what's wrong with teaching textbooks?

[Dana]

I wish that were true, but IME they were pretty typical of the teachers that my kids, my kids' friends, and my nieces and nephews have had. :( What seems "obvious" to some people is a total mystery to others.

 

I have a friend who teaches 6th grade, and one day I was ranting about Everyday Mathmatics, and she said that's what she used and she didn't understand what was wrong with it. I loaned her MM6 and Singapore 6, and she gave them back a week later saying she didn't understand it and couldn't teach that way.

:iagree:

I had someone who observes p.s. math teachers tell me about one she observed who was telling her students not to worry about the distributive property; they could just use order of operations. The observer said she asked the teacher privately what she'd do with something like 3(x+2). The teacher was surprised & said she hadn't thought of that... she'd start to teach the distributive property.

 

Headdesk.

 

Unfortunately, there are a LOT of bad teachers out there...particularly math teachers.

[regentrude]

Unfortunately, there are a LOT of bad teachers out there...particularly math teachers.

 

 

And unfortunately, very often the underperforming students choose to go into teaching when they can't hack it in their original major.

 

Here are some shocking data:

Teachers in Illinois had an average ACT score of 21 when they took the ACT as high school students. Chicago's ps teachers have an average of 19. How did these students even get into college?

 

http://www.siue.edu/.../IERC2008-1.pdf

 

(above numbers are from table 3, p. 12 and table 5, p.17)

[Dana]

And unfortunately, very often the underperforming students choose to go into teaching when they can't hack it in their original major.

 

 

 

I am quite sure that my son at his current age of 10 could pass just about all of my grad school courses in education... maybe one or two that had paper requirements would be difficult, but he could definitely pass most of them.

 

I wish we'd get rid of education as a degree and require content mastery to teach.

[regentrude]

I wish we'd get rid of education as a degree and require content mastery to teach.

 

 

AMEN!

[Corraleno]

I wish we'd get rid of education as a degree and require content mastery to teach.

 

 

YES!!!

 

I remember a news story from a couple of years ago where something like 75% of new teachers in MA flunked the math portion of the certification test that year. :blink:

 

Jackie

[Dana]

I remember a news story from a couple of years ago where something like 75% of new teachers in MA flunked the math portion of the certification test that year. :blink:

 

It's long enough now that the test should have been changed....

 

When I got my certification, our state required people who were getting teacher certification to take a standardized test to prove knowledge (not the Praxis....this was a different one... possibly just for our state).

 

The test was untimed, but you had to stay in the room for a half hour for each section (math, reading).

I kid you not... the first question on the math test was measuring a paper clip's length with a ruler that was superimposed on the page.

And some people wouldn't pass the test the first time.

 

I wish, wish, wish I were exaggerating.

(I think I'd blocked that test from my memory...)

[shanvan]

With the exception of the CC standards (which weren't out then), this is exactly what I did. I compared TT Prealgebra & Algebra I (both of which I own) to the following programs (all of which I own):

Prealgebra: Lial's BCM, Aufmann (Chalkdust), Thinkwell, Kinetic Books, MUS, LOF, AoPS

Algebra I: Jacobs, Foerster, Larson (Chalkdust), Lial, Dolciani, Gelfand, EPS (DIscovering Algebra), Thinkwell, Kinetic Books, MUS, LOF, AoPS

 

My conclusion was that TT and MUS were significantly "lighter" than the others in terms of the depth of conceptual explanations and the challenge level of the problem sets. In a past thread, I posted examples of how four different Prealgebra programs (TT, MM6, Lial's BCM, and Auffman/Chalkdust) taught a particular concept, with both the conceptual explanation and associated problems. However, it was VERY time consuming to do that (and it was hard to type up the math problems in a way that made sense); I wouldn't want to take on that task for every concept in all of the above texts!

 

It's possible to pick up used copies of many math texts very cheaply, though, so anyone who wants to do their own comparison can do so without much expense, and then just resell the books they don't use. (I tend to keep mine, because I'm nerdy like that. :tongue_smilie:)

 

Jackie

 

This is what I was hoping you would post. Well, now I'm off to look for the post. I have a decision to make for next year and it might be helpful. We previously used Lials, but I was considering continuing w/ TT next year for Algebra 2 after using it this year for Geometry. Though I suppose these musings belong on the high school board.

