By The Numbers: Greenwich Public Schools Mathematics Curriculum

The following presentation was made to the Board of Education of the Greenwich Public Schools at their meeting on 17 November 2011. The presentation is the start of an effort to have the entire K-12 mathematics curriculum reviewed immediately (for reasons explained in the presentation), and to push for immediate action to address the damage being done to our children by the EVERYDAY MATHEMATICS (R) ("EDM") program used in grades K-5 (for obvious reasons). As this blog develops, I will provide links to websites detailing the problems with this program and others like it. I will also provide a link to a site where you can sign a petition addressed to the Board of Education calling for the replacement of EDM.

I hope to hear from all parents with their thoughts about mathematics education and about EDM, good and bad. Parents must play an active role in their children's education, including participating in the selection of the educational material. I hope this will serve as a forum for making our children's math education better.

_________________________________________________________________________________

Mathematics in Greenwich Schools

Remarks to the Board of Education – 17 November 2011

[NOTE: items in brackets were left out due to the three minute time limit.]

(Items in parentheses and in bold are footnoted references - see end of post)

My name is Brian Peldunas. My wife, Liz, and I are the parents of a third grade student at Riverside.

On 7 October 2011, I submitted a request for curriculum review (attached) for mathematics, with the appropriate forms, to Dr. Lulow. In a follow up conversation with Dr. Lulow, he stated that the timing of a review was a Board of Education decision, and he promised to raise the matter after the budget season. Given that budget will be required to execute a curriculum review, I am coming to you tonight to make two requests.

First, that the planned 2014 curriculum review for Mathematics be rescheduled to begin immediately. Given the adoption of the Common Core State Standards, and the introduction of new Connecticut Mastery Tests in 2014, an immediate start to the review is warranted to align our curriculum with the new standards (which are already reflected on the new report cards). The need for this review is recognized on page 50 of Dr. Lulow’s recent Achievement Report, stating we should “Create/Revise Math and Language Arts curriculum to align with Common Core Standards.” A thoughtful, comprehensive review, followed by good execution, will benefit all Greenwich Public School students and will put the district on the road to improving our standing on standardized tests versus comparable districts (GT, DB). Why wait?

Second, that action is taken now to systemically address the shortcomings of the Everyday Mathematics program across all of our elementary schools, so all of our students receive a quality math education, not just those students whose parents can afford to address the shortcomings of this program.

Attached is an example of the “quality” of the Everyday Mathematics program (page 4). The instructions ask the student to “Fill in each shape to make a recognizable figure.” This problem appears not once, but twice, in the Student Math Journal, the in-class workbook. Is this a suitable problem for a second grader? How is it advancing their mathematical knowledge? But the reality is even worse: this exercise “problem” is in the sixth grade book. Even though Greenwich does not use EDM in grade six, such an example leads me to question whether this program should be used in grades K-5. Two examples of questionable fourth grade homework sets are also attached.

No program is perfect, but Everyday Math is failing our children. Its mile-wide, inch-deep, unfocused content; its limited attention to automatic recall of basic facts and to the standard algorithms; and its spiraling structure have all been rejected by the National Mathematics Advisory Panel (NMAP). Our teachers are extensively supplementing the program just to give their students a fighting chance. The very philosophical foundation of Everyday Math is flawed, and must be rejected. Given the on-going damage (and I do not use that word lightly) being done to our students, the curriculum review must commence now and Everyday Mathematics must be changed now. We need to do better, now. It is time to focus on curriculum.

[Possible actions could range from scrapping the Everyday Math program next year, to eliminating sections of that program now in order to make time for critical topics and instruction, to organizing parent-led after-school groups to help students fill the gaps, to implementing a second competing curriculum (e.g., Saxon or Singapore Math). ]

I will push even farther. “The Board of Education shall govern the District in such a manner that it sets the national standard for governance, oversight, public engagement and stewardship of the public education system.” (BOEG-000) If this district is to truly prepare our students for college and/or for the work force of the future, the core competency in the so-called STEM subjects, that is Mathematics, needs focus. I challenge the Board and the Administration to get serious about mathematics. Some high performing districts, such as Madison and New Canaan, have math specialists or coaches in their elementary schools (DISCUSS). Talk to them; find out the costs and the benefits. [Other districts, like Monroe, are moving to new curriculum in response to the new standards (DISCUSS). Perhaps we can form a consortium with several districts to review curriculum, so we can save time and money.]

[My initial reason for researching Everyday Mathematics was to protect my daughter and to determine where gaps needed to be filled in her education. You may claim that my concern is for the proper education of my daughter, and you would be right. However, my concern has grown to encompass the much broader issue of the mathematics education of all of our primary, middle and secondary school students.]

As parents, it is difficult, without significant research, to judge the methods used to educate our children. What we can judge effectively are the results of these methods. We, like college professors and employers, are critical and demanding consumers of the results of our children’s educations. Given the Board policy I quoted earlier, it is the Board of Education’s responsibility to take action on this request, with the appropriate budget. We need better results now.

If other parents feel the same way, they can reach me at greenwichmath@gmail.com.

Thank you.

Check out "problem" 5. More art class than math class.