Very Important Message....

As I have said many times, this debate is about math. There are many things in life far more important. My mother-in-law forwarded these reminders to me to make life the best it can be. I loved this and thought I would share.

1. Life isn't fair, but it's still good.

2. When in doubt, just take the next small step.

3. Life is too short to waste time hating anyone.

4. Don't take yourself so seriously. No one else does.

5. Pay off your credit cards every month.

6. You don't have to win every argument. Agree to disagree.

7. Cry with someone. It's more healing than crying alone.

8. It's OK to get angry with God. He can take it.

9. Save for retirement starting with your first paycheck.

10. Love your parents because they will be gone before you know it.

11. Make peace with your past so it won't screw up the present.

12. It's OK to let your children see you cry

13. Don't compare your life to others'. You have no idea what their journey is all about.

14. If a relationship has to be a secret, you shouldn't be in it.

15. Everything can change in the blink of an eye. But don't worry; God never blinks.

16. Take a deep breath. It calms the mind.

17. Get rid of anything that isn't useful, beautiful or joyful.

18. Whatever doesn't kill you really does make you stronger.

19. It's never too late to have a happy childhood. But the second one is up to you and no one else.

20. When it comes to going after what you love in life, don't take no for an answer.

21. Burn the candles, use the nice sheets, wear the fancy lingerie.

Don't save it for a special occasion. Today is special.

22. Over prepare, then go with the flow.

23. Be eccentric now. Don't wait for old age to wear purple.

24. The most important sex organ is the brain.

25. No one is in charge of your happiness but you.

26. Frame every so-called disaster with these words: In five years, will this matter?

27. Always choose life.

28. Forgive everyone everything.

29. What other people think of you is none of your business.

30. Time heals almost everything. Give time time.

31. However good or bad a situation is, it will change.

32. Your job won't take care of you when you are sick. Your friends and parents will. Stay in touch.

33. Believe in miracles.

34. God loves you because of who God is, not because of anything you did or didn't do.

35. Don't audit life. Show up and make the most of it now.

36. Growing old beats the alternative -- dying young.

37. Your children get only one childhood.

38. All that truly matters in the end is that you loved.

39. Get outside every day. Miracles are waiting everywhere.

40. If we all threw our problems in a pile and saw everyone else's, we'd grab ours back.

41. Envy is a waste of time. You already have all you need.

42. The best is yet to come.

43.. No matter how you feel, get up, dress up and show up.

44. Yield.

45. Life isn't tied with a bow, but it's still a gift.

With reference to #26...this disaster of math and the lack of content it is teaching our children really WILL matter in 5 years. That being said one last reminder: Some things in life ARE worth fighting for. Fighting for our children and the best quality of education that can be offered so we are not picking up the pieces in 5 years like Eldon now is...IS WORTH IT! Keep fighting the good fight parents. UNITED WE STAND. VOTE IN APRIL!

Questions Answered?

There will be a monthly school board meeting held tonight at 5:30 in the administration building in Camdenton. Many of us are anxious to get the answers to the questions we have been asking for months now. We handed the school board this list of questions and we have been told more than once we will get answers. We expect those should come tonight. We have been waiting for a month now for the answers to questions that should have been answered very quickly, assuming that our district did their homework before engaging our children in this program. Some of us find it troubling that the questions appear to be so difficult to answer. Understand....we have had questions since our first board meeting in November with not any answers offered....ever. Many of us have attended every single board meeting....and NOT ONE time have we ever seen the school board have any true or meaningful dialogue with reference to this math. That is a huge concern. Understand ....that the Sunshine Law is very specific in the fact that if the school board is not discussing it in the public school board meetings, then by law they cannot have private conversations as a group about this subject. Understand....that after three prior board meetings where math WAS on the agenda and we were promised answers...in January the subject of math was not even put on the agenda. We are hoping that we will hear those answers that we are looking for tonight. I will keep you posted.

Questions For The School Board
Questions For The School BoardMath Curriculum For Hawthorn December 12, 2009

1. On what basis did we choose this math curriculum? Aside from information provided by the publisher, what independent research showed merit in using this curriculum?(Refer to earlier post done in the last week "Their Silence Is Broken".)

2. Name 5 schools in the state of Missouri who are currently using this as their core without any supplementation?(Remember the school has provided over 30 schools who we have called to find that none of them were using Investigations as their core without supplementation...and only 3 of them were using it as their core, but each of those schools said that they were REQUIRED to use supplements.)

3. Did anyone consider that this was a reading rich math curriculum? In light of the fact that our children in Hawthorn are not proficient readers overall, how did this oversight happen? Was that taken into consideration? How are we addressing the fact that those math problems are written by adults for adults? How are we ensuring that each child is reading and understanding each problem inside and outside of the classroom?

