Milton Friedman on what schools would be like with vouchers

from Scott Sumner's blog today:

I didn’t realize until now that today would have been the 100th birthday of my favorite economist. So I don’t have a post prepared. My favorite Friedman comment was in response to someone asking him what sort of schools would be provided under a voucher system. I believe he replied something to the effect; “If I knew the answer, I wouldn’t favor vouchers, I’d just instruct the public schools to operate that way.”

I love this observation, though of course the punchline is completely wrong. It is not possible to 'instruct the public schools to operate' this way or that. Public schools do what they do.

Probably true of most institutions and organizations, not to mention people.

(?)

long division & mental math

Barry Garelick:

Investigations and EM both boast about how their programs emphasize mental math. Though they don't seem receptive to the idea of teaching long division. I wonder why not? Long division is an ideal way to hone mental math skills. A problem like 56,098 divided by 84 requires a lot in the way of number sense and mental math. The first step is looking at the maximum number you can have to multiply by 84 and stay under 560. Rounding, 560 divided by 80 would be 7, but a quick glance will tell you that 7 x 84 will be greater than 560, which quickly leads you to "6" for a choice. And so on and so forth. But reformers don't want to hear about all that. It's drill and kill, has no value, and anyway, calculators have made long division obsolete.

Everyday Math, an implementation

Saint Paul public schools use Everyday Math for their curriculum in all elementary schools, regardless of type of school, including "city wide", magnets, or any flavor of "type" attached, be they self-designated Montessori, Core Knowledge, IB, or any other supposed program. I've been trying to understand how Everyday Math is implemented.

Recently, I was able to find a great number of resources on the Saint Paul public web site, including standards, frameworks, tools, curriculum planners, worksheets and other items that the district uses to support its teachers, coaches, admins with EM. I found these illuminating, if not encouraging. Perhaps they will enlighten others whose schools use Everyday Math as well.

Here is the K-6 Framework document for Mathematics. It sets out the overarching vision the district has and lists the standards they say they implement. It's a confusing document, poorly organized. I've excerpted some of it below, but to get a feel for it, it's best to read it.

The framework doc mentions that SPPS has been working with an organization called Institute for Learning, IFL, at the University of Pittsburgh. They help with the planning and execution of the curriculum. (anyone have an opinion of IFL?) The framework says "These principles guide not only administrative leadership, but curriculum, instruction, and assessment in an authentic standards-based model." Some of the IFL's nine principles of learning are excerpted below, mostly the lowlights. (I love how they service-marked one of them--AccountableTalkSM!

1. Organizing for Effort
An effort-based school replaces the assumption that aptitude determines what and how much students learn with the assumption that sustained and directed effort can yield high achievement for all students. Everything is organized to evoke and support this effort, to send the message that effort is expected and that tough problems yield to sustained work. High minimum standards are set and assessments are geared to the standards.All students are taught a rigorous curriculum, matched to the standards, along with as much time and expert instruction as they need to meet or exceed expectations.

...

5. Academic Rigor in a Thinking Curriculum
Thinking and problem solving will be the "new basics" of the 21st century. But the common idea that we can teach thinking without a solid foundation of knowledge must be abandoned. So must the idea that we can teach knowledge without engaging students in thinking. Knowledge and thinking are intimately joined. This implies a curriculum organized around major concepts that students are expected to know deeply. Teaching must engage students in active reasoning about these concepts. In every subject, at every grade level, instruction and learning must include commitment to a knowledge core, high thinking demand, and active use of knowledge.

Commitment to a Knowledge Core
�� An articulated curriculum that avoids needless repetition and progressively deepens understanding of core concepts.
�� Curriculum and instruction organized around major concepts.
�� Teaching and assessment focus on mastery of core concepts.
High Thinking Demand
�� Students expected to raise questions, to solve problems, to reason.
�� Challenging assignments in every subject.
�� Extended projects.
�� Explanations and justification expected.
�� Reflection on learning strategies.
Active Use of Knowledge
�� Synthesize several sources of information
�� Test understanding by applying and discussingconcepts.
�� Apply prior knowledge.
�� Interpret texts and construct solutions.

