|
|
Post by blankcheck on Sept 23, 2006 18:02:20 GMT -6
My kids missed the boat on everyday math as well. I feel lucky when I talk to the parents around me with little ones trying to figure this out. CRH-very true. not everything cutting edge is the best. Children do have different learning styles - hence different approaches are necessary, but not for all of the students. When my son was introduced to Algebra he was totally confused. So I sat with him and explained it how I learned it (back in the stone age so to speak) and he got it. Unfortunatly, the results of a new concept are not known for quite awhile. At that point, many students have slipped threw the cracks. Math is huge in that each step helps you with the next. You miss out on a step and it gets very hard and the students get discouraged.
|
|
|
|
Post by justvote on Sept 24, 2006 14:51:57 GMT -6
I guess the big question is what is 204 going to do about it? What are they going to about it? Based on the most recent test scores (as mentioned in the article below), I would guess that they are going to continue with a program that appears, by all accounts, to be a phenomenal success. I honestly don't understand all of the negativity expressed on this board about Everyday Math. It is not what we're used to, but so what?. Let's not be so resistant to change. Someone on the board said that not all change is good - well, the proof is in the pudding and when our own superintendant says that our "math scores are unbelievable", I think that says alot for the program, and shows that can change can be good, as well. Dist. 204 aims for just more of the same By Sara Hooker Daily Herald Staff Writer Posted Thursday, August 24, 2006 Indian Prairie doesn’t need radical changes to improve this year, Superintendent Howard Crouse said Wednesday, it just needs MOTS. More of the same. He used numbers to draw returning teachers to their feet at the annual back-to-school gathering at Calvary Church where he offered a sneak peak of state report card results. “Math scores are unbelievable in Indian Prairie,” Crouse told more than 2,000 cheering teachers who will be in their classrooms Monday for the start of school. He prefaced the celebration by addressing the district’s lingering minority achievement gap, calling it “unacceptable.” “All we can do is look forward and look for solutions,” Crouse said. “This is critical for us as a district.” Some preliminary test scores showed improvement in that category, he said, but there’s still room to do better. In 11 elementary schools, 90 percent of students met or exceeded standards in reading, math or both, according to preliminary report card results. At another seven elementary schools, 90 percent of students met or exceeded standards in math with at least 10 percent more students meeting or exceeding reading standards compared to last year. “It’s preliminary and should be interpreted that way, however it’s incredibly positive,” said Patrick Nolten, director of research, assessment and evaluation. “We’ve seen remarkable growth in the area of mathematics. That’s a general statement, but it’s accurate. Reading has been strong as well.” While all six middle schools showed significant improvement, Nolten called Still Middle School’s preliminary numbers “unbelievable rocket-launch growth.” Teachers received a standing ovation for a 25 percent increase in students meeting or exceeding math standards, a 40 percent increase in black students meeting or exceeding math standards and a 50 percent increase in Latino students meeting or exceeding math standards. “They really showed remarkable growth,” Nolten said. Preliminary high school figures were unavailable. District officials expect to make the entire report card information available sometime in October. The positive results tell Crouse the district doesn’t need radical changes — just more of the same. “You can see it’s starting to provide long-range results,” he said. Teachers responded enthusiastically to the data. “I’ll take back the message that it’s very possible for these kids to improve drastically very quickly,” Waubonsie English teacher Nate Gehrt said. |
|
|
|
Post by 204parent on Sept 24, 2006 16:13:49 GMT -6
I guess the big question is what is 204 going to do about it? What are they going to about it? Based on the most recent test scores (as mentioned in the article below), I would guess that they are going to continue with a program that appears, by all accounts, to be a phenomenal success. I honestly don't understand all of the negativity expressed on this board about Everyday Math. It is not what we're used to, but so what?. Let's not be so resistant to change. Someone on the board said that not all change is good - well, the proof is in the pudding and when our own superintendant says that our "math scores are unbelievable", I think that says alot for the program, and shows that can change can be good, as well. I don't know enough about the EM program to say it's all bad, but I can tell you from first-hand experience that portions of it are horrible. Check out this link and read the sections called "Fuzzy Math Impedes Learning" and "Spiraling". The Fuzzy Math section talks about Lattice Multiplication. www.illinoisloop.org/math.htmlSo, why are the district's math scores pretty good? Are they good BECAUSE of the administration and staff, or IN SPITE of them??? Here's why I ask... Last year my second grader was told she would be in accelerated math in third grade. That meant she would skip third grade math, and be in a fourth grade math class this year. The school gave us a sheet that listed the concepts she needed to learn over the summer. We asked if we could get the third grade textbook and workbooks to use as resources, but the school refused. We even offered to pay for them, but the school still refused. They told us we were on our own to find the resources required to teach our child. Fortunately, several moms got together and purchased the books directly from the publisher. My kids do well in math because of their parents, not because of the school system!!! HC needs to pull his head out of his butt, and thank the Lord he has a district full of parents who make him look good. |
|
|
|
Post by justvote on Sept 24, 2006 16:53:17 GMT -6
204parent - I agree with much of your post, but all things being equal, I think it's fair to conclude that there very well may be a correlation between the recent INCREASE in math test scores and the implementation of the Everyday Math program.