4. Now that we have been given the "green light" to supplement, what are we going to use to ensure that there is uniformity in the supplementation? Are the teachers going to be provided with materials to assist them in supplementation?(Osage Beach and Hurricane Deck have been allowed to use supplements ALL year long...we have not. Our teachers have been strong armed all year and NOT allowed to use supplements until right before Christmas. However, there was no direction on what those would be. It just came out publicly for the fist time that the other two schools in our district ARE using something that we have not been allowed to use.)

......Now more than ever the parents of Hawthorn students want to know WHY our kids are NOT using what Osage Beach has been using all year. We are not using the same material, and we want to know why. If they are not using Investigations then why do the kids in Hawthorn have to? Since the last board meeting is has been made pretty clear by parents talking to other parents at OBE that we are NOT doing even close to the same thing.

5. Why are we not using our own Osage Beach Elementary School as a guide to improve our elementary schools throughout the district? Why are Hurricane Deck and Osage Beach allowed to use supplements that were not offered in Hawthorn? Why is there no uniformity? (Few schools in the state do as well in testing as Osage Beach Elementary. It does not take a rocket scientist to see that. Why are we not doing what they are doing?)

6. Why was I, as a parent, not informed when my child was being experimented on with Investigations when it was piloted on her as a third grader? By the school's own admission on their website: "Without question, these programs do represent a completely new method of learning mathematics, which is foreign to parents and teachers alike and this creates discomfort."(Why was there not full disclosure to each parent of children in the three third grade classes that used this "whole hog" without supplements last year? Should there not be full disclosure for every parent when using a very controversial program that is considered "under review" by the What Works Clearinghouse? For most of us a nod of "under review" is not enough to use it on our kids in light of all of the overwhelming data to prove what a failure it has been and remains to be all over the United States.)

All Missourians Must Contact State Officials NOW!

A new comment was sent this morning. It needs our attention and requires that we use our voices at the state level to not only help our children, but all children in the state of Missouri. We all want what is best for our children, but if you know this is wrong, then it would be just as wrong to keep your voices to yourself and not allow your state officials to hear from you. Ambivalence will have a price. I promise you. Find your voice and use it. Teachers, I have heard from SOOOO many of you in private, here is your opportunity to use your voices to help our children right now. Read the comment below and link to the information on how to contact our state officials.


concerned has left a new comment on your post "Great Editorial Done By Our Local Newspaper....":

My thoughts and prayers are definitely with the students, parents, teachers and school board members. As Missouri residents, we all have a responsibility to contact our elected and appointed officials and express our concern for the children.

If you click on "concerned" and go to the Math Education blog www.improvingmathed.blogspot.com , you will find contact information for your senators, representatives and the state board of education.

Our weak K-12 math standards are still awaiting state board approval. Now is the time to let you voice be heard.Districts across the state will continue to adopt mediocre programs until our standards are improved.

For more information see www.missourimath.org. You may also wish to review the released Algebra I End of Course exam posted on DESEs website. About 13 out of 35 questions are "authentic" algebra as described in the National Mathematics Advisory Panel's report.

Great Editorial Done By Our Local Newspaper....

This is a great editorial piece done by our local free newspaper The Camden County Reporter. I appreciate their coverage of this issue. A reporter from The Camden County Reporter, Jeff Thompson, attended a recent forum to become educated on what the REAL issues were. I am so impressed with the measures he went to in order to make sure he heard from both parties and then reported a fair and balanced story.

Taken from http://www.theccreporter.com/ :

MIP (Math In Peril)

Studies have shown that the United States is behind many countries in math and science.

Over the years public schools have been “dumbing down” each successive generation which just makes the problem worse.

Curriculums are being used that are actually hurting more than helping.

Now the Camdenton School District is jumping on board with the mathematical farce called “Math Investigations Program”.

The school district should do research before forcing a program on kids that will actually keep them from learning math.

In an online forum at The Online Teacher Resource (www.teach-nology.com) a 22 year veteran teacher has been using the MIP program for four years – and it is doing more harm than good, according to her.

“First, the kids do not learn their basic facts with this program. I know I'm a veteran and have been teaching for 22 years, but I don't care who you are, you can't do math until you know those facts. So here I have a program that is very time-consuming in the classroom, and I feel the need to take extra time to teach the basic facts.”

Math was easy for me in school and one of the things that made it easy was actually being taught how to solve the math problem.

If the teacher would have asked me to “Write a story problem to go with this problem: 352 (divided by) 168 = ?”.

What? How about teaching the child HOW to solve the problem? Does the kid even know how to do division?

Here is another part of an actual worksheet found at www.mathinvestigations.com called “Candy Math”:

1. Estimate how many candies are in the bag.
2. Open your bag and count the candies. How many candies are in the bag?
3. How far off was your guess?
4. Group your candies into sets by color. Write the total for each color:

And then you come to number six.

6. Write a candy math word problem.

First of all you have the expense of buying bags of candy for grade school kids and then when you give grade school kids candy there won’t be any left to count.

You teach children how to do the math problem first and then you can investigate deeper.

