Friday, October 30, 2009
Tuesday, August 11, 2009
means of transmission
EDUCATION trends have three means of transmission, all invisible to the public: the sale of textbooks and other instructional materials, teaching in schools of education, and teacher-training seminars conducted during the paid noninstructional days that are provided in teachers' contracts. As superintendent in California, [Bill] Honig realized that he couldn't directly affect what was taught in schools of education, because they are independent of the state board of education, and so if he wanted to have any real influence over what went on in public-school classrooms, the best means at hand were textbooks and seminars. He moved aggressively to put his people in charge both of setting up California's eight annual "staff development" days for teachers and of writing state subject-matter "frameworks," which form the basis for textbook orders.Thus was born the California Subject Matter Project. Ed headed the History Social Science Project; Phil Daro, currently a member of the mathematics Work Group for the Common Core national standards effort, was in charge of the Mathematics Project.The Reading Wars by Nicholas LemannAtlantic Monthly November 1997
The Subject Matter Projects gave teachers professional development in the form of seminars taught by disciplinary specialists. History teachers took seminars given by history professors, not consultants. Ed says today that, at the time, he had no idea how radical Honig's concept was.
Me, neither.
Monday, August 3, 2009
CA World Class Math
You may want to sign the letter.
CA Coalition for World Class Math
CO Coalition for World Class Math
CT Coalition for World Class Math
NJ Coalition for World Class Math
PA coalition for World Class Math
United States Coalition for World Class Math
Parents' Group Wants to Shape Math Standards
Common Core Standards: Who Made the List?
6.30.2009 Parents Group Wants to Shape Math Standards
7.1.2009 Common Core Standards: Who Made the List?
7.14.2009 ‘Common Core’ Initiative: Who’ll Make Decisions? (Jill Gladstone, Timotha Trigg)
7.24.2009 A Look at the Promises and Challenges of Common Standards—UPDATED
7.30.2009 Transparency of Common-Standards Process at Issue
Sunday, August 2, 2009
stakeholders
To the Editor:
Your June 17, 2009, article on national standards discusses the virtual exclusion so far of the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics, the National Council of Teachers of English, and the International Reading Association from the Common Core State Standards Initiative. But the exclusion of other key stakeholders also must be addressed.
First is the exclusion of authentic subject-matter groups from the “Common Core” decisionmaking process that determines what is in the final document. Anyone proposing to create mathematics and English-language-arts standards must enlist and pay heed to the expertise of true subject-area experts. Members of the American Mathematical Society, the Mathematical Association of America, appropriate engineering societies, and the Association of Literary Scholars and Critics should be allowed to provide input.
In addition to being true experts in their fields, college and university professors are in the best position to inform standards-writing committees about what high school graduates need to know and be able to do for success in credit-bearing college-level courses. It is well documented that community colleges nationwide have freshman remediation rates of more than 70 percent in math and English. Clearly, the community college stakeholders must have a seat at the standards-writing table.
Tax-paying parents are another important stakeholder group absent from the Common Core project. Yet the ultimate responsibility for ensuring that children receive a proper education rests with them. It is they who must closely monitor the success of students and schools, and it is they who must pay the price—in dollars and in anguish—when inadequate standards leave children ill-prepared for college or the workplace. Dozens of grassroots parent groups have sprung up in the past decade to advocate for improvements in mathematics education in the public schools. Our group, the United States Coalition for World Class Math, is just one of these.
Before mathematics standards for K-12 are finalized, the National Governors Association and the Council of Chief State School Officers should make room at the table for one of the most important education constituencies in the country: the parents of children in our public schools.
The writers are co-founders of the United States Coalition for World Class Math.
Vol. 28, Issue 36, Pages 26-27
CO Coalition for World Class Math
CT Coalition for World Class Math
NJ Coalition for World Class Math
PA coalition for World Class Math
United States Coalition for World Class Math
Parents' Group Wants to Shape Math Standards
Common Core Standards: Who Made the List?Education Week coverage:
6.30.2009 Parents Group Wants to Shape Math Standards
7.1.2009 Common Core Standards: Who Made the List?
7.14.2009 ‘Common Core’ Initiative: Who’ll Make Decisions?
