Michigan State mathematics professor Bill Schmidt says we should teach fewer topics to mastery, not repeat them every year, hit more advanced math, less basic arithmetic in 5,6,7 From: brucec76@ix.netcom.com Date sent: Sat, 22 Nov 1997 19:11:43 -0600 (CST) To: ltuttle@pen.k12.va.us To: education-consumers@tricon.net Subject: Re: Republican Governors Meeting on C-SPAn Lil, I think this must have been a replay from a few months ago. In Sept. Schmidt spoke to a group of teachers in Sacramento, CA, and to the Commission on Academic Standards. He's changed his spin somewhat. As a result, the Stds. Comm. tried to invent a new fad that mingled algebra and geometry for the top 5 grades. It would have been the worst of what Schmidt spoke about, but they did so because they thought that's what he was suggesting. What he says about the texts is also true. The Saxon series addresses that by being formatted in a daily lesson plan arrangement. The Saxon series is devoid of pretty pictures of the Taj Mahal and Mayangelou poetry though. What he says about the repetition is very true, and is what Stevenson and Stigler wrote a few years ago in their "The Learning Gap." His national consensus goes back to "A Nation at Risk" and their call for a national, not federal educational plan. This Clinton subverted by using the exact words to mean a federal plan. That districts vary doesn't mean that the good districts should be dumbed down by a federal program because the weak ones can't get their act together. Such a plan will kill all innovation, just as all federal and/or centrally planned programs kill innovation. BC On 11/22/97 17:00:02 you wrote: > >I caught most of a presentation by Michigan State mathematics >professor Bill Schmidt to the Republican Governors Meeting in >Miami yesterday. He was giving an analysis of the recent TIMS >data and suggested 3 policy implications, all of which the >schools (not society) control: > >1. Curriculum lacks focus. U.S. schools cover same math >topics repeatedly/shallowly year after year. Other nations >don't engage in this repetition. They teach a topic/concept >once, make sure kids master it that year, then go on to other >topics the next year. (This struck a nerve with me. How many >times I've heard teachers say 'don't worry if Johnny doesn't >understand fractions in 5th grade; he'll get it again in middle >school. Then when he still doesn't 'get it' in middle school >and fails Algebra in high school, no one seems to know quite >why and assumes it's the kid's fault because he didn't try >hard enough!) > Textbooks are another problem. Schools cede curriculum >to textbook manufacturers which include all topics in a 700 page >book to make sure it's marketable. Japanese students, on the >other hand, have 200 page paperback books covering just the >topics expected to be learned that year. > Middle schools teach arithmetic, not serious new >intellectually demanding coursework. TIMS data indicate U.S. >4th graders are competitive in math skills, but by 8th grade, >U.S. students are far behind. Schools must repair the >"intellectual wastelands" of grades 5, 6, 7, and 8. These are >the years that foreign students learn Algebra, geometry, >chemistry and physics, while U.S. students simply get refresher >courses on elementary school subject matter. > >2. Where students live dictates what they will learn. >Expectations vary too widely in schools and classroom across >the nation. > >3. Problems of low student achievement at 8th grade are >mostly structural and systemic. He argued that low student >achievement results at 8th show that problems originate >in the school, not society. (U.S. students do fine in >arithmetic, but fail in higher math subject matter at 8th which >the schools aren't teaching.) > >Schmidt encouraged the Governors (through the NGA group, >ACHIEVE) to address these problems and urged them to work on >the development of a national consensus (not, he said, a >federal program) of when and what kids should be taught. He >warned that in the absence of this national consensus, control >of subject matter will remain in the hands of U.S. textbook >publishers and national normed-referenced test makers. > >It was interesting. If anyone gets his full presentation, I'd >like to have a copy of it. > >Lil >EDUCATION CONSUMERS CLEARINGHOUSE > > EDUCATION CONSUMERS CLEARINGHOUSE