--- In beyondterc@yahoogroups.com, "chrisplant00" <chris@...> wrote:
they feel as though they are stuck in this program and
are already supplementing with basic math drills.
---------
Wow, that's great! Our school is totally cultish about it. They love
it. And when parents object, they say cultish things like, "just trust
us."
Linda
I just joined your group about Investigations. My child is using Dale
Seymour Publishings' version of Ivestigations. On the rare occasion
that my daughter has math homework, it is so far removed from "math" I
don't know if it is geography, art, social studies, etc. One of their
first math assignments was to sing "BINGO". Then they were supposed
to come up with other songs, preferably in a language other than
English, that they could share with the class. It went from that to
coloring quilts and drawing or downloading from the internet, a
building that they liked and writing a small paragraph why they liked
it. No reference to space or geometry or shapes or anything else was
brought up by the teacher. I will say that in my conversations with
the teacher, they feel as though they are stuck in this program and
are already supplementing with basic math drills. I am looking
forward to 11 1/2 more years of this.
Chris
I just joined your group about Investigations. My child is using Dale
Seymour Publishings' version of Ivestigations. On the rare occasion
that my daughter has math homework, it is so far removed from "math" I
don't know if it is geography, art, social studies, etc. One of their
first math assignments was to sing "BINGO". Then they were supposed
to come up with other songs, preferably in a language other than
English, that they could share with the class. It went from that to
coloring quilts and drawing or downloading from the internet, a
building that they liked and writing a small paragraph why they liked
it. No reference to space or geometry or shapes or anything else was
brought up by the teacher. I will say that in my conversations with
the teacher, they feel as though they are stuck in this program and
are already supplementing with basic math drills. I am looking
forward to 11 1/2 more years of this.
Chris
I agree. I know what a good, balanced math education looks like
because I received one.
TERC is unbalanced. I have two goals:
1. To ensure that my kids are ready for algebra
2. To teach my kids algorithms and shortcuts so that they can be
really facile with math and not waste so much time.
I tested all three of my kids over the weekend with the Singapore
pre-test. Here are the results:
Dwight (Grade 2) needs 2A
Marcy (Grade 5) needs 3B
Madeline (Grade 7) nees 4A
The most upsetting one is Madeline, who is not nearly ready for pre-
algebra. She has a friend in pre-algebra this year, who had years of
Kumon. And Jack Szigety, who is in 6th grade, is in pre-algebra.
He's been getting tutoring from his mother, who is a math teacher.
Madeline cannot seem to process anything mathematical that doesn't
have personal meaning to her. You get what you value.
I've chosen Singapore because it has similarities to TERC, and I
think it will work for my kids, but I'm also planning to use their
supplementary drill books.
I think there are good reasons to go with Saxon or Singapore or
others. It depends on the kid.
I think of TERC now as not being math at all. It's a wonderful
extended language program. When I think of it that way, I can be
supportive of it. Basically, my kids are simply not getting math at
school at all. My kids will get math at home.
Certainly my kids can learn several subjects at once--they're
already doing that. I just don't see the conflict. I'll tell them to
do math the TERC way at school, and many different ways at home. I
especially want to help my kids get facile at processing math in the
non-verbal part of their brains.
I think both parts of math are valid--the school will do one, and I
will do the other. I'm getting to be at peace with this.
For Max, you might like Saxon better but I'm not sure. Read the
reveiews of Saxon and Singapore. Home schoolers are big on
Singapore, but some don't like it.
You don't have to be a licensed math teacher to teach math. One
consideration for you, I would think, is to choose a program that
has a good teacher's manual.
If you choose Singapore, let me know before you order. I did a lot
of research, and there are choices to make that I might be able to
help you with.
Linda
TERC is not totally bad. There are good qualities in discovery based
instruction---good teaching includes some element of discovery and
investigations. The problem with TERC is the narrowness of its vision,
its antagonistic approach to other ways of thinking, and its all or
nothing philosophy---children who learned to carry and borrow in first
and second grades are somewhat forced to develop amnesia and totally
ignore what was taught to them, rather than connect and scaffold the
information to include new ideas . Education becomes flawed when it
becomes a cult and censors certain ideas and approaches.