7.30.2009 Transparency of Common-Standards Process at Issue
1.12.2007 how politics work
First Principles of Algebra - 1912
Preface
In writing the First Principles of Algebra the authors have had constantly before them two chief aims:
(1) To provide a gradual and natural introduction to the symbols and processes of algebra.
(2) To give vital purpose to the study of algebra by using it to do interesting and valuable things.
Each of these aims leads to the same order of topics, which, however, differs somewhat from the conventional order.
If it is admitted that there should be a gradually increasing complexity of forms to be manipulated, it follows that factoring and complicated work in fractions have no proper place in the first half year. This book is arranged so that factoring may begin with the second semester and complicated fractions may come still later. Simple fractions are treated in Chapter V.
The pupil is introduced to the algebraic notation by recalling and stating in terms of letters certain rules of arithmetic with which he is already familiar. The simplicity of the algebraic formulas, compared with the arithmetical statement of rules known to the pupil, cannot fail to impress him with the usefulness and power of the subject which h is about to study. This impression will be deepened when, in Chapter VI [Literal Equations and Their Uses], rules which caused considerable trouble in arithmetic are derived with the utmost ease by algebraic processes.
[snip]
For the development of skill in algebraic manipulation it is not sufficient to solve a certain number of exercises when an operation is first introduced. To fix each operation in the learner's mind, there must be recurring drills extending over a considerable period of time. These are amply provided for in this book. The fundamental operations on integral and simple fractional expressions, the solution of simple equations, and the representation of given conditions in algebraic symbols are constantly reviewed in the numerous lists of "drill exercises," many of which may be solved mentally. Factoring is practised almost daily throughout the second half year.
The principles of algebra used in the Elementary Course are enunciated in a small number of short rules--eighteen in all. The purpose of these rules is to furnish, in simple form, a codification of those operations of algebra which require special emphasis. Such a codification has several important advantages:
By constant reference to these few fundamental statements they become an organic, and hence a permanent, part of the learner's mental equipment.
By their systematic use he is made to realize that the processes of algebra, which seem so multifarious and heterogeneous, are, in reality, few and simple.
Such a body of principles furnishes a ready means for the correction of erroneous notions, a constant incitement to effective review, and a definite basis upon which to proceed at each stage of progress.
The authors gratefully acknowledge the receipt of many helpful suggestions from teachers who have used their High School Algebra
H. E. Slaught.
N. J. Lennes.
Chicago and New York,
April, 1912
[snip]
Chapter VI: Literal Equations and Their Uses
102. Some of the advantages of algebra over arithmetic in solving problems have been pointed out in the preceding chapters. For instance, the brevity and simplicity of statement secured through the use of letters to represent numbers; the translation of problems into equations; and the clear and logical solution of these equations, step by step.
Another advantaged is set forth in the present chapter; namely, the opportunity offered in Algebra to summarize the solution of a whole class of problems by solving what is called a literal equation, thus obtaining a formula which may be used in solving other problems.
For example, in arithmetic we solved many problems obtaining the interest when the principal, rate, and time were given. We now see that all of these can be summarized in the one literal equation
i = prt.
[snip]
104. In arithmetic a problem is said to be solved when a numerical answer is obtained which satisfies the conditions given. The solutions thus far found in algebra have, for the most part, been of this sort.
It is customary, however, to say that a problem has been solved in the algebraic sense when a formula is found which gives complete directions for deriving the numerical answer.
Thus, p = i/rt is a solution for the principal since it states precisely how to find the principal in terms of interest, rate, and time.
105. It is thus seen that from the literal equation i=prt we obtain the complete solution of every problem which calls for any one of these four numbers in terms of the other three.
In modern times machines are extensively used for computation. The algebraic solution of a literal equation gets the problem ready for the computing machine, that is, it gets the formula which the computer must use.
First Principles of Algebra: Elementary Course
by H.E. Slaught Associate Professor of Mathematics in the University of Chicago
N.J. Lennes Instructor in Mathematics in Columbia University
Boston ALlyn and Bacon 1912
pp. pp. iii - v; 92-93
One hundred years ago, mathematicians wrote math textbooks with the advice of math teachers. Today parents have to organize grass roots political movements to lobby for the inclusion of mathematicians in the design of national standards.