And the school district’s solution if parents have a problem with the MIP program: make sure parent-help materials are sent home, monthly “Math Nights” to help parents with the MIP process.

So in other words teach the parents how to understand the program and they can help their children.

In that case what do we pay the schools for? If the parents are supposed to help the teachers then why not just pull the kids out of school and home school them?

In this world of modern technology we think we know more than those who lived and taught 20, 30 or 40 years ago, but in many cases we are wrong.

Want some proof? Give a grade school or even high school kid a math problem but don’t allow them to use a calculator.

Do they even know how to do it with paper and pencil?

Maybe this new program will help; maybe it will bring the Camdenton School District math scores to the highest in the country.

Then again, maybe it will prepare them for a future career where a single phrase will be their life blood:

“You want fries with that?”

Just don’t ask them to count the fries.

Differing Points Of View

There have been several readers posting comments in the last couple of days. There have been a couple that I thought I would post. In the event you do not keep up with the comments, I thought you might find these to be of interest.


iteachmath said...

Stacy- You say you want to see some research so I am providing it. I care about our students and want what is best for them so please post the following (sorry it is so lengthy):

Regardless of what math program is used, every school will be eventually listed as “needs improvement” by the state. This is because the No Child Left Behind (NCLB) act requires that all students be at 100% by 2014. It does not take a brain surgeon to figure out that this is an impossible task. If you look at the DESE website, it shows what level each school has to be at as the years progress. The levels increase each year as it approaches that 100% for 2014.

All the research I have done indicates that children will learn what they are taught no matter what the math program is. The research also indicates that providing data with an inquiry-based series is difficult when teachers do not all use it in the way it was intended.
My proof: http://books.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=11025&page=189 and http://www.nctm.org/news/content.aspx?id=12320 (look under “Research Evidence for Effectiveness”). I am sure that this is due to the fact that all math series require some kind of supplementation and not all teachers use the same supplement.

When I found out that I was going to be teaching Investigations this year, I was petrified. The reason being is that I knew I was going to have to learn new approaches to math. Now that I am over half way through the school year, I am in awe at the math language and processes students are using. As long as the teacher monitors and follows the grade level expectations, your child will learn. Teaching Investigations has made me become a better math teacher, and I now know what I have to do to reach all children. Do I have to supplement? Yes, a little. Did I have to supplement with the traditional math series. Yes, a little. The big difference I see now is that students are taking charge of their learning and exploring more in-depth to develop an understanding as to why certain processes work. For teachers who dislike the program, I cannot speak for them. If they are having difficulty with the program, I would hope that they would seek out help from those teachers who are experiencing success with it.

The proof that inquiry-based math does work is on the U.S. Department of EducationInstitute of Education Sciences. http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/reports/elementary_math/topic/tabfig.asp The results of their research shows that Everyday Math does work. Everyday Math has been around for 25 years and has had 17 different research projects done on it. Investigations (also inquiry-based) is currently undergoing a 5 year study that will end in 2010. The description of the study can be seen at http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/projects/evaluation/index.asp

Again research on Investigations thus far has been difficult due to inconsistent implementation of the program. True research on Investigations has not been completed or done from what I can find. If you have found true research on it, I would like to see it. I know there are schools that can provide data based on using the program. My question would still be: Was there consistent implementation practices within that school district?

My thoughts are that if parents are so unhappy with Investigations, why not consider going with an inquiry-based math program that has proven itself… Everyday Mathematics? With being an inquiry-based math program, I doubt it is much different in its practices than Investigations. Again, the research proves it works if you trust the U.S. Department of Education Institute of Education Services.
January 29, 2009 2:06 PM


___________________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________

Stacy said...
Dear iteachmath,
I sincerely appreciate your commitment to our children and the fact that you do wholeheartedly believe in what you do. I can see that. I appreciate that you have research that you can offer to back up your beliefs and are willing to share that with us. I am familiar with most of your research. And I do have a response to most of it.

With reference to the WWC (What Works Clearinghouse). I do not find that research to be credible for several reasons. Please refer to the post "Their Silence Is Broken" it will go into depth as to why I believe that research to be outdated and unreliable.

As posted:
This is an archival copy of material that originally appeared at: http://www.textbookevaluator.com/?p=123
(And this information can be verified through the What Works Clearinghouse site as well.)

"Here’s what we know about the effectiveness of Everyday Math, based on the research reviewed by the What Works Clearinghouse:Sixty-six studies have been found to focus on the effectiveness of Elementary School Mathematics programs. Of these 66 studies, 57 did not meet basic “evidence screens,” meaning that the US Department of Education does not deem these studies to have merit because of flaws in their research design. So most of the so-called “research” is thrown out at the get-go because the studies are too small, too poorly constructed, or otherwise shoddy.Only one of the studies passed evidence standards. You got that right: only 1 of 66 studies was considered to be reliable. That’s a whopping 1.5%, for you mathematicians out there.