Your post addresses the district's high scores in general (as opposed to recent increases), which I agree can be attributed to factors such as parental involvement, socioeconomic background, quality of instruction, etc.
|
|
|
|
Post by cantretirehere on Sept 25, 2006 8:05:23 GMT -6
From my own personal experience in this SD spanning every grade level and having experienced most grade levels 3 times, I would have to say I agree with 204parent. I feel as if though I've picked up the slack of what the schools were lacking several times as far as my kids were concerned. A lot of parents can't do that, especially when you get to the high school level. I think the reason the math scores are so high in this district has more to do with the parent's mathematical qualifications and abilities to help their kids than what they are learning in class.
Case in point. As a past sub for this district I often subbed for 5th grade accelerated math classes. OFTEN I was told by some very relieved students that they finally understood what they were learning after I had taught it! My degree is not in math but in a very closely related field. The scary thing is that on one occasion I heard a 5th grade accelerated math teacher exclaim in frustration to another teacher that she was having a hard time teaching math that she barely understood herself!
Now, I'm not saying that is the norm but when you experience the situation directly in the classroom and hear it from a teacher's own lips it is a bit disconcerting. That is a separate issue from EDM but it goes to show that kids often times learn in spite of their school learning environment.
Not having a kid exposed to EDM, I only know what I have heard from other parents. I hear a lot of complaining. I hear a lot of parents saying that they are now having to teach their kids at home and the frustrating part for them is that they themselves do not understand all the methods being taught. They believe their kids aren't learning any ONE way thoroughly enough to consider the concept to have been mastered.
All we really have to go by to judge this method is test scores. But we also have to admit that we are not exactly in a controlled environment in this district. The parents care to much to let a POSSIBLY marginal method of learning harm their kids and will step in. They will most likely do this by teaching their kids themselves, and less likely by complaining to the district about it. Give me a kid with average math scores and no parental involvement and then teach that kid using EDM with no parental involvement. Then let's check those scores.
|
|
|
|
Post by momof3 on Sept 25, 2006 8:48:01 GMT -6
I guess the big question is what is 204 going to do about it? What are they going to about it? Based on the most recent test scores (as mentioned in the article below), I would guess that they are going to continue with a program that appears, by all accounts, to be a phenomenal success. I honestly don't understand all of the negativity expressed on this board about Everyday Math. It is not what we're used to, but so what?. Let's not be so resistant to change. Someone on the board said that not all change is good - well, the proof is in the pudding and when our own superintendant says that our "math scores are unbelievable", I think that says alot for the program, and shows that can change can be good, as well. I am normally all for trying something new, however, so far, my nephew in Texas has had terrible luck with EM and required tutoring (to memorize basic facts) in the 3rd grade. This is not a dumb kid, he started reading at age 3. My 4th grade niece in Ohio is having a terrible time with an even 'fuzzier' math - Trailblazers - and my sister has been taking her to Kumon now for over a year. Again, not a slow kid, she is in the gifted program. I think adding the Otter Creek curriculum to make up for EM deficiencies was a move in the right direction for 204. However, one has to wonder about the growth of Kumon tutoring centers, which is really just a back to basics approach to math. IMHO, it's a reaction to the fuzzy math being taught in schools. I think when the math teachers of this country speak up and say something, we should listen (as referenced in the Trib article). |
|
|
|
Post by kae on Jan 22, 2007 15:36:57 GMT -6