 

Jackie, do you have a link?

 

ETA: My posts here about TT have all been based on TT6 and above. I only know that the lower levels exist--have not looked at them and never felt the need to. I should have mentioned that earlier. I wouldn't dream of sending a child in the younger years to watch a lesson and complete problems independently of me or my teaching. Too much room for misunderstanding all the way around--Dc not fully understanding concepts, and mom or dad misunderstanding what the Dc has learned. And, even in the high school years, I'm a fan of close monitoring and teaching of Dc--but that's based on my own Dc and knowing what works for them.

[8filltheheart]

Some of the readers of this thread might be interested in these links posted on the high school board. http://forums.welltrainedmind.com/topic/463413-govt-report-out-on-algebra-i-geometry-curricula/

 

THey are about a govt report on alg and geo courses, course labels, and course content.

[shanvan]

I have the book. I bought it a couple of years ago when I first saw it recommended. I didn't get why it was so popular because it seemed like common sense. I remember ranting at Dh that they must have looked for the worst teachers they could find. It did make me more purposeful in checking the kids for understanding (I figured that if those teachers didn't understand multidigit multiplication or area and perimeter, my kids might not naturally pick up on it either), so it wasn't a waste.

 

I thought it was common sense too. I remember thinking 'of course' and wondering why the book was supposed to be such a revelation. It might have made me more purposeful in certain areas too, but I can't quite understand teaching math any other way.

 

I never thought about the possibility that poor teachers were picked on purpose. I don't have a lot of experience with public school math--just what I remember from my own years. My Dc have been homeschooled since birth. I was, however an education and English major, not b/c I was underperforming or couldn't hack it in my original major, but b/c I was passionate about learning and wanted to open up the world to kids. My school required all education majors to have another major anyway, so you could not just major in education, you had to have an area of specialty too. It was annoying at times b/c I had very few electives, but good too b/c I had a hard time choosing b/t English and education--and then I had one of the history professors pursuing me to major in history too, which I considered for more than a nanosecond only b/c I loved her classes. When I think back to my education courses, though, I think maybe some of my classmates could have been candidates for Liping Ma's book. I wonder what they were majoring in besides education? (Apologies to all the wonderful teachers out there)

 

I think, in my elementary years, the teachers were fairly good on math concepts (we are talking over 30 years ago), but imo the high school math teachers were very poor on conceptual teaching. I really wanted to know the underlying concepts, but all they wanted to teach were procedures and drill. Not sure I blame them since they had time restrictions and testing to worry about. I found out pretty quick that my ideas about education weren't easy to put into action in public school.

 

Anyway, now this thread should read 'what is wrong with math education in the US'. Sorry about the hijacking! I was just so excited to read that someone else had the same response to La Ping Ma's book.

[creekland]

I've stayed off this thread because of all the bickering, but... I finally broke down and read it all. I'll only give my opinion based upon my kids...

 

Oldest - did Alg 1 & Alg 2 in ps (7th & 8th grades) using Larson, then TT Geo and Pre-Calc. He tested top 3% in math on college entrance tests. He tutored many of his ps high school peers. He tested easily into Calc at our local cc and did it (successfully) at home using Chalkdust. We did not have him take the AP test as I believe it is better for college students to repeat Calc if needed in college. He regrets that decision as he only needed Business Calc in college and found it ridiculously easy.

 

Middle - all TT from Alg 1 - Pre Calc starting in 7th grade, but with Geometry in 8th instead of Alg 2. He also tutored his high school peers. He tested top, top 1% in math on college entrance tests and tested the highest his local cc advisor had seen for placing into Calc. Did Calc at home using Thinkwell (successfully), but did not take the AP test for the same reasons as oldest. Is doing Calc this year at his Top 30 school (where they do it without graphing calculators) and has an easy A. He often helps others - esp on challenging webwork. He's even gotten questions correct that his TA (in recitations) got wrong (they would all try a problem, then compare answers - then check answers). I "think" he's doing ok... or "good enough."