The government’s review of this article focused on Scott-Foresman Addison Wesley mathematics concluded that the program had “no discernable effect” on mathematics performance. So to repeat, the only decent study on elementary school mathematics curricula tells us that the curriculum under review has no effect one way or another on student achievement. So no Holy Grail here, folks.

Four of the 66 studies “meet evidence standards with reservations,” meaning that these studies may or may not have spotted the Holy Grail. In other words, these four studies have imperfections: tehy are not so bad as to force them out of consideration, but they contain flaws that may (or may not) undermine their conclusions.

As it happens, fully 61 of the 66 studies cited the What Works Clearinghouse focus on Everyday Math, at least in part. Fifty-seven (57) of them were thrown out because they did not meet the evidence screen. None fully meets the evidence standards. Four (the same four described above) meet the standards “with reservations.”Based on only these four studies, each of which passes Department of Education standards for evidence “with reservations,” the What Works Clearinghouse declares in its “Intervention Report” on Everyday Math that the University of Chicago program has “potentially positive effects.”by:http://www.textbookevaluator.com/?p=123

It is also widely known as documented in an email from Stanford University Math professor James Milgram that the Everyday Math findings for the WWC were "flawed".
See his email below:On Tue, Dec 23, 2008 at 9:17 AM, Jim Milgram wrote:

"I sent a request that they remove my name from their report. The people who did the original EM report were not renewed as contractors for the WWC web-site, and I believe a number of the studies are supposed to be redone. I think a key problem was the Everyday Math report, where they leaned heavily on the P. Noyce paper on EM in Massachusetts. But nobody reliable really believes it represents solid research, especially since Penny Noyce has refused to name the schools, and the results appear to be an isolated case."

With reference to Investigations there is NO conclusive evidence that it works when considered by our Department of Education. It is still "under review". After over 20 years of use in this country there is NO conclusive data to show that it works.

As well, I personally, have spoke to parents, administrators, and teachers from all over this country that can tell me what a huge disaster that it was for their children. Over and over and over again the stories are the same. It does not prepare children for Algebra. It does not give them the foundation to find success in true higher level mathematics. That fact is proven over and over again in talking to literally dozens and dozens of people who have been exposed first hand. Again, please refer to my post "Their Silence Is Broken" to see my rebuttal a little more in depth to this subject of the WWC.

The research is not enough to justify this method of teaching ESPECIALLY in light of the fact that our DOE has a new report out in March of 2008 called The Foundations For Success. It is a report handed out by the National Mathematics Advisory Panel mandated by our Department of Education. (All information was pulled directly from the "Foundations For Success Final Report 2008" the findings of the National Mathematics Advisory Panel. My words follow each number in parenthesis)."

In all, the Panel reviewed more than 16,000 research publications and policy reports and received public testimony from 110 individuals of whom 69 appeared before the Panel on their own word and 41 others were invited on the basis of expertise to cover particular topics. In addition, the Panel reviewed written commentary from 160 organizations and individuals, and analyzed survey results from over 743 active teachers of algebra.

They found:
1. 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.(This condemns spiraling without mastery. Meaning that a child should learn to add before they subtract. They should learn to multiply before they can divide. Those subjects should be practiced and "mastered" before moving on to the next subject.)

2. By the term proficiency, the Panel means that students should understand concepts, achieve automaticity as appropriate, develop flexible, accurate, and AUTOMATIC execution of the STANDARD ALGORITHMS, and use these competencies to solve problems. (Most teachers will tell you that they have been preached at that memorization is a waste of brain power. Rote memorization is not part of Investigations and the teachers manuals for Investigations condemns memorizing. See earlier posts.Also encourages the standard algorithm which is not even introduced in some parts of Investigations until 5th grade. The standard algorithm is shown as one of many ways to solve a problem but never taught as the fastest most efficient way to solve a problem.)

3. The essence of the Panel's message is to "put first things first". Use should be made of what is clearly known from rigorous research about how children learn, especially by recognizing
a.)the advantages for children in having a strong start
b.)the mutually reinforcing benefits of conceptual understanding, procedural fluency, and AUTOMATIC (i.e., quick and effortless)RECALL OF FACTS; and
c.)that effort, not just inherent talent, counts in mathematical achievement."(Again, the validity of memorizing key facts is essential...not allowed by Investigations.)see***

4.The Panel's survey of the nation's algebra teachers indicated that the use of calculators in prior grades was one of their concerns. "
(Remember that our 1st graders are using calculators as part of their math ALREADY. Right or wrong...this is not what our DOE is advocating. However if you read the teachers manual from Investigations/TERC recommends a text for teachers called "Beyond Arithmetic".
***In this book it says ...and I quote: traditional elementary math must be discarded because:
BA, Page 2• Requires that students "memorize many facts,procedures, definitions, and formulas."
BA, Page 2• "Focuses on learning a particular set of proceduresfor addition, subtraction, multiplication, and division of whole numbers, fractions, and decimals."
BA, Page 2• Results in "over practiced students."
BA, Page 3• Ignores the fact that "today's students have an important tool available to them: the calculator."
(Proves that Investigations does not approve of memorizing facts.)