CO Coalition for World Class Math
CT Coalition for World Class Math
NJ Coalition for World Class Math
PA coalition for World Class Math
United States Coalition for World Class Math
Parents' Group Wants to Shape Math Standards
Common Core Standards: Who Made the List?
Wednesday, July 15, 2009
Colorado Coalition for World Class math
Friday, July 10, 2009
comments needed, part 2
parents are responsible for results
CA Math Frameworks: parents must be "involved" in math education at all grade levels
CA math framework: Responsibilities of Teachers, Students, Parents, Administrators
parents are the problem
outsourcing to parents
CT Coalition for World Class Math
NJ Coalition for World Class Math
PA coalition for World Class Math
United States Coalition for World Class Math
Parents' Group Wants to Shape Math Standards
Common Core Standards: Who Made the List?
Tuesday, June 30, 2009
time to put the public back in public schools
The United States Coalition for World Class Math, a new non-partisan organization of concerned parents collaborating with professional mathematicians, educators, and others to promote improvements in K-12 mathematics education, has just issued its "Design Principles for K-12 Mathematics Standards and Assessments." It is also asking to be included in the decision-making process for the national mathematics standards currently being developed by the National Governors Association and the Council of Chief State School Officers in concert with several other educational organizations.
"Extraordinary numbers of grassroots groups have formed in recent years to learn more about current issues in mathematics education and to promote improvements in K-12 mathematics curricula," says Coalition co-founder Timotha Trigg. "Many parents believe there is already a crisis in mathematics education and fear that poor standards, if adopted by states on a national scale, would make the situation even worse."
For example, the most recent Trends in International Math and Science Study (TIMSS) found that only 6% of U.S. eighth grade students perform at the advanced level in mathematics, whereas 40 - 45% of eighth graders in top-performing countries reach this level. The poor performance of U.S. students on these and other state, national, and international assessments has not only spurred interest in creating national mathematics standards, it has also motivated many parent groups to unite under a single banner and to design a document setting forth their own principles for K-12 mathematics standards and assessments.
Jill Gladstone, who helped to spearhead the Coalition, states, "This document is intended to help inform the Common Core State Standards Initiative, the 46-state effort that will result in K-12 mathematics standards and assessments for public school students in participating states." Key points of the Coalition's Design Principles, found at United States Coalition for World Class Math, include:
|
Contact Information:
Jill Gladstone 908-672-2070
Timotha Trigg 610-388-6220
E-Mail: USWCmath @ yahoo.com
Website: www.usworldclassmath.org
CT Coalition for World Class Math
NJ Coalition for World Class Math
PA coalition for World Class Math
United States Coalition for World Class Math
Parents' Group Wants to Shape Math Standards
Common Core Standards: Who Made the List?
comments needed
Wednesday, June 17, 2009
United States for World Class Math
United States Coalition for World Class Math
Check out their Design Principles for K-12 Mathematics Standards:
1. All students should be expected to master foundational concepts and skills – especially in arithmetic – that are prerequisite to an authentic Algebra I course in a logical progression from grade to grade in the elementary and middle school years. The Final Report of the National Mathematics Advisory Panel (NMAP) should be the guiding document describing appropriate mathematical content.
2. The K-7 standards should be designed to prepare as many students as possible for an authentic Algebra I course in Grade 8. K-7 standards should be based on the "Critical Foundations of Algebra" described on pages 17-19 of the NMAP’s Final Report. Standards for authentic Algebra I and Algebra II courses should be based on "The Major Topics of School Algebra" described on pages 15-16 of the NMAP’s Final Report.
3. Standards-based alternatives could be written for less prepared students and alternate paths after algebra and geometry for high school students, depending on student achievement, interests, and career goals. For example:
a. The standards document could outline the possibility of a two-year course spanning Grade 7 and Grade 8 based on Grade 7 standards for students who, at the end of Grade 6, are judged to need more time to master foundational concepts and skills for Algebra I.
b. The standards document could outline a two-year course spanning Grade 8 and Grade 9 based on authentic Algebra I standards for students completing Grade 7 who are judged to need two full years to master Algebra I standards.
