The key is "knowledgeable teachers". The best book explaining the difference between math education in the U.S and China is a book by Liping Ma called Knowing and Teaching Elementary Mathematics. The book compared a group of US teachers that were rated above average and Chinese teachers when they were asked how to solve four different types of problems. For example Ma asked the teachers:

People seem to have different approaches to solving problems involving division with fractions. How do you solve a problem like this one? 1 3/4 ÷ 1 /2=
Imagine that you are teaching division with fractions. To make this meaningful for kids, something that many teachers try to do is relate mathematics to other things. Sometimes they try to come up with real-world situations or story-problems to show the application of some particular piece of content. What would you say would be a good story or model for this problem.

Only 9 of the 21 U.S. teachers who worked the problem produced the correct numerical answer to the division problem. This clearly points to a problem with the teachers’ algorithmic competency. In contrast, all 72 Chinese teachers performed the computation correctly. Only one of the U.S. teachers generated a story that corresponded correctly to the given division. In contrast, 90% of the Chinese teachers generated appropriate stories for the division. U.S. teachers were taught by teachers without a profound understanding of math so they teach the way that they were taught which creates a never ending cycle of incompetent teachers. One way to change the system would be for math to be taught by math teachers/specialists at the elementary level instead of elementary teachers.

Anonymous wrote:While I appreciate all the opinions, can anyone point me to articles or other research that digs into these issues in depth and supports positions with research? I'm kind of a "show me" person, so I need to see the research myself.

Here is an excellent article that was developed by the National Science Foundation's National Science Board.

http://nagc.org/uploadedFiles/Information_and_Resources/Hot_Topics/NSB%20-%20Stem%20innovators.pdf

Short of doing the research for you refer to The Chronicle of Higher Education for a wealth of information over the years on the number, ethnicity, citizenship and other demographic data about the students in all US graduate programs. NSF and NIH websites have this data. A google search will also provide info on these metrics. Does require a bit of discipline and work.

As Americans we do get a little confused over who is really doing the innovating? Since when was the "boss" the expert or innovator? Not the case in my Industrial sector?

While I appreciate all the opinions, can anyone point me to articles or other research that digs into these issues in depth and supports positions with research? I'm kind of a "show me" person, so I need to see the research myself.

This is pretty easy. The US government and most states don't provide any funding for gifted education. If there was any priority at all in our educational system to support and nourish STEM talent then these talented kids could surely do great things. Other countries value and nuture talent and provide a foundation for these children to meet their potential.

Our society for the most part supports this practice and can't put two and two together. Talent can't develop unless it's nurtured. Our most talented students are the ones being left behind in the current system. We have turned our backs as a country on the children who have the potential to make great contributions in the fields of math and science yet we still wonder why we are so far behind. It is maddening to me.

Innovation? Has anyone taken a look at what type of students are in STEM graduate programs in America, postdoctoral students and researchers in the American biomedical industrial complex, NIH campuses, NSF, IT engineers and the like? Who is ... and will be doing the innovating? Are we entering an era of too many Chiefs and managers?

Anonymous wrote:OP, you might want to take a peek at nychold.com , it has a lot of interesting articles that speak to some of your concerns.
I am not sure that agree that curriculum does not matter. It is a PIECE of the solution.

I've looked at NYCHold before. My problem with them is that they seem so focused on advocating about curriculum issues, that it's hard to assess whether their other research materials are honest research, or just more advocacy disguised as research. It feels sort of like looking at the NRA's website for statistics on handgun injuries to children in homes -- you can't help but feel the research is biased.

Maybe I'll look again though. Thanks.

Anonymous wrote:The bit I can't work out is.. While US students score poorly on math tests, the US remains the innovator in the technology area -- like way ahead of other countries. At least that's the case in the software industry, which is what I'm familiar with.

I think US math education has been poor for a while, so that should translate into falling behind in software but that's not the case.

The only theory I have is that average US students do poorly in math, but the innovators really excel at it. But those numbers are brought down by all the poor (academically) students.

That's the only theory I can come up with, and even that doesn't seem that strong. Is it something with testing or the educational process? I just don't get why students are doing so poorly compared to otehr countries, but the US is still innovating so well.

Many of those innovations are created by immigrants. Check out the nationalities of math or physicals PhDs at any US university. Lots of immigrants. Also, Silicon Valley - full of immigrants.