Also, (this is a biggie)the National Mathematics Advisory Panel; Foundations For Success also says: "U.S. mathematic textbooks are extremely long. With study guides and answers, they sometimes exceed 1000 pages. Even elementary school textbooks sometimes exceed 700 pages. Mathematics textbooks were much shorter in previous decades and continue to be much shorter in many nations with higher mathematics achievement than in the United States. Thus, the great length is not needed for effective instruction. " (Our 3rd and 4th graders have 9 editions in their math curriculum this year. NINE teachers manuals. Of which the principal from Hawthorn acknowledged at the last board meeting that it would not be possible to get through all NINE of those texts completely this year..Wow. Then why are we using it?)

Also...the National Mathematics Advisory Panel says pg.22: "The curricula of high achieving nations in the TIMSS study do not follow the single-subject sequence of Algebra I, Geometry, and Algebra II, but they also differ from the approach used in most U.S. integrated curricula. Instead Algebra, Geometry, and Trigonometry are divided into blocks. The teaching of each block typically extends over several months and aims for mathematical closure. As a result, these curricula avoid the need to revisit essentially the same material over several years, often referred to as "spiraling."(Mathematical closure...AVOID SPIRALING!!! Need I say more?)


Please read mathematician, Bill Quirk's article: 2008 TERC Math vs. 2008 National Math Panel Recommendations
TERC 2008 Math Fails to Provide the Foundations of Algebra
by Bill Quirk ( wgquirk@wgquirk.com)
For a brief analysis of TERC 2008 math, click on TERC 2008 Math vs. NMP 2008 Math: A Snapshot View.

With reference to your comment:"why not consider going with an inquiry-based math program that has proven itself… Everyday Mathematics? "
First of all...we do not believe that EM is proven. See the research with reference to the WWC and the what the National Mathematics Advisory Panel says about those fundamental beliefs of EM.Secondly...you must know that our elementary schools have used the inquiry based curricula only since 1994 as their core. EM has been around in the Camdenton Schools for over 15 years. If our math has not been working maybe we should go to a traditional approach for the first time in 15 long years and maybe try something that just may work. I think change is long overdue. Our children have weak skills because EM is weak. Our school recongnizes Investigations as being similar to EM (see www.camdentonschools.org note: the research section under math.)...so why not try something new? A more traditional approach may just work, why not give it a try?

I, too, apologize for my lengthy response. There is just so much to respond with.

I do appreciate your offering your research. I do not believe that it is strong enough to merit use on our children. Being that I have spent countless hours speaking with people who have had first hand experience with this type of math and confirm over and over what a disaster it has been for thier children along with the abundance of strong research that rejects this way of teaching...I cannot say that the research you have used is terribly convincing.Even though we may not agree I appreciate the dialogue on this matter. I think productive debate brings to light both perspectives and why we feel as strongly as we do. Again, thank you for offering your research. I appreciate your taking the time to present your argument.

______________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________

Also from an anonymous math teacher in response to the initial research done by iteachmath:

iteachmathtoo said...
The commenter sortof conveys a mixed message. On the one hand he/she says that the programs must be implemented properly, but on the other hand he/she says they do supplement.
SO what is it?

Does the program contain appropriate content or not??

This passage, "Now that I am over half way through the school year, I am in awe at the math language and processes students are using. As long as the teacher monitors and follows the grade level expectations, your child will learn."
leads me to believe that maybe this teacher might be learning more than her students. She thinks the GLEs are good? Your child will learn. Learn WHAT is really the question, isn't it? What content is supplemented? And WHY buy a program that needs to be supplemented if you believe that it must be implemented "with fidelity"??

It makes no sense.

Another comment was "The results of their research shows that Everyday Math does work. Everyday Math has been around for 25 years and has had 17 different research projects done on it."
http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/reports/elementary_math/topic/index.asp
The findings in this topic report summarize the first wave of WWC elementary school math intervention reports produced in 2006–07. "We looked at 340 studies. Of these, 237 were assessments of interventions that qualified for our review; the other 103 could not be categorized by intervention. 3 Of the 237 studies, 9 studies of 5 curricula met our evidence standards, 2 without reservations and 7 with reservations. Altogether, the WWC looked at 73 interventions: 5 had studies that met WWC standards with or without reservations, 67 had studies that did not meet WWC evidence screens, and 1 had a single-case study, which is still under review. (The identification of eligible programs ended in September 2005, and that of eligible studies, in July 2006.) In looking at the one outcome domain for the five elementary school math curricula: Everyday Mathematics had potentially positive effects on math achievement "
----------------
I'm sorry, but I hardly call that evidence when it has been reported : (http://suburbanjournals.stltoday.com/articles/2009/01/15/west/education/0121cfj-rockmath0.txt )that "Everyday Mathematics is a 25-year-old prekindergarten through sixth grade mathematics curriculum developed by the University of Chicago School of Mathematics Project and published by Wright Group/McGraw-Hill. According to that university's website, it is being used in more than 185,000 classrooms by almost 3 million students." Affecting 3 million students? So why did so few of their studies meet WWC evidence standards or screens?

