Ontario Math Scores Down

[AngusThermopyle]

I have the proper requirements. There is too much emphasis on math and not enough on social justice.

In other words you have one of those useless degrees and couldn't do basic math to save your life. Lets not even talk Trig or Calculus.

[socialist]

In other words you have one of those useless degrees and couldn't do basic math to save your life. Lets not even talk Trig or Calculus.

We don't need calculus or trig to graduate with an Education degree.

[MiddleClassCentrist]

Again, being close to many people in education.

Around 6-7 years ago the ministry started to push "new math" into the classroom.

This let the children pick how they answered questions, and effectively killed practicing math.... heaven forbid students have to repeat tasks to burn the process into memory.

Most of the articles I have read blame teachers.

Since the number of teachers educated in math has remained relatively the same.... and only really the initiatives pushed by the ministry have differed... The cause is obvious. Airy fairy stuff works in some environments but math processes are logical and defined at the high school level and below. You need to learn and remember the process before you can creatively use it.

The real issue is that the people at school boards and ministry need new initiatives to move up the ladder. They messed with something to move to a new job because of how "new and out there" they are. They messed with something that was working fine and screwed it up.

Edited September 7, 2013 by MiddleClassCentrist

[MiddleClassCentrist]

This is the direction that education is going and there are a variety of ways to achieve it. Odd that you would respond this way since, this would have been a major topic during your claimed recent stint at teachers college.

Anyway, the video below shows one method of teaching concepts to the point mastery that most resembles the traditional classroom format. Basically teachers work as a team, teach a unit/concept, formatively assess their own class and then group the classes into reteach and enrichment groups. One teacher handles the reteach group and another teaches the enrichment class.

I'm always skeptical of these videos simply because someone who's just trying to further their career uses them to push their own ambition.

The students are often coached to make it look more effective than it actually is.

They call this "Team Teaching" in Ontario and it works most effectively when you have many classes of the same grade level.

[gunrutz]

This proves that drill and kill doesn't work. There needs to be a more open ended style of mathematics taught in schools. Let kids discover math strateies on their own which will foster understanding. I have a link, but I do not like the source as they are right -wing puppets to corporate intererests.

http://www.torontosun.com/2013/09/01/math-scores-sag-despite-liberal-spending

So the evidence that the current way of doing it doesnt work comes from lower scores, well golly gee, do you think that the scores had to have been higher before to be lower now? So maybe it isnt the system, or maybe it is and maybe the old system worked better than the current one, but i know progressives like you can't imagine that change along you way of thinking might be wrong.

Edited September 7, 2013 by gunrutz

[Michael Hardner]

Lots of discussion happening here without links, and lots of hearsay so it's hard for me to tell who is just talking off the cuff and who isn't.

[AngusThermopyle]

We don't need calculus or trig to graduate with an Education degree.

It appears that one does not have to be very intelligent either.

[GostHacked]

Lots of discussion happening here without links, and lots of hearsay so it's hard for me to tell who is just talking off the cuff and who isn't.

Sometimes the obvious does not need links.

[cybercoma]

In other words you have one of those useless degrees and couldn't do basic math to save your life. Lets not even talk Trig or Calculus.

With all due respect, I find your tone insulting. Not everyone needs calculus and trig and the social sciences and humanities do valuable research.

[Michael Hardner]

Sometimes the obvious does not need links.

This is true, except that people are arguing 'obvious' points that are diametrically opposed to each other, with neither side providing evidence.

[socialist]

Here is a link that tries to disparage Constructivist math. People who don't have training in education and how children learn are threatened by this new approach because it means kids today will by much better at math than those of previous generations.

http://www.utahnsagainstcommoncore.com/a-constructivist-math-example/

[GostHacked]

Here is a link that tries to disparage Constructivist math. People who don't have training in education and how children learn are threatened by this new approach because it means kids today will by much better at math than those of previous generations.

