On NOW at RadioFR!
Doug from Upland interviews JAYNA DAVIS discussing the OKLAHOMA CITY BOMBING
Posted on 12/04/2002 9:41:55 AM PST by Lizavetta
Goshen – A new math curriculum plus confused students equals angry parents. At least when that new math curriculum is the Interactive Mathematics Program.
Under IMP, high school students learn from books that have more word problems than equations. Instead of traditional math instruction, IMP emphasizes students working in groups to solve a problem over the course of a few weeks.
Goshen has been using IMP for the past three years in its freshman, sophomore and junior classes. The district plans to add it to its 12th-grade curriculum next year.
But some parents want it gone.
"The whole program is a travesty," said parent Traude Ellert, who has made it her personal mission to convince the district to ax IMP. "It's like a cancer. We are using language arts books to teach math. I'm outraged as a taxpayer. Part of my money was used here."
IMP replaces the algebra, geometry, trigonometry and pre-calculus found in traditional math, where students are taught in a more structured setting and a teacher drills formulas. Students of IMP are taught in groups and spend weeks on one central problem or theme.
An IMP textbook states that it "does not teach directly." There is no index in the book for math concepts. Called "fuzzy math," IMP has received mixed reviews. In 1999, the U.S. Department of Education named it one of the nation's top five exemplary math programs in the country. But some Web sites call it a scam that frustrates parents and turns A and B students into C and D students.
Math is an exact science and IMP makes it cloudy, Ellert said.
"Don't mess with math," she said. "They messed with math and that's not OK."
Ellert, who teaches pre-GED courses at a state prison, began her own math group. Every Tuesday night for 90 minutes, she teaches math to a group of 16 freshmen, including her daughter, from a Math A Barron's Review Book.
The students meet in the art room of the high school, where Ellert gives homework assignments and rewards them with saltine crackers for correct answers. She doesn't get paid to teach and the students go on their own time, many sacrificing extra-curricular activities.
But they don't mind. It's better than learning what they call "CHIMP" math. "We call it CHIMP because it's so easy monkeys could do it," said freshman Katey Bischof, 14, an honors student. "We learned more in three weeks here (with Ellert) than we learned in three months in IMP class," said freshman Hillary Quinn, 14.
The students complain that there are no lessons, just stories; parents can't help them if they have questions because the book does not explain the math problems and the Math A Regents exam has nothing to do with IMP.
Goshen isn't the only school district with IMP. Newburgh also has the program but it is under review, said spokeswoman Rebecca Foster. By the end of next year, the Goshen School District will have spent about $65,000 funding IMP, said Superintendent James Langlois. The district added the program to adapt to changing Regents requirements.
By the time current freshmen graduate, they will have to pass English, U.S. history and global studies, math and science.
"We can no longer allow kids to slide by with the same understanding of math as they did in the past," Langlois said. "Everyone has to pass the Math A (Regents) exam." And that concerns parents.
"We're giving the tutors in the area a lot of business," said a mother, whose son is part of Ellert's group. "As soon as I saw the book, I saw a problem. I said, 'This is not math.' We need a blending of the old math and new math. I don't think anyone is against new and innovative ideas. But you need a basis."
But for Ellert, it's become a personal goal to get rid of the program. "I'm not stopping until this is gone," she said. "It's a travesty to the Goshen School District."
IMP word problem
IMP was created in 1989 by San Francisco State University professors Dan Fendel and Diane Resek. The program uses an integrated problem-based approach to teach algebra, geometry, trigonometry, probability and statistics. It is used in more than 350 schools across the country.
For more information, visit the IMP Web site at www.mathimp.org or contact Dan Fendel at 415-338-1805 or Diane Resek at 415-338-2071.
This is an example of an IMP word problem:
"Pick any answer"
Lai Yee has a new trick. He tells someone:
--Pick any number.
--Multiply by 2.
--Now add 8.
--Divide by 2.
--Subtract the number you started with.
--Your answer is 4.
1. Try out Lai Yee's trick. Is the answer always 4? If you think it always is, explain why. If not, explain why it sometimes will be something else.
2. Make up a trick whose answer will always be 5.
3. Pretend that someone gives you a number that he or she wants to be the answer. Using the variable A to stand for that number, make up a trick whose answer will always be A.
Source: Interactive Mathematics Program text book
Yes it is. A careful observer will notice that the downward spiral of student performance in California over the last thirty years or so roughly parallels the continual introduction of "new" ideas into the California educational system ;)
Tell us what math texts YOU like.