------------------
Another comment was "Again research on Investigations thus far has been difficult due to inconsistent implementation of the program. True research on Investigations has not been completed or done from what I can find. If you have found true research on it, I would like to see it. I know there are schools that can provide data based on using the program. My question would still be: Was there consistent implementation practices within that school district?

"And if you read this one closely: http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/projects/evaluation/math_curricula.asp
it will definitely answer the question about whether or not your children are being experimented on...
January 29, 2009 8:56 PM

If you are not reading the "comments" I encourage you to take a look. There is productive insight that comes from some of those dialogues.

No "Spin" Allowed Here!

I received this comment this morning from a reader. I am so proud that this reader took it upon themself to do their own research and NOT take someone else's word for it!!!! This is what we should all be doing from now on. Remember the "fuzzy math double speak"? Some of us are catching on to it and are CHOOSING TO BE OUR OWN EXPERTS! Great job parents. Keep up the good work. The comment is shown below. Remember you, too, need to check any facts thrown your way by any administrator/teacher/newspaper who may leave you with questions. The facts are the facts. You cannot "spin" the truth here....it is not allowed! Great job "groupie"!

Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "Answers Offered": I just read a very interesting article in the Lake Sun Leader. It is titled: In Eldon, it’s just called math. A quote from the article reads, "While there is very little hard proof - Eldon’s MAP scores have remained about the same since implementation - Investigations math does show signs of working."
About the same?

Let's investigate...From DESE website...
Eldon (% of students in proficient & advanced)

3rd grade 2007 46.1
..............2008 39.9


4th grade 2007 46.9
..............2008 36.9


Camdenton

3rd grade 2007 49.8
..............2008 39.9

*remember 3 classes used Investigations completely this year (2008) and two used it half.


Wow! Do any of these look "about the same to you"? I didn't think so. Unless 10 percent drops in one year are "normal" then I beg to differ! Hmmmm ....if it was working so well, then why did Eldon's scores drop so dramatically? I don't know about you all...but, I don't think these facts make me feel all warm and fuzzy about the success of Investigations!!! *** Remember... if it was "working" so well then why did they (Eldon) order the Scott Foresman text mid way through the first semester of THIS school year to rescue this situation? Let's all be honest here...if something is "working" then why change it mid year? Be your own judge.

Answers Offered

In continued efforts to present a fair and balanced blog...I thought I would share a recent comment from a very distressed reader. I did my best to answer those questions that he/she accused me of not being willing to answer. Just thought you might want to take a peek, and realize that some people are really mad about this on the other side and want to make this a personal attack. I hope that the majority of you understand this is not personal for me and should not be for any of you. This is about math ONLY. Anyway...I did my best to answer the questions offered. Hope this helps.



Stacy,
I have been reading your blog and listening to your arguments for some time, and I have never responded until now.I feel very comfortable responding because we all know that the blogs that have a different opinion than yours, never seem to make it to your blogspot. (So, if this is the first time to post...how would you even know that I reject any posts? Looks to me like you are THAT "hate" poster....again. But, I will post you this time not just in the comment portion. I will post your comment front and center since you have felt so neglected to this point. Sorry about that, but typically when comments come in that are hateful in nature and show unfounded research they don't make the cut. Also, if your comment is so "ignorant" I hate to post it because it invites unproductive banter on my site...which I prefer to avoid if possible. None-the-less, I hope this makes up for any hurt feelings. Anyway...understand that this is my blog and I have no responsibility to post things I believe to be off color or poor research. I am allowed to post whatever I want on my blog. That is why it is called a blog.

Furthermore what makes an anonymous poster's research so valid? At least I am willing to put my name on it. As far as I am concerned speculation by some angry blogger isn't worthy of making the cut...sorry.) I find that amazing. (What? Start your own site if you don't like it. It makes me laugh to think that someone is having an "anonymous tantrum" because they can't manipulate me into posting their very skewed opinion on my blog. FYI: Only the truth is allowed here. NO SPIN.). I think that there are many, many issues that you have yet to address or even think about. So lets get started. (Gladly)


#1 When was it that you acquired your educational degree? Since you have now appointed yourself as the "educational expert " for the Camdenton School District, I was just interested in your credentials. First of all, I have not appointed myself the educational expert for the Camdenton Schools. I have never said that. I am simply asking questions with merit that have been asked for months now that no one knows how to answer in our administration. And when you are managing something as precious as our children the answers that have been asked should not be hard. Yet we have still not heard one answer. I am asking for accountability from those who have made the decisions. Nothing more. Nothing less.