Is there a course in constructive english as well?

[Mighty AC]

I'm always skeptical of these videos simply because someone who's just trying to further their career uses them to push their own ambition.

The students are often coached to make it look more effective than it actually is.

They call this "Team Teaching" in Ontario and it works most effectively when you have many classes of the same grade level.

This video is definitely scripted and staged, but the point was to demonstrate one of the many methods of teaching to mastery. Team teaching generally involves group planning and shared projects but it rarely includes the extra step shown in the video. The 'Reteach/Enrichment' technique is an integral part of every unit or concept for the schools that use it and as might be expected the results are very positive.

At the secondary level this process becomes more self directed and can be achieved by one teacher. Using a blended learning approach students take responsibility for their own learning and the teacher spends more time working with students and less delivering lectures.

[Michael Hardner]

At the secondary level this process becomes more self directed and can be achieved by one teacher. Using a blended learning approach students take responsibility for their own learning and the teacher spends more time working with students and less delivering lectures.

It strikes me that the early American (or perhaps even up to mid 20th century) 'schoolhouse' system would have naturally gravitated to such a system, since there were often all grades in one schoolroom and also smaller classes in rural America.

[Michael Hardner]

Here is a link that tries to disparage Constructivist math. People who don't have training in education and how children learn are threatened by this new approach because it means kids today will by much better at math than those of previous generations.

http://www.utahnsagainstcommoncore.com/a-constructivist-math-example/

Strangely, the person in the video advocates for two things that seem to contradict each other:

- She advocates for parents to act on their own "beliefs" about educatoin ("if you believe that students should...") rather than listen to education experts

- She advocates all students learning mathematics as tradition has taught it, rather than have students think about the problems for themselves as the new system teaches it. But if she's so against teaching students to figure out their own approaches to math, why is she doing it herself for math education ?

I generally agree with your assessment here, Socialist, but I also think that authorities must be responsive and to thoroughly explain the rationale for their decisions to the people that they serve. As we have seen, people are unaccustomed to the 'expert' model of services and make every attempt to work around it rather than within it. The person in the video, however, is being utterly reasonable with her concerns, and she is advocating for a proper process to give feedback to educators and legislators.

Education Professionals serve us, and they need to be aware that unless they convince the bulk of the population that their ideas are good then those ideas won't be adopted.

[Mighty AC]

It strikes me that the early American (or perhaps even up to mid 20th century) 'schoolhouse' system would have naturally gravitated to such a system, since there were often all grades in one schoolroom and also smaller classes in rural America.

Indeed. With one person teaching all grades students were likely able to proceed at their own pace to the point of mastery. Since the teacher also handled every subject he/she most likely used many cross curricular lessons where history content complemented English or math studies, etc. With large classes divided by age group and subject, we are now using tech to make some past educational features possible.

[cybercoma]

Is there a course in constructive english as well?

They did away with phonics years ago. Does that count?

[GostHacked]

They did away with phonics years ago. Does that count?

I don't understand reinventing the wheel here. Math is taught the way it is, because great minds had already figured some of this out. And those math theorems are 100% valid and is what our modern maths are based on. Little Jonny would be best served knowing that 2+2=4 and 3x4=12. I have no problems with them getting creative later on but that is after the basics of math are taught and understood.

The logic with the new math being 3x4=11 is not just startling, it is 100% irresponsible and is doing the children a huge disservice.

[cybercoma]

Lots of discussion happening here without links, and lots of hearsay so it's hard for me to tell who is just talking off the cuff and who

I've looked further into constructivist math environments since this discussion began and it seems that it results in similar outcomes to traditional teaching methods. However, when there are students with behavioural or learning disabilities that are already suffering in mathematics and perhaps other areas, constructivist classrooms are not effective learning environments for those students. For students that do benefit from a constructivist environment, it results in external benefits, such as students being more engaged in learning, as well as having better communication skills and co-operative working skills. So it's a mixed bag. When it works, math outcomes are not only the same, but there are other added benefits beyond simply learning math. The problem is early identification of learners that will struggle with this system and getting them the interventions that they need before they fall too far behind.