6. Accountable TalkSM
Talking with others about ideas and work is fundamental to learning. But not all talk sustains learning. For classroom talk to promote learning it must be accountable to the learning community, to accurate and appropriate knowledge, and to rigorous thinking.Accountable TalkSM seriously responds to and further develops what others in the group have said. It puts forth and demands knowledge that is accurate and relevant to the issue under discussion. Accountable TalkSM uses evidence appropriate to the discipline (e.g., proofs in mathematics, datafrom investigations in science, textual details in literature, documentary sources in history) and follows established norms of good reasoning.Teachers should intentionally create
the norms and skills of Accountable TalkSM in their classrooms.

Accountability to the Learning Community
�� Students actively participate in classroom talk.
�� Listen attentively.
�� Elaborate and build on each other's ideas.
�� Work to clarify or expand a proposition.
Accountability to Knowledge
�� Specific and accurate knowledge.
�� Appropriate evidence for claims and arguments.
�� Commitment to getting it right.
Accountability to Rigorous Thinking
�� Synthesize several sources of information.
�� Construct explanations and test understanding ofconcepts.
�� Formulate conjectures and hypotheses.
�� Employ generally accepted standards of reasoning.
�� Challenge the quality of evidence and reasoning.


7. Socializing Intelligence
Intelligence is much more than an innate ability to think quickly and stockpile bits of knowledge. Intelligence is a set of problem-solving and reasoning capabilities along with the habits of mind that lead one to use those capabilities regularly. Intelligence is equally a set of beliefs about one's right and obligation to understand and make sense of the world, and one's capacity to figure things out over time. Intelligent habits of mind are learned through the daily expectations placed on the learner. By calling on students to use the skills of intelligent thinking—and by holding them responsible for doing so—educators can "teach" intelligence. This is what teachers normally do with students they expect much from; it should be standard practice with all students.
Beliefs
�� I have the right and obligation to understand and make things work.
�� Problems can be analyzed and I am capable of that analysis.
Skills
�� A toolkit of problem-analysis skills (meta-cognitive strategies) and good intuition about when to use them.
�� Knowing how to ask questions, seek help, and get enough information to solve problems.

...

Eventually, they do get to the actual standards. Leaving aside whether NCTM or Minnesota standards are any good for now, you can read the standards, and then read what the framework says they need to do for instruction, and you'll see that it never says anything that would actually meet the standard.

Here's an example: For First Grade, the standard says (some pieces left out):

Teachers will:
�� Establish daily 60 minutes—or more—mathematics lessons.
�� Spend 35–40 minutes teaching Part 1 of the lesson,15–20 minutes on Part 2 (the practice and review), and 5 minutes on the closing.
�� Ensure that all students receive Part 1 of the lesson (no pull-outs).
�� Teach math to a heterogeneous group of students. Ability grouping is not recommended for Part 1 of the lesson.
�� Provide Flexible Group Lessons/Activities daily.
During Part 2, at least one or two flexible group lessons that are 5–7 minutes in length,are offered to a small group of students needing extra time/practice to learn an expected Secure skill/standard. (Pull-outs for support services could occur during Part 2 of the lesson.)

Provide students needing enrichment—in pairs or in a small group—activities to extend,enhance,and enrich their math learning, during all of Part 2. These activities must support the learning goals of the topic or strand of the current Everyday Math unit. If you determine they are demonstrating proficiency on the skill taught during Part 1, they may be excused from that as well. (Pullouts for support services could occur during Part 1 or 2 of the lesson.)
�� Teach, in sequence, all lessons in both Teacher Guides of Everyday Math,covering four to five lessons per week.
(Follow the pacing guide of the curriculum.)
�� Use the Everyday Math Games as part of the lesson, part of flexible groups, part of
homework, or at other review times. Students should play the games at school, up to four or five times per week.
�� Have students write their mathematical thinking/processes used to reach a solution, at least two times a week.
�� Create a classroom environment that recognizes and supports the strengths and abilities of diverse learners.
�� With students, create ongoing class charts, including vocabulary aids/graphic organizers.
�� Read Content Highlights at the beginning of each unit to support deeper mathematical knowledge and instruction.
�� Regularly analyze student work with their colleagues.
�� Provide multiple ways of presenting mathematical concepts.