With reference to the matter of credentials, that is a very good question. I am glad you bring this up. Not with reference to mine. My credentials do not rest in the field of education. However, credentials of those administering these programs and have chosen them should be questioned I agree. I would love to see that done and those credentials carefully evaluated. You are so right...when it comes to the education of our children those credentials should bear much weight.

#2 On your blog you stated in one of your ramblings that the math scores for the school were not "that bad". (Okay...let's go there. I was making reference to "not bad" in comparison to where we were in relation to reading. They definitely did not need as much attention as our falling comm art scores. That is why we are so upset. This is a reading rich curriculum that requires proficient reading scores. We do not post even decent reading scores. So whose bright idea was it to deviate from working on the obvious area of decline? Why are we focusing on Math when reading is so much worse and has shown steady decline in recent years in all grade levels? Why were we not looking at a much needed change with our reading curriculum? Why did we set up our children for failure by taking them to a curriculum that is centered around word problems when we know they can't read? That is the true context that those words were spoken in.) When I looked up the information it shows that our test scores have been at 45%,( while there did you notice that our third graders last year took a 10% decline over the third graders the year before in MAP testing? Yes, this may be a coincidence, but it looks suspicious when you factor that 3 teachers went to this curriculum without supplementation last year and 2 teachers went part time. I think you need to get your facts straight. 45% is not accurate, at least for our third grade. ) which to me means that 55% of our students are not "getting it". (At this point you can look at that in this way too...it is better than 65% not getting it, and that is really what is happening. I am a glass half full kind of girl;) That really seems like an okay percentage to you? The test scores I believe are the results of the "old way" of math that you love, right? (If you have read any research or anything that I have ever written, I am asking for balance. I do not want JUST a traditional approach. Our kids have NOT had that in grades k-2 in Camdenton since 1994. Yep, that is right that is when Everyday Math was first piloted. So...I say it is long overdue that our children get to try the "old way" for a change. We have failed with the reform math for well over a decade now in our elementary schools. Is that not a long enough time for you to deduce it does not work? For me, I think the writing is on the wall and has been for years now. My son and all of his peers in third grade have had their math changed 4 TIMES IN 4 YEARS!!!!! And guess what...he has not had traditional math in any of those 4 years as his core! NOT ONE TIME!!! So, call me crazy but, yes I think that it is long overdue that we look into something that just might work for a change. ) Just for thought, if this "old way" of math is so terrific, why then do we as the United States score so terribly on EVERY international math test? (Maybe that is because since 1989 this hideous and insidious kind of math has plagued our country. Read the research.)

#3 I love that you have an online petition that has people who: have asked for their names to be removed, but you have not done it, people who do not live in our district, and people listed twice. Shows that you are lacking integrity I believe. ( I hate to disappoint you, but I don't spend my days counting our online votes and validating every single voter at this point. Between the paper push and the online votes I cannot and do not "police" that. It has gotten way too big for me to track at this point. I have, however, spoke with Roland Todd (our county clerk) weeks ago and have asked him to verify/validate all of our petition signers when the time comes. Ask him yourself. That has already been addressed. I am impressed that you apparently are on patrol, though. You apparently have way more time on your hands than I do. I have not heard from one person who wants their name taken off. That is news to me. As far as the person who voted twice...she hit the submit button twice accidentally. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure that out as her name appears twice in a row. I have no idea how to remove that. For you to call my integrity into question Mr./Mrs. Anonymous is almost comical. Again, your speculation is nothing more than that to me at this point...pure speculation. )

#4 Are you more interested in what you would consider "winning", than in doing what is best for our kids? ( You know what... if "winning" means that they will receive the quality of education that they deserve, then yes. If "winning" IS doing what is best for our kids and I believe that to be the most worthwhile cause that I could ever fight for....then the answer to that question is a whole-hearted "YES"!)

#5 Just wondered how many of your little groupies have ever attended a Math night at school? I have never seen any of you there. Oh, I forgot you hold your meetings at the same time. ( I will be honest, I don't know the answer to that question. My little groupies are too many to count these days and I am not their keeper. Those "groupies" I think might find that connotation offensive. These are educated moms and dads who love their children. They have a right to be concerned, they have a vested interest in this fight called their children. I find it insulting to address those very concerned parents in such a belittling way. They are respected members of this community who deserve a voice when it comes to their children. They are not a part of this because it is fun, they have chosen to take a stand because they fear for their children which is more than I can say for you "anonymous".

I, personally, feel the math nights to be a complete and total waste of my time as I will never be persuaded that this math as anything more than a supplement is okay. It is irresponsible and damaging to our childrens' futures, and at some point that will be acknowledged. I just about guarantee it. It will manifest through our childrens' scores or the outcries of high school teachers who see the damage on the front lines sooner or later just as it has ALL OVER THE NATION! It is what it is, and I want no part of accepting it as our core.

I am educated. I know what it is and I know the damage that it causes. I have a legion of "teachers" from all over the state and in all parts of the United States. You see, I KNOW the truth. I really know the truth. I have chosen to spend my extra time at home helping my child with real math. I can't say that I will never go for the purpose of accountability, but to this point I have had no desire to attend. I, frankly, view it as a waste of my time.