As stated in the Ten Myths article... "Students learn in a variety of
ways. Basing most learning on student
discovery is time-consuming, does not insure that students end up
learning the right concepts, and can delay or prevent progression to
the next level. Successful programs use discovery for only a few very
carefully selected topics, never all topics."
When you get a chance, read Liping Ma's book. TERC, Singapore etc...all
these become just labels...good math teaching is balanced and
incorporates both conceptual and procedural elements.
Linda Moran wrote:
This is a terrific article. My DH remembers having read it (He's a Newsweek junkie) but it means more to him now.
I like the idea that the 2 countries have something to learn from each other, and that reinforces my decision to let TERC and Singapore reside in 2 different tracks in my children's brains.
LInda Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/beyondterc/
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
beyondterc-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
This is a terrific article. My DH remembers having read it (He's a
Newsweek junkie) but it means more to him now.
I like the idea that the 2 countries have something to learn from each
other, and that reinforces my decision to let TERC and Singapore
reside in 2 different tracks in my children's brains.
LInda
"and, because of teaching methods that focus on bringing everyone
along,
the bright ones are never pushed. In Singapore we get the poor kid who
is very bright and very hungry, and that's crucial to our success."
At the end of the day, parents have to look at their kids and see what
works better for them.
Linda Moran wrote:
As math skills slip, U.S. schools seek answers from Asia
CRIS PRYSTAY, The Wall Street Journal
Okay maybe that's an exaggeration. But I realized that I would like to
test my fifth grader with the Singapore pre-test. I'm going to try 5A.
I think this might reveal some interesting information for you and me
both, to find out where she's at.
I'll let you know what happens.
Linda
Hey Cristina. Dwight's almost done taking test 2A, and he may not
pass. It takes 80 percent to pass, and he's already gotten 19 wrong.
He only needs to get 5 more wrong to fail. Tomorrow I'll know.
That means I'll be buying the 2A book.
The guy from Harvard said anybody can use the Singapore math books.
You don't have to be a math teacher. He said they're pretty easy to
use.
Giving Dwight this pretest really shows me how far ahead the kids
are in Singapore. I think I want that for my kid, too.
If I proceed with Singapore math, I'll get settled in with Dwight,
and then see if I'd like to do it with Marcy, too, who is entering
BF in the fall. I'm trying to resist feeling guilty that I'm
focusing on just Dwight right now, but I can't do it all.
I had a rare opportunity to have a long conversation with my
husband, who has been away until today. He thought Catholic school
sounded like a great option for both Max and Dwight. But he also
liked the Singapore math idea.
I do see, though, that you and Max have more issues with the school
than just math. I haven't had these other problems, but that doesn't
mean I won't have them in the future. Now I'm terrified that Dwight
will get Max's teacher from this year.
It all feels overwhelming right now, but you and I will figure out
just what our kids need, and then we'll go do it.
Linda
I'm going down three tracks at the same time. This afternoon I plan
to visit Huntington and Kumon (after school).
I'm also slowly giving Dwight a pre-test for Singapore math, as I
contemplate tutoring him myself in Singapore math. Right now I'm
giving him the test for second grade. Even though I know he's
advanced, Singapore math is VERY advanced.
It's a free test, and it's available on their web site. You can
choose any grade to start out with. However, the test is very long.
Then, once you determine which grade level he needs, you order the
books. It comes to about a hundred dollars for one grade level. A
hundred a year, I think, is a real bargain. Or maybe two hundred if
our kids move rapidly. But it means we're doing our own tutoring.
I'm wondering if I can stick to this. I'm good at sticking to stuff,
but it means I'll need to keep believing that it's necessary.
Find the Singapore math web site on the lens, but i think it's
www.singaporemath.com
In my conversation with Wilfried Schmid of Harvard, he said the
Singapore math materials are easy to follow, and that he tutored his
own daughter in second and third grade levels.
Linda
--- In beyondterc@yahoogroups.com, Cristina Neuman <kcmneuman@...>
wrote:
>
> I picked up a packet yesterday. I don't know too much about it.
But when
> we were living in London, a couple of friends from Malaysia and
> Singapore said that it was popular in Singapore.