 

Youngest - he started homeschooling at 5th grade and was behind 2 years in math coming from ps. He started with TT Math 7 in 6th (were catching up before this), Pre-Alg in 7th and Alg 1 in 8th. At the end of 8th grade he was testing in the top 15% nationally for 8th grade math. He since opted to return to ps and has been working with the VERY HORRID program, CPM math there. He gets easy As, but understands next to nothing compared to his brothers. It really bothers me and I wish he would supplement with TT, but he doesn't want to do anything he doesn't have to. His PSAT and ACT score were low (compared to his brothers), but higher than our school average. Many students come to him for math help as he at least had some formative years during the 4 years he was home. He will not be taking Calc at all in high school selecting Stats instead. I fear for him when it comes to college math, but he's not picking a top college, so maybe he'll do ok.

 

We used the first version of TT and I LIKE that it goes slow and develops a good foundation. I supplemented Pre-Calc when it came to matrices and one other thing I'm not remembering at the moment. I did not supplement anything else, but my boys did have SAT/ACT prep books. The math youngest has been learning has actually been from the prep books, but he hasn't used them a ton. Oldest never touched the books. Middle used them a bit (not just math, of course) as he was aiming for perfection on the tests.

 

I also bought a Lial's Pre-Calc book for middle to look through. He did, but found it repetitive and easy (after having done TT Pre-Calc) so did very little in it. Personally, I DO like Lial's book, but I keep it for extra problems I can take to high school kids at school when we're doing similar math. Middle son did not need it.

 

I have no regrets using TT and would use it again (but I'm not sure I like the computer grading part based upon what I hear about it). I wish I could ditch our ps curriculum and switch to TT. I do think it needs to be advanced a year or two pending the student. I also agree that the parent should be testing and checking that the knowledge is learned. I agree with that statement regardless of the curricula chosen/used.

 

One change I would have made would have been to have middle son review more Geometry before his 11th grade PSAT. Since he did Geometry in 8th grade he had forgotten some of the material by 11th (the two problems he missed were both geometry). A PSAT prep book might have helped dust off those neurons, but we used an SAT prep book instead (less of that type of Geometry on the SAT). But those are little details.

 

YMMV. My advice to anyone looking it to find the program that works for their child. I'm quite pleased with TT.

 

Could my guys have done as well with another curriculum? Maybe, maybe not. I happen to think (my personal belief) that a good, strong, slow, foundation in the basics produces knowledge that then can be carried over easily. I do not like rushing kids with math and rushing doesn't mean Alg 1 in 7th grade - it means going through Alg 1 at a pace they can handle - perhaps slower than they can handle - whenever they are ready for it. I see many kids who are rushed. They quickly go from topic to topic sort of memorizing it enough to do well on a test when they know what is going to be on the test, but then the foundation wasn't solid and they forget it a week or two - perhaps a month later. For me, when a kid KNOWS something, they can prove it by taking a test anytime, anywhere with mixed questions. They can also apply it to science or anywhere else math is used. I often brought home tests from ps for my guys (esp when we were new to homeschooling and I was unsure of myself). Mine never failed to do extremely well on those ps tests as well as doing successfully later on (at least, the two I homeschooled through high school).

 

So yeah, I'm satisfied.

[snowbeltmom]

YES!!!

 

I remember a news story from a couple of years ago where something like 75% of new teachers in MA flunked the math portion of the certification test that year. :blink:

 

Jackie

 

That report came out my first year of homeschooling. The state of MA had revised its certification exam that year and 75% of the recent college teaching graduates failed the exam. The really scary part of that statistic is that the highest level of math tested on the exam was at the 6th grade level.

 

That same year, I also read a study paid for by the Department of Education. The study had various elementary school districts across the nation pilot Singapore's math program. The DOE was surprised that despite using the exact same curriculum as Singapore, the US standardized test scores were still far below those obtained by the Singapore students. Upon further study, the DOE came to the conclusion that the poor test outcomes in the US were the direct result of the teachers not being able to solve the problems in the Singapore elementary series themselves, let alone teach it to someone else.