#6 If you are truly so concerned that your kids are not getting the education that you want for them, and you can do it better, why not pull them out and homeschool? (Why should I have to? I bet you would love that wouldn't you? Why don't we just buck up and find some accountability and fix it? We have fabulous teachers whom I trust implicitly with the care of my children. Why can't our administration put the same trust in them that I do and just let them be the teachers? )

#7 If I understand correctly, the reason that OBE did not have to use the math program was because they do not have to make the progress that the town schools do.(Hello....hint: Maybe if we took a few lessons from them we might see some success. Ever thought of that? Are you hearing yourself? The solution seems pretty simple doesn't it?) If the town schools scores were at 80% we would not have had to do something different either, right? (Why not...we have had something different for the past 4 years for the poor children in Camdenton...heck, what is one more year? I know...let's just experiment with these kids who have had no continuity since they have been in school and see how the fare with this off-the-wall curriculum...as I said, what is just one more year of experimentation on them...who cares?) When I looked at how many students OBE has I think that they have 2 classrooms of about 15 students, versus 11 classrooms of 21-22 students. Do you think that could factor into any of this? (NO. I think that EVERY child in this school district should be offered the same quality of education irregardless of class size. Your argument is weak when you see that our third graders last year in comparison to OBE showed a margin of approximately 50% to the deficit (see graph in prior post). Is that because of a class size differentiation of 6-7 students? I don't think so. There is a much bigger problem here. That is the simple fact that the children of Camdenton in elementary school have NOT been offered ONE steady curriculum or program....it changes every year. That is what part of our problem is. Our problem is that our teachers have no voice. Our problem is accountability. So, if you would like to keep offering weak excuses as to why our children should not be allowed the same opportunities as those at OBE, then don't waste your breath. Excuses don't impress us much.)

#8 While I see that you have a handful of people who think that you are championing there cause, I wonder if any of you have enough sense to see how your behavior and constant complaining is truly embarrassing,I have yet to hear you offer ONE solution. (I will tell you what is embarrassing...this math is embarrassing. It is embarrassing that our administration has adopted such a controversial curriculum with no substantive research to support it. It is embarrassing that our third graders have had FOUR math curricula in FOUR YEARS! It is embarrassing that someone made the oversight of sticking our kids who can't read into a math curriculum that is incumbent on their reading ability to be successful. It is embarrassing that when our school offers names of other schools supposedly doing this math as their core over half of them have never used it EVER! It is embarrassing that NONE of those schools use this math as anything more than a supplement! It is embarrassing when talking to a multitude of other districts throughout our state and they laugh when you tell them that our kids are forced to do it without supplementation. MOST OF THEM HAD NEVER HEARD OF SUCH A THING! That is embarrassing. It is embarrassing when some of the schools we were given to support our school's argument as to the "who else is doing this" have never even heard of Investigations or TERC math. It is embarrassing that we would be so arrogant to think we could pull off something that Columbia or Raymore Peculiar (just to name only a couple in a sea of failures) could not. It is embarrassing that our district officials wrote it off as "political" without even digesting all of the failing test scores from Columbia across the board. It is embarrassing that our administration apparently ignored the Department of Educations warnings that came out in March of 2008 with reference to this way of teaching math in their report called the Foundations For Success. It is embarrassing that our school board and administration cannot and will not answer our very valid questions. It is embarrassing that they would ask a group of very educated parents to just give our blessings to the experimenting with our children with no valid research to support this choice. It is embarrassing that we don't give our teachers a voice in something as important as this. That is embarrassing.

If you view my demand for accountability and questions that should have been answered long before our school district chose to drag our children down this ridiculous path as embarrassing, then what do you call those oversights that our school continues to make? I am sorry if I make you so uncomfortable, but a very wise man reminded us just this week "You are your child's only advocate. There is no cause more worthwhile." I happen to agree with him. So, I guess what I am saying is this...I don't really care if I embarrass you. I don't even know who you are. Since you won't use your name, it is pretty hard for me to make sure I don't offend you in public. I hate that, but that is what "anonymous" will get you. With reference to the solution we are offering... I am pretty sure that you know how to navigate the petition portion of this site. So, next time before you police the signature page stop for just a second and read the petition. There in very detailed terms is the "solution" we are looking for, since apparently you have missed that before. It is all there. )

I know I will never see a response from any of the above mentioned things, I just wanted to let you know that there are people who are not buying into what you are doing. (I think that if you had ever really read this site the answers to those questions should be pretty obvious, but I am happy to spell them out for you. I hope it helped. As I have said many times, this is not about people. This is about a math program that we don't agree on. There are very good people who like this way of teaching whom I believe to be outstanding people. I have nothing against any person involved. I just want was is best for my child and yours. )

Please read the comment portion from "How Do You Like Them Apples II" to have a better idea of what precipitated this post.