### Monday, March 05, 2007

##
Math education: an inconvenient truth

It’s hard to know where to begin. What’s wrong with the video “Math Education: An Inconvenient Truth, ” which is primarily an attack on TERC’s

On second thought, I don’t want to count them, because I’ll be here all day. Let me just mention a few:

*Investigations in Number, Data, and Space*and other standards-based curricula? Well, let me count the ways.On second thought, I don’t want to count them, because I’ll be here all day. Let me just mention a few:

- Narrator M.J. McDermott complains that
*Investigations*teaches kids to “reason through problems.” As I say, it’s hard to know where to begin. Surely this is a good thing. Surely reasoning through problems is the primary goal of school mathematics learning. - The video’s first example is finding 26 × 31. It goes on to show an “inappropriate” way of reasoning that TERC promotes. Quoting verbatim:
I know that 26 × 31 = (20 × 31) + (5 × 31) + (1 × 31).

McDermott correctly calls this method “inefficient,” but surely it demonstrates much more understanding than the standard magical algorithm, and surely the skills involved will have far more payoff in doing algebra.

So how do I find 20 × 31?

Well, I know 10 × 31 is 310, and I can figure out from mental math that 20 × 31 is twice this, and I can figure out that that’s 620.

Now I need to find 5 × 31, and I can figure out that 5 × 31 is half of this [*points to the 310*], so I can figure out from mental math that that’s 155.

So I add that to the 620 and I get 775 so far.

So now all I need is one more. I know 1 × 31 is 31, and now I just add the 775 here, and I get 806. - Ah, next we get to long division — a current favorite in my precalculus class, since we’re doing long division of polynomials in order to factor them. (And later we’ll be doing long division of polynomials in order to find asymptotes.) Many of my students find that their memory of long division with numbers help them with algebra, but more of them find that the work with algebra finally lets them make sense of the traditional algorithm with numbers. Anyway, back to the video. The sample problem is 133 ÷ 6, and — no surprise — McDermott objects to TERC’s avoidance of the traditional algorithm. TERC’s “less efficient” method eventually results in the sentence 6 × 22 + 1 = 133, which is exactly the right form for doing algebra and number theory in high school. But McDermott sarcastically quotes the teaching guide for another series she attacks,
*Everyday Math,*because it concludes that it is “counterproductive to invest many hours of precious class time” to memorizing traditional algorithm for long division. “The mathematical payoff is not worth the cost,” correctly observes*Everyday Math.* - McDermott laments the lack of math skills among many college students. I’ve lamented that too, but surely it’s not because of TERC and the like. Most of these college students went through
*traditional*math programs!

Labels: math, teaching and learning, Weston

###### ARCHIVES

- May 2005
- June 2005
- July 2005
- August 2005
- September 2005
- October 2005
- November 2005
- December 2005
- January 2006
- February 2006
- March 2006
- April 2006
- May 2006
- August 2006
- September 2006
- November 2006
- December 2006
- January 2007
- February 2007
- March 2007
- April 2007
- May 2007
- December 2007
- January 2008
- February 2008
- March 2008
- April 2008
- May 2008
- July 2008
- November 2008
- December 2008
- January 2009