>
-------
Well that's interesting, because all the anti-TERC intelligiencia
are big on "Singapore math." That's what California uses, now that
it has dropped TERC. I'm toying with the idea of tutoring Dwight
myself so I can use the Singapore math materials, but I'm concerned
I'll burn out and then get lazy and he'll get nothing but TERC. I'm
more likely to stick to a routine of driving him to a class once a
week.
I had an email exchange today with the person largely responsible
for changing the Massachusetts math standards, and he said he didn't
like Kumon, but here's why. He said:
"I am not exactly a fan of Kumon, either. For children with a
learning disability, it may be ok. For mathematically gifted
children, on the other hand, the drill provided by Kumon may be
excessive. Children should be computationally fluent. As long as
they can compute accurately and fluently, both with paper and pencil
and mentally, speed is not helpful -- especially if they find the
push to make them compute faster distasteful."
I think that's okay, but we'd have to find out if there's a minimum
amount of drill they can do, and we'd still have to supplement with
meaning because I think Kumon is about ALL drill. It sure would be
nice to have a balance but I'm thinking we're not going to find that
in any one place.
My opinion is that any tutoring should be in small doses over a long
period of time, as opposed to short, intense bursts. The short
intense bursts will be lost on our kids becasue it won't get
reinforced in school.
Instead, it's better to think of our kids as having two separate
math programs--one in school, one outside of school, and both are
long-term.
If Kumon expects a few days a week, I'll opt for Huntington Learning
Center instead. Marcy did Huntington last year, and they did the
right amount of drill with her -- not too much, not too little. The
mistake I made was giving her too many hours per week. She learned
it all, then promptly forgot it because it wasn't reinforced in
school.
Also, with Kumon, you and I would want to check to see if they can
do some kind of altered accelerated program so that our gifted
children won't get bored.
What are their hours? I noticed they were closed during the day,
then I left a message but they never called back.
If we do go with this method of two simultaneous math programs, it
will be very interesting to see how this unfolds in our kids'
brains. I suspect that the two different math programs will take up
residence in two different parts of their brains.
I picked up a packet yesterday. I don't know too much about it. But when
we were living in London, a couple of friends from Malaysia and
Singapore said that it was popular in Singapore.
That's my mantra today. I just called Kumon and left a message. I'm
going to enroll Dwight in Kumon, and keep him there at least until
middle school.
Have you considered Kumon?
Linda
New Jersey has one of the worst standards in the country according to
the experts. I added that to my lens today too.
I feel like moving out of the state. Because NJ standards are so
flimsy, schools can easily justify constructivist math programs.
Hmmm...how about Catholic school? I'm serious about this campaign I'm
on to get the right math for Dwight.
Linda
At least our school will not be the only one lagging behind! But
seriously, this is very depressing news.
I had a conversation from a parent who is currently taking the TERC
parent workshop. She was under the impression that all elementary
schools in Ridgewood will eventually implement TERC.
It is hard to believe that this district is moving in that direction
after all the published articles from respected
mathematicians/educators, even the IES director, citing the flaws of
this program. I suspect that serious marketing and lobbying must
somehow play a role. Publishing houses and egos have a stake in
this...the more schools take to this program, the more materials will
be produced and sold---the more the empire will grow, translating to
higher revenues and more funds to TERC.
Thanks for posting "According to IES (Institute of Educational
Sciences) Director Russ
Whitehurst of the U.S. Department of Education, in his presentation on Ed.gov,
"A second finding that complicates the basic constructivist view is
that discovery activities may substantially compromise learning unless
the child already has mastered the background knowledge that is
relevant to the problem to be explored."
Linda Moran wrote:
I emailed the principal at Hawes. Here's the correspondence:
Dear Linda,
We are currently using Scott Foresman Addison Wesley MATH. This company purchased TERC and has put together a crossover program infusing TERC units of study into their existing scope and sequence. Our staff spent time with a TERC staff developer in how to implement this crossover program and each grade level is implementing it this year. Does this give you the information you requested? May I ask the reason for your question?
Kathi Kathi Rodger-Sachs
Principal
Hawes Elementary School
Ridgewood, New Jersey 07451
Phone: (201) 670-2720
Fax: (201) 670-2878
-----Original Message-----
From: Linda Moran [mailto:lindamoran@...]