OP, you might want to take a peek at nychold.com , it has a lot of interesting articles that speak to some of your concerns.
I am not sure that agree that curriculum does not matter. It is a PIECE of the solution.
The experts are zeroing in on the issues and are coming closer to a plan. The only problem is that schools are so SLOW in taking action that perhaps your grandchildren will benefit.
For the time being, we will continue to import scientists.
I remember one statement from an interview that was on nychold. The gentleman was saying that there needs to be more rigor in our math studies. It is not all about this "discovery" and "understanding" of math that matters. The kids just have to learn the facts. The understanding will come later. He said that it took some of the best minds thousands of years to figure out the decimal system, and we think that a six year old can discover it one his own if we give him time to explore.
Anyway, the teachers stink (private and public) and the parents themselves don't now math because they went through the same crummy system.
Even our brightest students are under-performing compared to the bright students overseas.

The bit I can't work out is.. While US students score poorly on math tests, the US remains the innovator in the technology area -- like way ahead of other countries. At least that's the case in the software industry, which is what I'm familiar with.

I think US math education has been poor for a while, so that should translate into falling behind in software but that's not the case.

The only theory I have is that average US students do poorly in math, but the innovators really excel at it. But those numbers are brought down by all the poor (academically) students.

That's the only theory I can come up with, and even that doesn't seem that strong. Is it something with testing or the educational process? I just don't get why students are doing so poorly compared to otehr countries, but the US is still innovating so well.

I came to the US from South America in the early 1990s, when I was in my late teens. I had been a good student back home. I had fairly limited English abilities -- I was able to maintain only a limited, basic conversation in English -- when I took the SAT just after a few months of arriving in the US. I got 80 percentile in math and 65 percentile in English.

I am grateful to this country for many things, but that early experience, and many others ever since, make me concerned about how US kids are getting prepared for the future.

If you are skilled at Math in the US you can get a job making much more money than a teacher. I would love to teach Math and I am great at it but I can't take the pay cut. I quite my Masters in Eduction to take a promotion at work.

I hope to teach Math as a second career. Hopefully my finances can handle the hit.

Today's Americans children place far too much emphasis on sports, video games, movies, television during their developing and formative years (which they continue into the many decades of adult years). Many of today's American children lack the discipline of other global children. Discipline and work is frowned upon by American parents in general in favor of what is perceived as play, fun and leisure. Learning mathematics requires critical thinking, work and solving hard problems. Many American parents perceive these activities in the first decade and a half of life as torture and later when children realize they need math to academically survive (psychology, economics, STEM, medicine, healthcare, statistics) they plead fear, aversion, and incompetence. Some of these children and their families may even seek special accommodations to simply get through the educational process under the guise of a developmental learning pathology to explain lack of number sense, fears and poor math performance.

"...K-12 math is just not that complicated..."

well that's not the case where i'm from - K-6 was not complicated, but 7-12? it's hell for me. don't think i ever scored 60% in math since 7th grade (MS).

what do u do to catch up? i'd say if kids trade 1-hr/day of sports for math they'd all be in much better shape. but that's not the US way i'm afraid...

I read this WaPo column with interest -- http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answer-sheet/post/the-problem-with-math-education/2012/01/12/gIQAbhx5vP_blog.html?wprss= . The column claims that not only is the US lagging at the bottom end of the spectrum, but even the top 10% of US students do not compare favorably to many other nations. Let's just accept without debating it that the US needs to do a better job teaching math and science to its students. So what's lacking? What is preventing schools from doing better at teaching these subjects? The author's proposed solution -- "My experience leads me to believe that the most effective methods involve knowledgeable teachers with a passion for the material, and a set of expectations which are as hard as possible, while attainable" -- strikes me a vague, ambiguous, and weak. This is not something I've ever researched, so I'm hoping some people here who know more than I do can help guide me.

NB: I'm really NOT looking for yet another debate over Everyday Math or other specific curricula. Those don't seem to be the answer to the question I'm proposing, because many different schools in the US and elsewhere have used several different curricula for many years, with little clear change in the end results. It seems the reasons need to be more fundamental than that.

My initial guess (without research) is that it can't be simply a question of finding "knowledgeable teachers with a passion for the material" because K-12 math is just not that complicated, and so plenty of teachers should be able to teach it effectively. Maybe there just aren't enough good teachers to go around? I guess that's possible, but it would suggest the US is also lagging in other areas besides math & science. Maybe there also is an issue of math and science not being "cool" so that children have less interest and motivation to learn.

I'm all ears. Help please.

Sam2