4. As emphasized by the National Mathematics Advisory Panel, "a focused, coherent progression of mathematics learning, with an emphasis on proficiency with key topics, should become the norm in elementary and middle school mathematics curricula. Any approach that continually revisits topics year after year without closure is to be avoided." Placement of the standards should reflect the grade level at which mastery is expected, and standards should not be repeated from year to year.
a. The sequence of the standards should be logical and hierarchical, following the structure of mathematics itself and should be modeled after the strong standards in California, Indiana, and Massachusetts.
b. "Benchmarks for the Critical Foundations" (pages 19-20 in the National Mathematics Advisory Panel’s Final Report) and recommendations from the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics’ Curriculum Focal Points should be used for grade level placement.
c. Concepts and skills, once mastered, should be used in subsequent years with a minimum of review.
5. In order to focus on building solid foundations for the more advanced mathematics – including algebra – that occurs in Grades 8-12, extraneous topics including aspects of geometry such as tessellations, nets, statistical approaches to geometric properties, much of data analysis, probability and statistics, and non-algebraic concepts such as pattern recognition should not be present in the K-7 standards.
6. In Grades K-7, the distribution of content by strand should be stated explicitly as percentages at each grade level and should change as students move up through the grades.
a. Early grades should concentrate on the arithmetic of whole numbers and measurement, with a limited amount of geometry and graphing. Certain aspects of algebra, as well as preparation for algebra, should be present from the earliest grades, as is the case with the California and Massachusetts standards.
b. Students should be expected to acquire automatic recall of basic number facts at least to 10 x 10 and 10 + 10.
c. Students should be expected to understand and use the standard algorithms of whole-number arithmetic in the early elementary grades (i.e., addition, subtraction, multiplication, and long division).
d. Students should be expected to understand and use the standard definitions for operations with fractions in conjunction with the standard algorithms of whole number arithmetic to compute sums, differences, products and quotients of fractions, including fractions expressed as decimals and percents.
e. The algebra strand gains emphasis in the middle grades, focusing on the content specified by the National Mathematics Advisory Panel.
7. The organization of the standards should change at Grade 8.
a. In grades K-7, standards should include multiple strands of mathematics, with their relative weight appropriately adjusted through the grades.
b. For algebra and beyond, standards should be given for a single-subject course sequence (Algebra I, Geometry, Algebra II, Pre-calculus, etc.) and their components re-ordered for alternative integrated mathematics courses. The standards for the Geometry course should require students to do proofs and to understand postulates, theorems and corollaries.
8. Mathematical problems should have mathematical answers.
a. In general, students should learn techniques for problem solving that can be applied to many contexts. Problems should be contextualized in the "real world" only when the context is sensible and relevant and contributes to an understanding of the mathematics in the problem.
b. Standards documents should include example problems. The level of difficulty of these problems should reflect mathematical complexity rather than non-mathematical issues.
9. K-12 math standards should meet the criteria specified by the American Federation of Teachers. They should be:
a. Clear and specific enough to provide the basis for a common core curriculum.
b. Rooted in the content of mathematics.
c. Clear and explicit about the content and the complexity students are to learn.
d. Measurable and objective.
e. Comparable in rigor to the standards of A+ countries, with grade-level specificity.
10. Standards documents should appropriately emphasize the attainment of procedural fluency. Students must be competent in performing all K-7 tasks without using a calculator.
11. Standards documents should only address mathematical content; language pertaining to pedagogy should be excluded.
12. As emphasized by the National Mathematics Advisory Panel, mathematicians should be included in greater numbers, along with mathematics educators, mathematics education researchers, curriculum specialists, classroom teachers, and the general public, in the standard-setting process and in the review and design of mathematical test items for state, NAEP, and commercial tests.
CO Coalition for World Class Math
CT Coalition for World Class Math
NJ Coalition for World Class Math
PA coalition for World Class Math
United States Coalition for World Class Math
Parents' Group Wants to Shape Math Standards
Common Core Standards: Who Made the List?