Sent: Tue 3/7/2006 2:13 PM
To: Kathleen Rodger-Sachs
Subject: Question about math instruction
Hello. I'm a Ridgewood resident. I'd like to know what kind of math curriculum you offer at Hawes, and whether there are any near-term plans to switch to TERC math or Everyday math. Thank you. I couldn't find anything on the web site about it.
L Moran
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/beyondterc/
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
beyondterc-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
The federal department of education says that parents, not schools,
are ultimately responsible for their child's education. And then our
kids are given extreme, controversial methodologies which we're not
allowed to question.
What gives? Aren't we the taxpayers? Do we get no say? It's worse than
that. We're told, "Just trust us."
As a responsible parent, I've stared tutoring my kids at home. But now
I find out that my children are DISALLOWED from using the standard
algorithsm they're learning at home. My hands are tied.
And in the end, after they graduate and don't choose a math-intensive
field because they're ill-prepared, I can't win a lawsuit against my
school because "I'm responsible for my child's education."
Just useless venting.
Linda
I emailed the principal at Hawes. Here's the correspondence:
Dear Linda,
We are currently using Scott Foresman Addison Wesley MATH. This
company purchased TERC and has put together a crossover program
infusing TERC units of study into their existing scope and
sequence. Our staff spent time with a TERC staff developer in how
to implement this crossover program and each grade level is
implementing it this year. Does this give you the information you
requested? May I ask the reason for your question?
Kathi
Kathi Rodger-Sachs
Principal
Hawes Elementary School
Ridgewood, New Jersey 07451
Phone: (201) 670-2720
Fax: (201) 670-2878
-----Original Message-----
From: Linda Moran [mailto:lindamoran@...]
Sent: Tue 3/7/2006 2:13 PM
To: Kathleen Rodger-Sachs
Subject: Question about math instruction
Hello. I'm a Ridgewood resident. I'd like to know what kind of math
curriculum you offer at Hawes, and whether there are any near-term
plans to switch to TERC math or Everyday math. Thank you. I couldn't
find anything on the web site about it.
L Moran
--- In beyondterc@yahoogroups.com, Cristina Neuman <kcmneuman@...>
wrote:
>and a certain outcome from kids
-----
That's a good point, Cristina. In fact, certain answers are taboo,
such as "I got the answer by multiplying" or "because my mother taught
me that way."
LOL. Gotta laugh or you'll cry, right?
Meanwhile, I've done a ton more research, and have added it to my TERC
lens: http://www.squidoo.com/beyondTERC/
I found out that both Massachusetts and California have moved away
from TERC math.
What I'm currently doing is trying to find out what the math
curriculum is at Hawes. My strategy may be "Let us transfer to Hawes
and we'll quietly go away." Not sure yet.
I've also decided to close the posts on this board to anyone who is
not a registered member. I'll do that later today, and I'll remove my
RSS feed from the lens. More later.
Linda
I haven't really seen the Investigations
workbook. We
only get one page homework assignments so it's hard to tell. I thought
the
Everyday Math book at least offered several approaches...and yes, it is
more
tolerant of standard algorithms.
What bugs me with TERC is its narrow minded viewpoint. As much as TERC
people
say that this approach is reaching all kids, it is simply not true.
TERC people
want a certain answer and a certain outcome from kids...so it's really
not
"real" investigations or discovery.
I agree with you, placing emphasis on creativity and negating the need
for
facility is misguided. Metacognition sounds impressive but it is
meaningless in
this case. Children need to bank information until they are ready to
analyze
it. Forcing them to analyze it when they are not ready is as bad as the
useless
memorization they claim to be addressing.
Read a revealing anecdote that will help you get your mind wrapped
around how the TERC folks think, and why it's bugging you. This post
will help you to be articulate about what's wrong.
http://www.lindamoran.net/blog_teen/2006/01/post.html
Linda
Linda Moran here. This new board is for parents concerned about their
children's TERC math program, also known as the Investigations
program. I've already written some articles, which I'll post next.
I'm here to help parents vent a little and then get on a positive
track. Contrary to what you may believe, you are not powerless over
you child's education. Find out here what's good about TERC math,
what's missing, and what you can do about it.
It all doesn't seem so bad when you have the tools to fix it.
Cheers! Linda Moran