 

Instead of coming out with new revised standards every few years, the focus, imo, should be on demanding that our colleges granting elementary teaching degrees ensure that their graduates have a solid understanding of the math they will be teaching. What good are rigorous standards if the teachers don't have the necessary skills to teach it?

 

Note: I am not blaming the teachers for this at all. I am blaming the colleges that are responsible for training the teachers.

[AimeeM]

 

I wish we'd get rid of education as a degree and require content mastery to teach.

Some private schools already do this, on some level.

I'm *pretty* sure that the middle school teachers at my dd's old catholic grade school (preK - grade 8) had degrees in their subject, not in education (i.e. the latin teacher had a degree in classical languages, the math teacher had a degree in math, etc). Don't quote me on it (well, you know what I mean) because our daughter only attended the lower school before we pulled her, but I *think* that's what I heard.

[FriedClams]

He's just not getting it at all. I don't have a lot of time to sit with him and go over the lessons every day.

 

I have never used TT. My advice is a little third hand... It's my understanding that TT can be gamed by the student to appear they are doing better than they really are. If you do go in the direction of a computer based program - as a busy mom with lots of distractions you may want to make sure you have a good handle on the limitations and how a kid can work the grading. From what I've heard it does still require daily parental involvement and oversight to be a good, useful math program.

 

If you want more teaching - i'd look at BJU DVDs. We use Science 6 and it's 95% student driven. I'm not sure about their math though.

 

I hope you find a great fit for your son. 7th grade is tough - hang in there, Mom!!

[FairProspects]

Some private schools already do this, on some level.

I'm *pretty* sure that the middle school teachers at my dd's old catholic grade school (preK - grade 8) had degrees in their subject, not in education (i.e. the latin teacher had a degree in classical languages, the math teacher had a degree in math, etc). Don't quote me on it (well, you know what I mean) because our daughter only attended the lower school before we pulled her, but I *think* that's what I heard.

 

 

This has been true for most 7-12 grade PS teachers anyway after 2000 under No Child Left Behind and its "Highly Qualified" designation. The issue is with the K-6 teachers because what do they choose as a major when they need to be generalists?

[snowbeltmom]

 

This has been true for most 7-12 grade PS teachers anyway after 2000 under No Child Left Behind and its "Highly Qualified" designation. The issue is with the K-6 teachers because what do they choose as a major when they need to be generalists?

:iagree:

 

The system needs to be changed. We should have specialists at the elementary level as well. The elementary level, imo, is the most important level. We need competent math teachers providing a strong foundation. This is not happening in many US elementary schools today.

[shanvan]

:iagree:

 

The system needs to be changed. We should have specialists at the elementary level as well. The elementary level, imo, is the most important level. We need competent math teachers providing a strong foundation. This is not happening in many US elementary schools today.

 

As far back as the 90's some colleges have required a major beyond elementary education. As I stated in an earlier post, it was not even possible to major in elementary education at my college. All education majors were required to have another major--but I don't think it had to be a subject area major, though I could be wrong. Mine was English. Nevertheless, I am a better math teacher than my mathy husband. I think I had ONE math teaching course (but 3 college math courses were required). I don't know what the answer is, possibly at least a second pedagogy class on teaching higher level math? The one math pedagogy class I had was quite good, but it was taught by a former math professor who had switched into the education department.

[snowbeltmom]

As far back as the 90's some colleges have required a major beyond elementary education. As I stated in an earlier post, it was not even possible to major in elementary education at my college. All education majors were required to have another major--but I don't think it had to be a subject area major, though I could be wrong. Mine was English. Nevertheless, I am a better math teacher than my mathy husband. I think I had ONE math teaching course (but 3 college math courses were required). I don't know what the answer is, possibly at least a second pedagogy class on teaching higher level math? The one math pedagogy class I had was quite good, but it was taught by a former math professor who had switched into the education department.

 

Imo, the answer would be to require that those who teach math have a major in mathematics. We have music and art specialists at the elementary level. We should also have math specialists at the elementary level.

 

The state of MA revised its state certification exam sometime around 2008. Unless the colleges have revised their elementary teaching programs since 2008, many elementary teachers today are not qualified to teach math at the elementary level.

