this well; it is very disjointed and does not include inherent connections.

Just my $0.02 added to the pot with no blame. I am far from perfect at teaching the Mathematics I curriculum, but I do my best, which is what I expect of my students.

I do have to say, I think it stinks that we are forcing all students into the same mold. It is especially sad that our students with disabilities no longer can earn a special education diploma to accommodate their individual needs. Sadly, I think we will see a rise in the drop-out rate as students become frustrated, not only with the difficulty, but the expectation of all to meet college readiness. I have not even touched on the complexities involved in a student transferring in or out of Georgia, nor the issues with out of state colleges.

• Link
• Report this comment

Coastal Area Math Teacher explains it better than I could even begin. You are exactly correct.

• Link
• Report this comment

I’m in Accelerated Math III right now.

Acc Math 1 was incredibly hard. Hardest class ever. I got better teachers my sophomore year and I got the same teacher I had last year this year.

I got an 80 my first semester freshman year… and I’m a straight A student. Then I got an A second semester and from there on out A’s.

What I’m saying is, it’s quite an adjustment. And even though I’m getting A’s now, it doesn’t mean it’s coming easily. I have to put SO MUCH WORK into that class especially compared to others.

Hopefully I’ll do good in Accelerated Math III then I can get into AP Calculus BC and get off this effin math curriculum crap

• Link
• Report this comment

I understand the need to teach children a more complex curriculum; however, when a school (like my son’s) does not furnish or teach from a math textbook stating the children will “make their own math textbook”, I see failure written all over it. I can state my son’s accomplishments and tell you that in the 5th grade his reading and comprehension was that of a 10th grade, 4th month student, I can tell you that he was placed in the gifted classes in 1st grade and remains there still; with the exception of math, I can even tell you he was the second child in his 50-year-old class to be sent to Washington D.C. with People to People for his outstanding abilities. However, this has nothing to do with the fact that he is struggling profusely in math which is due primarily from the absence of a math textbook. Please do tell me what child can learn middle school math without examples from which to reference generally found in a standard math textbook?

I will be petitioning the board of education and should I receive no answer for the second year in a row, I will be going directly to news channels, AJC, and the state as this is the most ridiculous way to ensure our children fail in math – a subject that is detrimental to making it in this world.

• Link
• Report this comment

Linda, I wholeheartedly agree with you! How in the world can you expect a child to learn when there is no textbook, ESPECIALLY in Math???

• Link
• Report this comment

A little perspective. One of the posters above discussed teaching X+3 = 7 as “what? plus 3 = 7?” to 7th graders, presumably here in Georgia.

This summer I suggested this same example of making algebra easier to a friend who teaches in Seattle, and she replied “But that is still a really hard concept for some first graders”.

This blew me away as I had never imagined teaching algebra to first graders as she apparently routinely did. When I told her that I really was talking about 7th graders or ninth graders, she just stared at me in embarrassment, too polite to comment.

It is sobering to talk to people in other states (or countries) where algebra in elementary school is normal, and here we have to remediate it to college freshmen. Maybe we do need to set our standards a little higher. Someday these students might want to survive outside Georgia.

It reminds me of a study we did at UGA showing math performance was correlated with social security number, which has a portion showing what state you are from.

The challenge is how to improve standards without sacrificing a whole generation in the experiment.

• Link
• Report this comment