A pity that the article does not include any excerpts from the books or detailed critiques of what's wrong with them.<p>Examining a <i>Discovering Algebra</i> book at <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Discovering-Algebra-Investigative-Approach-Mathematics/dp/1559533404" rel="nofollow">http://www.amazon.com/Discovering-Algebra-Investigative-Appr...</a> suggests that the book is not so bad (though obviously this only allows previewing a few pages)...however, I'm unsure whether this is even the same book, since the OP doesn't mention the name of the publisher.<p>It's hard to judge whether the books themselves are poor or whether the failure stems from teachers unwilling to adapt to a knowledge-building rather than a purely didactic approach. Education is important and worth spending money on but (as a European) I'm frequently horrified by American teachers, whose union seems defensive even of members who exhibit basic deficiencies in literacy or numeracy. It's still strange to me, for example, to consider that there are teacher's editions of textbooks that include answer keys for scoring homework - I ask myself what possible need a competent teacher could have for such a thing, and why school districts are wasting money on buying them.<p>I'm <i>strongly</i> against dumbing down school curricula; on the other hand, I think discovery of knowledge by experiment imprints knowledge far better than mere receptive learning (cf. recent HN posts about college physics students who learn the material well but are hopelessly incapable of applying it to a novel context). So I'm inclined to favor the <i>approach</i> of these textbooks (without endorsing their actual content). This article <a href="http://www.oregonlive.com/news/index.ssf/2009/01/the_constant_math_problem_how.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.oregonlive.com/news/index.ssf/2009/01/the_constan...</a> suggests that at least some of the problem stems from parental or school unfamiliarity with the methods, such as complaints about an 'overemphasis on...problem solving'.<p>Hmmm. I think we need to take a closer look before jumping onto the 'blame the book' bandwagon. The books discussed may well be inadequate, but it's hard to judge that without a more reasoned critique. If anything, this lends further support to opinion of many HN readers that we should be moving towards open-source textbooks instead of the current cosy arrangement between school districts and publishers.
I am made uneasy about someone that contrasts 'low income' and 'white' in their graphs.<p>I do however, still holding a low opinion of the discovery math pedagogical model in general, as it requires more math sophistication than is likely to be found in an elementary/middle/high school's teacher.
I find it telling that the article breaks down scores by race, not by income. Note that it claims that the difficulties are for <i>low income families who cannot afford tutors / other resources</i>, not <i>black children</i>. What's the crossover? What's the pass ratio for <i>poor</i> white children?<p>Granted, a book can easily be harder to read / understand for less-classically-trained children. I'm not saying it's not possible, just that the article is definitely seeing what it was looking for.
It's interesting to use an ethnic achievement gap as a legal basis for opposing a particular math program. That most United States school districts don't simply use Singapore Math<p><a href="http://www.singaporemath.com/Primary_Math_s/21.htm" rel="nofollow">http://www.singaporemath.com/Primary_Math_s/21.htm</a><p>shows that most math curriculum adoptions are not made on the basis of best results for least expense.
OK, so it worsens the achievement gap, but what about absolute achievement. I'm fine if the poor are even worse off than the rich if they are 5% better off absolutely (i.e. the rich are 10% better off).
A Mathematician’s Lament by Paul Lockhart:
<a href="http://www.maa.org/devlin/LockhartsLament.pdf" rel="nofollow">http://www.maa.org/devlin/LockhartsLament.pdf</a><p>Persuaded me that the way I learned math is pathologically soul crushing; the way it's taught from kindergarden through university. The first two pages set up a nice metaphor: mathematics is argument and creativity and our traditional math education by memorization and rote repetition are akin to teaching music by reading and writing sheet music without first hearing or playing an instrument.<p>"No society would ever reduce such a beautiful and
meaningful art form to something so mindless and trivial; no culture could be so cruel to its
children as to deprive them of such a natural, satisfying means of human expression."<p>The rest of the article digs into some specific examples.<p>Mathematics instruction needs an overhaul and back-to-basics isn't The Right Thing.
If you want an example of math education that does a lot right, take a look at what's been done in Chicago [1,2]. Unfortunately, substandard K-12 curriculum is all too common. I don't even want to think about the billions of dollars society would save by implementing effective programs across the board. Makes me sad. :-/<p>[1] <a href="http://ucsmp.uchicago.edu/" rel="nofollow">http://ucsmp.uchicago.edu/</a><p>[2] <a href="http://everydaymath.uchicago.edu/" rel="nofollow">http://everydaymath.uchicago.edu/</a>
As a university level instructor, I find so many things high school teachers have to put up with appalling. I choose my text book for one. My lesson plans are not approved by anyone except me (yes, in fact my sister-in-law had to use recycled old lesson plans because they were "AP approved") The decision rights should be located as close to the in-the-trenches information unless the coordination benefits outweigh the costs. I doubt the benefits come anywhere close here.
Why not offer both types of instruction and let the teachers recommend which students should learn by which method. It seems like having an option would make it more likely more students would do better. Why limit the students to only one option.
The categorisation of children's test scores into different racial types I think says a lot about how far America has yet to go in dealing with issues of segregation and unequal opportunities - despite Obama's election as president.
From the article >>In this approach math is substantially dumbed down for "equity" reasons and students are asked to discover age-old principles on their own.<p>Charlotte Iserbyt, former Senior Policy Advisor in the Office of Educational Research and Improvement (OERI), U.S. Department of Education, wrote the free eBook (pdf) "The Deliberate Dumbing Down of America" <a href="http://www.deliberatedumbingdown.com/" rel="nofollow">http://www.deliberatedumbingdown.com/</a>
Welfare. These low-income and minority kids know they won't starve to death, they think that learning is "acting white". Here's the result.<p>Oh well, better for the rest of us.