[shanvan]

Imo, the answer would be to require that those who teach math have a major in mathematics. We have music and art specialists at the elementary level. We should also have math specialists at the elementary level.

 

The state of MA revised its state certification exam sometime around 2008. Unless the colleges have revised their elementary teaching programs since 2008, many elementary teachers today are not qualified to teach math at the elementary level.

 

My guess is that would start a war among educators and academics. All the writing people would want English majors. Then there would be some who want history or science majors, and on it goes. I have successfully taught elementary mathematics and I fully understand the concepts behind it (I'm sure some could argue not as well as a math major), but my degree is in English. Further education in the area of mathematics--yes, majoring in the subject is not likely to fly. Further education in the area of teaching writing is also needed. And, the only reason I had a good grammar course was b/c I majored in English. No elementary ed major I knew took grammar unless they were also an English major. Maybe improvements in teacher ed in general, especially in the basics of math, writing, reading?

 

At any rate, a full understanding of the material is required to teach no matter what curriculum you use--even if it isn't TT.

[AimeeM]

 

This has been true for most 7-12 grade PS teachers anyway after 2000 under No Child Left Behind and its "Highly Qualified" designation. The issue is with the K-6 teachers because what do they choose as a major when they need to be generalists?

I assume they would have dual majors? (in education *and* their "subject")

[DarlaS]

My guess is that would start a war among educators and academics. All the writing people would want English majors. Then there would be some who want history or science majors, and on it goes. I have successfully taught elementary mathematics and I fully understand the concepts behind it (I'm sure some could argue not as well as a math major), but my degree is in English. Further education in the area of mathematics--yes, majoring in the subject is not likely to fly. Further education in the area of teaching writing is also needed. And, the only reason I had a good grammar course was b/c I majored in English. No elementary ed major I knew took grammar unless they were also an English major. Maybe improvements in teacher ed in general, especially in the basics of math, writing, reading?

 

At any rate, a full understanding of the material is required to teach no matter what curriculum you use--even if it isn't TT.

 

 

:iagree:

 

Also, my oldest son is a math major. He'll be starting his junior year next semester at a university after completing his AS at the community college. Even with the 2 year AS in Mathematics, has had taken some heavy duty math courses--currently advanced calculus (the one that comes AFTER Calc 1, 2 and 3). It is in no way preparing him to teach math. I can explain the elementary concepts way better than he can (He is in no way a natural teacher...).

 

I have suggested that if he minored in education, he could get a job as a math teacher, or even an adjunct professor (at the CC). But I would consider some training in education to be what (hopefully) prepared him to actually teach though. (ETA: This would give him "fall back" career options. Math majors have career options where they could make a good deal more money than teaching. This would be your reason they don't go into teaching often. ;))

 

Incidentally, one of his English professors had a PhD. She confused her students to no end. :001_unsure:

[Dana]

 

I have suggested that if he minored in education, he could get a job as a math teacher, or even an adjunct professor (at the CC). But I would consider some training in education to be what (hopefully) prepared him to actually teach though.

 

 

To teach as an adjunct at a cc, you need enough graduate hours in your subject...depending on the accrediting agency. Here, I need 18 hours at the graduate level in math to teach at the cc. Math Ed doesn't count.

 

And the math Ed courses I took...at the graduate level...in no way prepared me to teach.

[DarlaS]

To teach as an adjunct at a cc, you need enough graduate hours in your subject...depending on the accrediting agency. Here, I need 18 hours at the graduate level in math to teach at the cc. Math Ed doesn't count.

 

And the math Ed courses I took...at the graduate level...in no way prepared me to teach.

 

I don't think he's interested in teaching, but if he was, he'd have to figure that out.

[Guest Apple2511]

I love TT, not sure if that helps

[kiana]

I have suggested that if he minored in education, he could get a job as a math teacher, or even an adjunct professor (at the CC). But I would consider some training in education to be what (hopefully) prepared him to actually teach though. (ETA: This would give him "fall back" career options. Math majors have career options where they could make a good deal more money than teaching. This would be your reason they don't go into teaching often. ;))

 

You don't need Ed courses to teach at colleges (unless you're teaching education courses). You just need graduate-level coursework in the subject.