I want practice, hands-on, and application in a text. I will pull from wherever needed to reach students. I know some teachers like Saxon. It does seem to work for some kids. The other two will work for more kids.
Don't forget the inert gas atmosphere you need to keep your tungsten wire from going "Poof!" within seconds of applying the current.
Hmmmm... It didn't go poof the last time I was doing a bench test to see how much current through it would melt a copper foil at close range... I was using 15 mil W though, that's right hardcore stuff...
Had ABeka through grade school. I recall alot of long division... Rote, bored the p!ss outta me, but did the job... Saxon had a very cleancut conciseness that attracted me as a youngster...
Saxon has got to be the best physics text out there for homeschoolers at any rate... Take Bob Jones, for example. That piece of dog waste must've been written by a bunch of English majors, I swear to God. They should stick to building their barbwire fences to keep the Catholics and other infidels out and leave science alone...
Argon works well.
A simple, progressive math test will do the same without the embarassment of showing ones' lack of knowledge (or abundance of knowledge which can be frowned upon by peers) in front of the class. I still don't see what there is to discuss. If they class can multiply and divide, then move on to bigger things.
Thinking and reasoning are very important in learning math. Math is not always about practicality. If so, use a calculator. Funtionality is based on thinking and reasoning and applying what you have learned.
I would never argue that thinking and reasoning aren't important in math. But, if a problem doesn't have a purpose or goal, it is useless. And if students find it useless, they probably won't work with it. Finding one of an infinate number of answers to a question, to me, has no goal. It sounds more like "Dr. Spock meets Pythagerus". :)
Math is changing - in some good ways and some not so good ways. My first year to teach was when "new math" started. The texts were new, and I had not had any of it in college - (like graphing inequalities on a number line). My ex tried to help our first grade son, and could not do the math - <, > were new in the texts. Now things are getting moved down further in the curriculum, and basics are getting less emphasis. Manipulatives were new 20 years ago in the US (40 in Europe), and are rarely used now. There are times when they are very beneficial, but teachers tend to teach how they were taught. Many consider them too time consuming.
Math hasn't changed a bit; the methods of teaching have. Oh granted, we do more digital now, but the quadratic equation hasn't changed and the only thing different with pi is how many decimal places it has been successfully been carried out.
I beleive that the changes in teaching methods have shown up negatively in the results on standardized testing over the last 40 years. This is particularly true on tests that haven't been dummied down since the late 1950's.
To be honest, I don't blame this entirely on teaching methods; I put most of the blame on social promotion and other feel-good claptrap that serves only to lower the standard of the class to its weakest link.
Finding certified teachers is hard, whether math or otherwise. There are too many who are ill-prepared. I blame a lot of this on universities. The profs that can do research get more time and money. Those that can teach get run off. Teachers are not highly valued in our society. Discipline is becoming non-existant in our schools. All of this leads to kids learning less.
I can understand that. Putting up with kids and their parents without the ability to flunk the ones that don't make the cut and without the ability to expel the troublemakers is probably a big reason. Why enter a profession in which you seemingly cannot do anything right?
Is the publishers information comparative or anecdotal? I have seen or heard of few classroomes where it has really worked. Most are leaving it, or supplementing it heavily.
The touchy-feely, rainforest, can't-we-all-get-along, problem-solving mantra is a canard.
There is nothing touchy feely about PROBLEM SOLVING. It is thinking, applying, and using basic math skills.
Development of critical thinking skills and the ability to problem solve comes after a strong foundation in the basics has been laid. Upper division high school and then college are the correct places to put the burden on students for complex problem solving.
Our children are problem solvers before they enter school. Not encouraging problem solving in everyday life is a disservice to them. Evidently we don't agree on what true problem solving is.
I agree and see that as a important lesson in education.
This bears repeating. First the basics, then using the basics to solve.
On NOW at RadioFR!
Doug from Upland interviews JAYNA DAVIS discussing the OKLAHOMA CITY BOMBING
I have four children and I honestly have not noticed this in them, or any other child. And whatever abilities to solve children may inherently have, I don't believe it has any meaning in terms of abstract mathematical principals. Young brains are not capable of abstract thought until later - they're simply not wired that way.
Evidently we don't agree on what true problem solving is.
Perhaps not....but at least we can have a civil disagreement, right?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.