Everyday Math (Again)

[Anonymous]

Our private uses EDM. DC has had consistently high standardized test scores and we haven't done Kumon or hired tutors. Does your school go through HS? If so, talk to parents of older kids about math readiness in upper grades and look at where the HS math curriculum maxes out and how many kids go all the way. (And whether the kids who do did LS/MS elsewhere!)

We're in a PreK-12 school and the lower school prepares kids for advanced mathematics in MS and HS. The LS math teachers are accountable not only to parents but to the upper grade math teachers and the relationship is clearly a collegial one.

[Anonymous]

If you rely solely on EDM curriculum alone to get your child to grasp higher mathematics in high school and college (mastery of multiplication and division, fractions and decimals, algebra .... ) the child will be behind the proverbial 8 ball. If multiplication/division, fractions/decimals are not mastered (backwards and forwards) in elementary school the child will have difficulty in algebra (the gateway to higher mathematics). Elementary school is a platform to get these fundamentals down cold ... before the intensity of algebra and higher mathematics pick up. Experiment (e.g., EDM) only after one has the fundamentals down cold. That's my advice.

[Anonymous]

EDM may not be a disaster, but I certainly sense that many of us don't give it high marks at all. For what private schools charge, I would expect that our math programs would be ranked higher than many of the public school systems out there. I have to say that our public school friends are happy with their math programs.

I would also expect that given the vast number of complaints from parents at our old school, the administration would have done something by now. They haven't - and it's not even on the agenda for review.

Call me old but when I was in private school, there was no such thing as supplementing. We got what we needed from our school. We were good in math and excellent writers, too. Got into great schools and did well on the SATs. I now have a child who had to be supplemented in math, writing and sports. Yes, OP, it made me furious to think that all this tuition money still didn't pay for what was promised.

A happy ending - we moved to another private school. No supplementing needed. A great feeling knowing that we don't have that complicated schedule anymore with driving and appointments. And $$$.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If you rely solely on EDM curriculum alone to get your child to grasp higher mathematics in high school and college (mastery of multiplication and division, fractions and decimals, algebra .... ) the child will be behind the proverbial 8 ball. If multiplication/division, fractions/decimals are not mastered (backwards and forwards) in elementary school the child will have difficulty in algebra (the gateway to higher mathematics). Elementary school is a platform to get these fundamentals down cold ... before the intensity of algebra and higher mathematics pick up. Experiment (e.g., EDM) only after one has the fundamentals down cold. That's my advice.

Could you please cite some support for your more sweeping claims (underlined above)? I'm not trying to argue, and I'd demand the same of anyone who makes a similar claim in support of reform math. Forgive me, but whenever I see such dramatic claims (especially on DCUM), I chalk them up as utter bullshit unless someone can support them in some way. Thanks.

[Anonymous]

I agree with poster above. Both my children in elementary school have mastered the fundamentals. I have taught them at home. EDM is used in their school system. What they learn in Math at home is completely out of phase with the school curriculum. The mathematical principles in the heavy school textbook that gets revised every few years can be distilled into a tenth the size. EDM for both children is simply an afterthought to fullfill school requirements.

[Anonymous]

No need to make demands. My data is anecdotal from my experience with my own children and the children of close friends. The math curriculum in many elementary schools using the EDM is not very challenging and students move on the the next level with good grades. When the rubber begins to hit the road in middle and high school as children begin their journey on the higher Math trail ... algebra, geometry, trigonometry, abstract algebra and calculus...many children find the going tough because the foundation in multiplication/division; fractions/decimals is weak. This comes as a surprise to them and their parents because up until now they have done "well" in elementary school math. They are behind the proverbial 8 ball (5 years behind). Some are able to remedy the situation and catch up. Others remain forever intimidated by mathematics whether in the Math or Economcs department. Those kids that have supplemented the EDM curriculum with traditional methods grounded in mastery of multiplication/division and fractions/decimals seem to have a smoother transition to higher mathematics in middle and high school. Further supplementation in the area of problem solving and critical thinking via math competitions (e.g. MOEMS, Math Counts, AMC8, 10 and 12) provides the icing on the cake. These students in my own experience are performing at the highest levels.

This is not gospel.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, just keep in mind that EDM has a sales pitch that is almost scripted, to give the schools to deal with parent inquiry. The bottom line is that they (EDM) really did not expect this level of scrutiny. Also, I can bet that all of the schools that are using it wish that they had not adopted it. Kids that do standard math can solve problems in the grocery store too, you don't need EDM to help with that.

That is so much BS. Everyday Math was funded by the National Science Foundation and developed at University of Chicago. In other words, it came out of an academic context in which scrutiny is the norm -- not a surprise. The people who designed this curriculum have a theory about what they're doing and why and they've explained it. And local privates like Sidwell and GDS (which, unlike some public school systems, are free to abandon curricula that don't serve their needs) who use EDM or Investigations continually evaluate those programs and are happy with the results including things like standardized test scores.

I'm not an EDM partisan (just open-minded), but I'm really tired of this kind of (non-)argument.

I was also talking about the publisher. If you are not aware, textbook sales are real money. They use the same sales people that car dealerships and drug companies use.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Many families bypass EDM with supplementation. A lot of these weekend schools, like the Russian, Chinese, Korean schools that are held on weekends have little non EDM type math classes. Some parents do work on their own, or use Kumon. The point is that EDM will take credit for the extra effort and say "things aren't that bad".

Any evidence that kids whose schools use EDM (vs. kids with a more traditional math program) disproportionately go to Kumon or weekend schools? Regardless of curriculum, some families supplement. I grew up with flashcards, math games, workbooks, logic puzzles, etc. And that was pre-home computers. Supplementation isn't a sign that something is going wrong (e.g. a curriculum is failing) -- it's a sign that something is going right (e.g. families support their kids' education, schools use a variety of approaches because kids have different learning styles and/or each text has different strengths).