�� Create a classroom environment where students take central roles in the math-talk
learning community.
This includes:
1) students listening in order to understand each other's thinking;
2) students reasoning, defending,and proving their math concepts to one another;
3) students using thelanguage of mathematics in order to engage in Math-Talk/Accountable Talk; (Refer to Principles of Learning #6.)

Read the rest of the document for more. Remember, those were for FIRST GRADE.

Other documents that shed light on how the district operates:

The Math Coaching Vision document is here. This appears to be how math coaches create accountability, at least at their quarterly coaching meetings.

Here is a document explaining what you would be seeing if you visited a District Model Classroom teaching Everyday Math.


This document is called Everyday Math Instruction Evidence . It lists standards and benchmarks of what is supposed to be happening in a classroom during instruction, presumably so the teacher or teacher evaluator can determine if such elements are occurring.

Here are some of the things they are looking for :

a. Creates a rich math classroom environment
- Number Line, Number Grid posted and used
- Student generated charts are available
- Word Wall is available for student use
- Math Literature is read by teacher to class and available to students
b. Provides Part 1, Part 2 and a Closing, including pacing
- All students participate in Part 1
- Students are placed in appropriate flexible groups, for reteaching and for enrichment
- A closing includes students sharing what they learned and/or what still confuses them
- The pacing expectations are closely followed
c. Uses open ended questions - Accountable Talk
- Encourages critical mathematical thinking
- Students use reasoning, defending, and proving skills
- Students use the language of mathematics
- Students and teacher are questioners
- Students take responsibility for their learning

Read the document for more.

welcome to the Grand Canyon

The Palo Alto textbook selection committee has voted for Everyday Math.

Before the secret ballot was taken, committee members summarized the pros and cons of the two finalists and also tried to address parent complaints against Everyday Mathematics that were raised in a community meeting last week.

Positives of Everyday Mathematics included depth, quality of conceptual lessons, a high-quality teachers' manual and strong electronic resources. Concerns included a plethora of components, occasional assumptions that students have mastered concepts they might not have mastered and a problematic transition from fifth grade to what students will need for middle-school math.

"There's a huge gap between what they get in fifth grade and what they need is sixth grade," one fifth-grade teacher said. "The hole is as huge as the Grand Canyon. So we're going to have to address that problem as a district."

This is the kind of thing that makes me think parents need the right to sue their school districts.

It will be interesting to see how this situation unfolds. Assuming the quotations in the article are correct, the superintendent does not appear to be enthusiastic about the committee's recommendation, which means the board will receive mixed signals. If I were a parent in the district I would, at a minimum, urge the board to delay its decision until the district has a plan in place to remediate Everyday Math's deficiency where the transition to sixth grade math is concerned.

Are people familiar with enVisions?

ignoring parents in Palo Alto
welcome to the Grand Canyon
a teacher-mom on Everyday Math
the plot thickens
enlightenment
Steven H on Everyday Math in Palo Alto
where parents get their information
"reality" in Palo Alto

Parents frustrated over math texts
Teacher committee recommends new math text
Ed Week on the ed wars

interview with my cousin re: her experience with EM

Isn't it ironic?

My district has paid a conflict resolution facilitator to meet with several math focus groups. Why? Because parents from two of the six schools have voiced various concerns over their schools' math program, TERC aka Investigations in Number, Data, & Space. The focus groups consist of parents from the district. The district has a total of six elementary schools, two middles schools, and a high school. The focus groups have put parents from two elementary schools together.

What's ironic?

Tonight was the focus group meeting of parents from the two elementary schools with the TERC math curriculum. Too bad the facilitator did not show up.

Do you think petty cash can pay for the sitter?

The Skipper gets off Gilligan's Island

The Skipper in the title is none other than Skip Fennell, President of NCTM who testified before a subcommittee of the House Science and Technology Committee. This is a guy you'd definitely want to be stranded on an island with, because he would surely know how to get rescued. Here's an excerpt from his testimony:

"I would like to address an element of a child’s education that is often overlooked by policy experts and elected officials. As members of the National Science Board and other prominent education leaders have noted, a child’s first—and perhaps most—influential teacher is a parent. Any call to action—small or large—must recognize the crucial role that parents play in encouraging children and exposing them to knowledge and ideas about any topic or subject, including mathematics. Without parental support and involvement, it will be very difficult to convince young people of the urgency and importance of STEM literacy in this country."