I'm not a fan of EM at all. I think the district should abandon EM before they churn out years of kids that have no math skills. Here's a link to a youtube video with an explanation about some of the biggest drawbacks of EM and another method called TERC. www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tr1qee-bTZIThe method of multiple digit addition is reiterative. What I mean by that is you aren't guaranteed you will have the answer by going through the method the first time. The EM method must be reiterated until there are no carry overs. The old method is a "once-and-you're-done" method. Yeah, Yeah. I remember when I was a kid and my parents always said "That new math! UGH!"; however, from what I saw of my parent's math, there was very little difference in the algorithm. I think once a kids know the fundamentals and has them down then they will begin to develop methods (like TERC) to help them solve problems without needing calculators, but you can't teach that until you have basic math skills. That's putting the cart before the horse. Was that story about kids taking a math test using rigged calculators and putting obviously wrong answers down just an old wives tale told to us at Curriculum night? I thought the whole reason that the district was teaching EM was to give students a better understanding of math, but according to the video EM teaches that working problems by hand is a waste of time and that students should just use calculators (at least for division). I also have a 4th grader that (to me) doesn't really have a very good understanding of basic math skills. I'm pretty worried that she/he'll be far behind if I left it up to the school to teach basic math skills. Maybe the reason EM fails is that most parents can't afford to send their kids to Huntington or Silvan or some other expensive tutoring program. |
|
|
|
Post by wvhsparent on Jan 22, 2007 15:47:20 GMT -6
My head hurts
|
|
|
|
Post by jenrik2714 on Jan 22, 2007 16:07:18 GMT -6
I agree wtih EM...I hate the Lattice multiplication. I didn't even get it...How good is that when you need to multiply "quick on your feet"
I also hate that pan balance problems..I did not get that either.
Teach it the old fashioned way, I say....
I saw a website describing the many flaws of EM math called Chicago Math. When I find it, I will post it
|
|
|
|
Post by blankcheck on Jan 22, 2007 16:10:21 GMT -6
I never knew what the Everyday Math program was. I'll really glad my children had to learn the basic way for elementary math skills instead of this method. It just does not make sense to me. This program reminds me a lot of several years ago (my son was in 1st grade at the time) where they used the "whole language" approach to reading and writing. After several years, research showed these kids could not spell at all. Hense, no more whole language.
The problem is that once a problem in the program is found (5-7 yrs. down the road) those kids are out of luck.
|
|
|
|
Post by wvhsparent on Jul 15, 2007 15:58:58 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
Post by blankcheck on Jul 15, 2007 20:22:53 GMT -6
wvhsparent-I have see a very similar video. It blows my mind - why so complicated? I agree -
GACK!!!!!!!!!
|
|
|
|
Post by doctorwho on Jul 15, 2007 21:12:51 GMT -6
wvhsparent-I have see a very similar video. It blows my mind - why so complicated? I agree - GACK!!!!!!!!! I am not a professional teacher, but I also question as you and WV parent does the complexity, and the much longer method of problem solution --is this really a better way ? The whole lattice system makes my head hurt. Also wondering, on standardized tests does this more cumbersome method slow them down to the point where it could work against them ? I feel about this the way I felt when we had an ES program that taught writing with zero regard for spelling, and then in a lot of cases we ended up with kids who couldn't spell very well in MS. This is my experience with it as well as some other parents I know whose kids went thru around the same time. |
|
|
|
Post by chicoryowl on Jul 15, 2007 21:39:16 GMT -6
I've got fairly young kids and I think I'm a year or two away from my oldest being immersed in EM. Therefore, I'm going to hold my judgement for now. It's definitely not what I'm used to. With the lattice, my first reaction was that it was a nice parlor trick. However, I can see how the segments equate to places in a 4 or 5 digit number. It took me less than half the time to calculate using the "old" method. Thanks for posting that. I showed it to my wife and we're definitely more interested in learning and seeing more of how the school is using it. |
|
|
|
Post by blankcheck on Jul 16, 2007 7:24:39 GMT -6
Doc-that was the "whole language" approach. No phonics. They realized it didn't work and they axed the program after several years.
I agree, to figure out basic math, which some should be mental, how will these kids take to test?
Chicory-I do not have young children which would be affected by EM. My understanding from some of my neighbors who do have young children is that the parents are having trouble figuring out how they want the problem solved,so it is hard for them to help their own children.
|
|