Yes, but when you look at results, you can't say that this cohort used EDM and all was fine. The supplementation is a big factor.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:EDM may not be a disaster, but I certainly sense that many of us don't give it high marks at all. For what private schools charge, I would expect that our math programs would be ranked higher than many of the public school systems out there. I have to say that our public school friends are happy with their math programs.

I would also expect that given the vast number of complaints from parents at our old school, the administration would have done something by now. They haven't - and it's not even on the agenda for review.

Agree. The thing is that there are better curricula. What's to say that your dc would not have had a better outcome with something else. I guess many parents are happy with 'good enough'. I want the best.
I think that these schools will switch in the next ten years.

[Anonymous]

PP, I not only want the best, I am (supposedly) paying for the best.

Let me ask you this: How can an average, relatively uninformed private school parent like me get involved in this without annoying the school and administrators? I can't imagine that they would take well to random parents calling them up and questioning the curriculum they have chosen....

[Anonymous]

Depending upon how your school is structured, you can always go to the Head of the school division and ask "out of curiousity." You can also go to your PTA as well as submit a question for your Head's monthly chat/coffee/get- together.

Also, read the Board's plan for issues to address this year.

[Anonymous]

I had not paid much attention to the "math wars" until I started following this thread, and I don't really have much bias one direction or the other. I got curious though, and started looking for a non-partisan summary of the issues. Finding any in-depth evaluation without an agenda is difficult. For others who might be interested in taking an objective look, here are two useful links I found:
http://www.nctm.org/news/content.aspx?id=12320
http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/reports/topic.aspx?tid=04

The first link is a balanced summary of the research from the Nat'l Council of Teachers of Mathematics. It seems to suggest that both approaches can be effective, and each has strengths and weaknesses.

The second link is the "gold standard" research summary described by NCMT, which purports to compare how large numbers of students fare under different curricula. I'm not familiar enough with the various curricula to know which are traditional and which are reform. I suspect many combine different elements of traditional and reform approaches. I know only the Everyday Math is considered a reform curriculum, and it seems to score fairly well.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:No need to make demands. My data is anecdotal from my experience with my own children and the children of close friends. The math curriculum in many elementary schools using the EDM is not very challenging and students move on the the next level with good grades. When the rubber begins to hit the road in middle and high school as children begin their journey on the higher Math trail ... algebra, geometry, trigonometry, abstract algebra and calculus...many children find the going tough because the foundation in multiplication/division; fractions/decimals is weak. This comes as a surprise to them and their parents because up until now they have done "well" in elementary school math. They are behind the proverbial 8 ball (5 years behind).

Geez, you'd think these kinds of problems would have come to the parents' attention when they got standardized test scores back.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote: From OP:
And I'm interested in the remarks made about people having to supplement math work with tutors, etc. That is another concept that, at this point, I just don't get. I'm sure I'll learn more about it as he progresses, but at this point, all I can say is that with all the $$ we are paying to send him to this private school, if there is EVER any talk about additional paid instruction, simply because the school is using a program that is not up to par, I will be FURIOUS!

I suggest you try to figure out what kind of a learner your child is. Then you may see supplementation as a good thing, and not simply a failure of the school:
- If s/he really likes math, you may feel that supplementation is a great thing. Math kids are sponges and love it; it is sometimes this realization that leads families to supplement.
- Your child may learn better with something other than EDM. That does not mean EDM is terrible, just that your child would be better off with something else. Then you may wish to supplement.

As you can probably see, I think the expectation that "I pay all this money and we still have to supplement" is a little narrow. There may be economic reasons to be furious, but the reasons may have to do with your child. I also don't see supplementation as a great refuge for over-anxious parents. But that is another story.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Many families bypass EDM with supplementation. A lot of these weekend schools, like the Russian, Chinese, Korean schools that are held on weekends have little non EDM type math classes. Some parents do work on their own, or use Kumon. The point is that EDM will take credit for the extra effort and say "things aren't that bad".

Any evidence that kids whose schools use EDM (vs. kids with a more traditional math program) disproportionately go to Kumon or weekend schools? Regardless of curriculum, some families supplement. I grew up with flashcards, math games, workbooks, logic puzzles, etc. And that was pre-home computers. Supplementation isn't a sign that something is going wrong (e.g. a curriculum is failing) -- it's a sign that something is going right (e.g. families support their kids' education, schools use a variety of approaches because kids have different learning styles and/or each text has different strengths).

Yes, but when you look at results, you can't say that this cohort used EDM and all was fine. The supplementation is a big factor.

I can, however, say, that my kid goes to a private school, the private school uses EDM, most people I know at the school do not hire math tutors or send their kids to Kumon, the kids' test scores (on standardized tests that measure computational skills) are consistently high, and they've gotten higher since EDM was adopted.

Frankly, I don't care which component of the curriculum is responsible for which test scores. The curriculum as a whole works well. It's just wrong-headed to act as if the use of EDM is a sign that a school has a substandard math program that will leave your kids years behind, unable to do algebra, etc. Guess what -- kids can learn computation, a variety of techniques for calculation, *and* a variety of other more conceptual skills (e.g. estimation, algebraic reasoning). It's not as if one kind of skill necessarily comes at the expense of the others. And while knowing number facts backwards and forwards may be necessary for higher-level math or science, it's certainly not sufficient. From what I've seen, EDM does a good job in providing kids with "math sense" -- something that drill and kill type approaches generally fail to produce.