[cybercoma]

I don't understand reinventing the wheel here. Math is taught the way it is, because great minds had already figured some of this out. And those math theorems are 100% valid and is what our modern maths are based on. Little Jonny would be best served knowing that 2+2=4 and 3x4=12. I have no problems with them getting creative later on but that is after the basics of math are taught and understood.

The logic with the new math being 3x4=11 is not just startling, it is 100% irresponsible and is doing the children a huge disservice.

Great minds didn't figure these things out by rote though. There's a conceptual reason 2+2=4 or 3x4=12. Allowing students to come to the answer themselves without spoonfeeding them, gives them a better conceptual understanding of arithmetic. And in most cases, their educational outcomes are the same, as I noted above with a linked study. Teachers are optimizing students learning by not only teaching them the math, but also fostering communication, co-operation, and problem-solving skills. As we move into a Post-Fordist society these skills are going to be paramount to the workplaces of the future. Industry is more collaborative than it has ever been and looking for more creative out-of-the-box ideas than it ever has. But how do you teach these skills? These aren't things you teach to a student. They have to develop them. Rolling it into math curriculum this way allows them to not only learn the math skills that they need, but also develop the other skills that will make them productive and successful in the way that industry needs in the future.

[Michael Hardner]

The logic with the new math being 3x4=11 is not just startling, it is 100% irresponsible and is doing the children a huge disservice.

If you watch the video, you can get a better understanding with what the concern here is.

At no time is anybody suggesting that they teach incorrect math.

[GostHacked]

If you watch the video, you can get a better understanding with what the concern here is.

At no time is anybody suggesting that they teach incorrect math.

Awesome, tell me one thread to watch a video and in another tell me you don't want to waste time watching a video.

[Michael Hardner]

I've looked further into constructivist math environments since this discussion began and it seems that it results in similar outcomes to traditional teaching methods. However, when there are students with behavioural or learning disabilities that are already suffering in mathematics and perhaps other areas, constructivist classrooms are not effective learning environments for those students. For students that do benefit from a constructivist environment, it results in external benefits, such as students being more engaged in learning, as well as having better communication skills and co-operative working skills. So it's a mixed bag. When it works, math outcomes are not only the same, but there are other added benefits beyond simply learning math. The problem is early identification of learners that will struggle with this system and getting them the interventions that they need before they fall too far behind.

I don't see why they can't teach a set of algorithms to approach arithmetic.

Indeed, one of the "new math" approaches to division in the video was taught to me as one of several approaches to long division - in the 1970s.

This whole thing strikes me as an argument waiting to happen. It's like they can set up a table with a bunch of chairs marked "traditionalists" and another marked "progressives" and just let everyone pick a chair before we decide what the topic is.

There are big problems out there - if children are taught either approach here, I don't see it making a big difference.

There's a convincing argument in September's Harper's magazine appealing for Algebra to be optional for American high schools. I was convinced:

http://harpers.org/archive/2013/09/wrong-answer/

(you must register to read it)

[cybercoma]

$21/year for a Harper's subscription to read that article. No thanks. Can you summarize its argument for me?

[Michael Hardner]

$21/year for a Harper's subscription to read that article. No thanks. Can you summarize its argument for me?

Sorry, I didn't realize. The site isn`t very clear about the cost to register.

Well, from memory, he talks about how Algebra isn`t necessary in life, generally, and that the skills required to master it are largely innate. That it`s misguided to force all highschoolers to pass it.

He talks about the history of Algebra in education, and how it was actually removed from high school subject matter in the early 20th century (the 1920s ?) but reinstated when Cold War fears sparked a myth that Russia was gaining superiority through their teaching of math to the masses.