[Haiku]

A few weeks ago I took out of the library the 1985 edition of Houghton Mifflin Mathematics to use as an alternate assessment for my son to make sure he was retaining what he learned in TT. What I found was that he was sound on arithmetic but the ancillary concepts (time, money, measurement) could use some work. We have been working through the relevant lessons in the Houghton Mifflin book, and today he told me he actually likes it better than TT. I nearly fell out of my chair, as my son has loved TT. He actually told me that when he finishes up his current level of TT, he wants to switch over to Houghton Mifflin. I'm going to do it, because after our struggles with math with him I want to keep him happy, but I will definitely keep TT in mind if we end up crying over math again, as we did before we switched to TT.

 

Tara

[dereksurfs]

A few weeks ago I took out of the library the 1985 edition of Houghton Mifflin Mathematics to use as an alternate assessment for my son to make sure he was retaining what he learned in TT. What I found was that he was sound on arithmetic but the ancillary concepts (time, money, measurement) could use some work. We have been working through the relevant lessons in the Houghton Mifflin book, and today he told me he actually likes it better than TT. I nearly fell out of my chair, as my son has loved TT. He actually told me that when he finishes up his current level of TT, he wants to switch over to Houghton Mifflin. I'm going to do it, because after our struggles with math with him I want to keep him happy, but I will definitely keep TT in mind if we end up crying over math again, as we did before we switched to TT.

 

Tara

 

 

Tara, this is an interesting new development with your son. Did he say why he likes it better or wants to switch now? Houghton Mifflin Mathematics isn't one discussed much on the boards. But it sounds like something really caught his interest. Which grade level are you using? I think these are used more in the public schools, correct? Do you think it will take a lot more work on your end vs. TT which can be more independent?

 

I also noticed they have a good website here with additional resources:

http://www.eduplace.com/math/mw/

[Haiku]

Did he say why he likes it better or wants to switch now?

 

Yes, he said that he was getting bored with the format of TT. He dislikes having to do the problems in the book and then type in the answers. Too frequently for his liking he gets the answer wrong because he has typed it in incorrectly (and it's not just a matter of him being careless; he has some learning differences that make that kind of thing hard for him).

 

He said that he likes the instruction of TT but would rather sit and do math with me on the couch and that Houghton Mifflin isn't as hard as Math Mammoth was, which is what we switched from because MM was making him cry and feel stupid.

 

Houghton Mifflin Mathematics isn't one discussed much on the boards. But it sounds like something really caught his interest. Which grade level are you using?

 

No, it's not. I think people tend to shy away from school textbooks. I was never interested in using them before, but as my kids get older I'm less opposed to them. We are using a Holt science book this year, and the kids love it. (Keep in mind, it is the 1985 version of the math book that we will be using, not the newest edition. I find the newer math books to be too visually cluttered.) Right now we are using the grade 3 book (my son is in 4th grade and in TT4), but I am just using a nifty little feature called Checkpoints (two mini-quizzes in each chapter) to assess what my son knows and what he needs work on. He's progressing fairly quickly, and when he struggles with a Checkpoint we review the relevant lesson and then I have him do the Extra Practice problems for that concept. (Each set of problems in the checkpoint has the associated page numbers listed for easy reference.) I expect that he will move into the 4th grade book in a few weeks, and we will continue to do the same assessment with the Checkpoints until we come to material he hasn't mastered.

 

Do you think it will take a lot more work on your end vs. TT which can be more independent?

 

I don't think it will take too much more work, no, because I didn't just turn my son loose with TT. I let the program teach the lesson, but if my son had questions I would reteach the concept, and I was always with him or right nearby to discuss problems and questions as he worked through the practice exercises. I think it will be more fun for us than TT, because I plan to do a lot orally or on the whiteboard with my son since his fine motor coordination is poor and writing is still a struggle for him. (In fact, he's still in speech and occupational therapy.)

 

You can see a review of the Houghton Mifflin book that I wrote just today here.

 

I also noticed they have a good website here with additional resources:

http://www.eduplace.com/math/mw/

 

 

Yes, I saw that, too. Thank you!

 

Tara