His politburo is quite good. The party-line answer of "the influential role played by parents" is designed to make everyone feel good. But what it really means is, if you want your child to learn math, you better do your part at home. Which means more than providing a support for learning. It means that the principle role that parents play is to make up for the lack of instruction provided by schools forced to use inferior math programs, and taught by teachers with inadequate math knowledge.

Which brings me to the Focal Points. The focal points are like an ink blot test. You can see whatever you want to see in them. If you want to adopt TERC in your school district, just say it conforms to the Focal Points. Why not? That's what Prince William County in VA did last year when they adopted Investigations. Well, actually they said it after Scott Foresman, the publisher of Investigations said it. Check it out: on the County's website is a "correlation document" prepared by Scott Foresman (publisher of Investigation) showing how Investigations meets the Focal Points. It's located here. This is for the new edition of Investigations.

You may also be interested in the School Board's document that they prepared to rebut the protests from one lone parent (an engineer) in the County against Investigations. Go here and scroll down to where it says: Clarifying Misconceptions about Investigations in Number, Data, and Space and click on it. It's described as: "This position paper was written by members of the PWCS Office of Mathematics in response to some criticisms and concerns about Investigations."

Here's only one of many gems: "The crisis in mathematics education in the United States is at least twenty-five years old. Programs like Investigations did not create the problem, but were developed after 1989 to address the problem." Reminds me of that old joke:

Mother: Stop pulling the dog's tail.
Child: I'm not pulling, the dog is pulling.
(Cue laugh track)

As they say in blog land: "Read the whole thing". Then weep.

TERC I am

from the Beyond TERC

Anonymous said...
I am TERC
TERC I am

That TERC-I-Am
That TERC-I-Am
I do not like that TERC-I-Am

Do you like reform in math?

I do not like it, TERC-I-Am
I do not like reform in math.

Would you like it here or there?

I would not like it here or there.
I would not like it anywhere.
I do not like reform in math.
I do not like it, TERC-I-am.

Would you like it in your class?
Would you like it for your lass?

I do not like it in any class.
I do not like it for my lass.
I do not like it here or there.
I do not like it anywhere.
I do not like reform in math.
I do not like it, TERC-I-Am.

Would you like to do the fad?
Would you like to do math bad?

Not with the fad.
Not do math bad.
Not in the class.
Not for my lass.

I would not do TERC here or there.
I would not do TERC anywhere.
I do not like reform in math.
I do not like it, TERC-I-Am.

Would you? Could you? At the store?
Draw it. Draw it.
Draw it some more.

I would not, could not at the store.
Draw it, draw it.
NO! I CAN REALLY DO MORE.

You may like it, you will see.
You may like to draw number three.

I would not, will not, draw number three.
Not at the store. TERC, let me be.

These drawings are silly, dont you see.
I understand, what is three
Now let me go, I must insist
I have real math to learn, you I can resist

I like real math, TERC I Am
I like it,
I un-der-stand it
MATH I AM

These silly games must go
I have place value I must know

I use it to subtract and add
Those terms, I know, you find bad

So TERC-I-Am, please let me be
I am MATH, I am more than counting to three

I multiply and divide
I have algorithms I can derive

TERC you must go
This I really do know

I am math and you will see
Because in the end, I will be set free

"Investigations" in Prince William County, VA

Prince William County, in Virginia, recently adopted Investigations for grades K-3. The school district has an online TV station that gives updates on what's going on. If you go here you can watch a video of the Superintendent and Deputy Superintendent of PWC school district talk about Investigations, including interviews with teachers about the program. It is on the first 5 or so minutes of the program. The rest of the program is devoted to other issues.

All the standard verbiage is there: "hands on", "inquiry-based", "build a foundation", "the way we learned was by memorization" . This last one, while employing the usual canard (i.e., the previous method didn't involve any understanding whatsoever, it was just pure memorization) is given a caveat: the Superintendent condescends to recognize that memorization "works for some students". Just not all.

So far there are only about two parents in PWC who are upset. One has protested and has done a good job doing so, to the extent that the school board wrote a written response to address his concerns. But Investigations is there to stay. Old story.