Everyday Math

[Anonymous]

Is there an independent school around that doesn't use it?

Would also be interested in hearing from current parents at any area independent school. Can you indicate which school and the degree to which your school embraces the Everyday Math program - low/medium/high.

TIA

[Anonymous]

The only way to get rid of it is for the parents to confront the schools. They will always come back with "there's a new version". Or, "it has been heavily researched". Read up and be prepared for these answers.

[Anonymous]

WES (Washington Episcopal School) does not use Everyday Math; they follow the more traditional approach.

[Anonymous]

St. Patrick's uses Investigations starting in second grade. In fourth grade I believe that they start using Mathematics in Context in the later part of the year. They also uses some supplemental sources for math fact and algorithm practice -- Mountain Math, I think, but I could be wrong. If you don't like Everyday Math, though, you'd probably hate Investigations and/or Mathematics in Context. I will say, though, that in the Virginia county schools where Investigations is used state test scores have been on the rise, even if a lot of parents think it's crazy.

I think something important to remember is that just because something isn't taught the way you learned it -- and it might seem totally crazy to you -- doesn't make it wrong. That said, I don't really like Everyday Math very much, but I don't at all like something like Saxon Math (a very traditional approach). An interesting note is that elementary students' math scores on the National Assessment of Educational Progress have been slowly but steadily on the rise as our nation's schools have been adopted more reform math curriculums (of which Everyday Math is one -- and the most commonly used one). This doesn't mean definite causation, but it is an interesting correlation to consider.

[Anonymous]

EDM is NOT a firm curriculum, just go online and look at the research. Scores are on the rise due to NCLB. They have risen even faster in places that have switched from EDM to more traditional approaches.
Investigations is also very bad.
Take a peek at nychold.com/edm

[Anonymous]

Everyday Math is a spiral curriculum that does not bring topics to completion. That approach was strongly discouraged by the blue ribbon panel that just released its recommendations.
I figure that the schools will change...in 10 years. Too long for my kids, I'm teaching them at home.

[Anonymous]

I am somewhat nervous about Everyday Math because of all the terrible things I've read about it, yet my first hand experience with it so far is that it seems to be very good for my child! True, he's only a kindergartner, so a spiral format that doesn't spend too long on any one concept and is activity-based rather than worksheet-based is a good match. Still, he is so happy doing the skip counting and is already doing simple multiplication (2 x 3 or 3 x 25) and actually understands what he is doing. I will of course keep a very close eye on how things go over the ensuing years, but for now, I for one am very pleased with the results of the program. I would feel even better about it if I weren't the only person outside of the University of Chicago that held this view!

[Anonymous]

pp, maybe your son would be doing even better with one of the newer curricula. That is the point, EDM fails even the bright kids.

[Anonymous]

What newer curriculum (or curricula) do you recommend?

[Anonymous]

Saxon or Singapore.

[Anonymous]

Do you know of any actual research (not commentary) that compares Singapore Math and Everyday Math? I know Singapore as a country does better on international comparisons than the US, but hey also average like 30 school days more per school year, and there's a reliable body of research showing (not to mention it's just obvious) that more instructional time = increased student achievement.

As for Saxon, it's certainly not new (nor is Singapore), but that doesn't really matter. What does matter is that the largest compilation of research data available that I know of suggests that Everyday Math is more effective than Saxon is.

Here's a link to an easy table to review: http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/reports/elementary_math/topic/tabfig.asp

Here's where it comes from: http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/reports/elementary_math/topic/rating.asp

I'm not a fan of Everyday Math myself, but I really don't like Saxon. Singapore Math I think has some potential when appropriately supplemented.

[Anonymous]

I'm not a fan of Everyday Math myself, but I really don't like Saxon. Singapore Math I think has some potential when appropriately supplemented.

I think this statement is key. All mathematics curricular should be supplemented with a variety of materials, manipulatives, other curriculums and most importantly effective instruction. I wonder if the program is really that ineffective or could it be the instructional practices implemented by the teachers. When asking about the curriculum we should also ask what type of professional developement teachers are receiveing to effectively teach mathematics content.

[Anonymous]

American students spend more time on school work than Singaporean students. They are just seem to be more efficient and productive.
I also am not a fan of Saxon.
There is lots of research in these areas. Just Google: education research math curricula us singapore ....
One question, what would be so wrong with trying something new?

[Anonymous]

22:01 your references are only comparing EDM to other US curricula.

[Anonymous]

Please take a look at these similar articles:
A Coherent Curriculum. A Case of Mathematics by William Schmidt et al
Curriculum Makes a Huge Difference by Hook et al
Also, this one reads easy:
A Solution to how to Teach Math: Subtract by G. Toppo
EDM is a spiral curriculum and this report discourages that approach: "Any approach that continually revisits topics year after year without closure is to be avoided," the report says.