This thread discusses the Content article: Utah may get new math

Looks like someone is finally doing their homework and suggesting a math program for Utah children that makes sense!

What makes sense is the realization that not every child is going to do well at math no matter the program.

As a kid I would have done both Singapore Math books in a week if left to my own devices since it has significantly less content per grade level than what I was exposed to. I fail to see why this program should be seen as a catch-all for Utah's math education. It seems more like another cookie-cutter band aid approach. Instead of addressing the core problem, many failing students aren't vested in their education, we are again looking at programs as our holy grail.

While it is a strong program, much better than the stand-alone Investigations program ASD has run, we are ignoring other factors that contribute to Singaporean mathematic success. Do we want the High Stakes testing, and accountability for learning directly on the student? That I believe is why Utah and the US has been caught up to in Math by the rest of the world, because we aren't willing to have students accountable for their own learning (or lack there of). We instead focus on the teacher or the programs.

Until we address student accountability in education, things like this are band-aid fixes designed to make politicians and the establishment feel better, not to effect change.

It's great that Utahns are researching math programs. But there is an obvious mathematical fact that everyone seems to ignore about these countries that are scoring so much better than the United States. For example, the Singapore school calendar is 280 days per year. Utah children are required to attend 180 days per year. Do the math. That's at least 1200 more days of math instruction before college. Who will be willing to pay for this? Also, thanks Steven. Your comments are too true.

Time to implement (or re-implement) the metric system!

Our archaic measurements in yards, feet and inches are yet another hurdle that potentially slows our children down.



By the way, I don't think Ronald Reagan cares anymore.

Steven,
Although I generally agree with you on math and education issues and feel that Saxon is one of the best programs, you are grossly understating the Singapore program out of misunderstandings about how it works. Looking solely at the workbooks and thinking that's what the program covers is not accurate. The program is deep and rigorous. Purchase a set of the challenging word problems that accompany the grade level work and you'll get a different perspective. My child that just finished 5th grade Saxon work can't do most of these 5th grade Singapore problems because by this point Singapore children are doing algebraic concepts and the workbooks are only showing the basic work they do at home for practice. There are also intensive practice problems.
The results of the program speak for themselves. In the U.S. by 4th grade, about 7% of our students have an advanced understanding of math where 38% of Singapore students do. By 8th grade the gap widens and 7% of U.S. children are advanced and 44% of Singapore children are advanced (2003 TIMSS Results). Imagine if Utah had 40% of the population with an advanced understanding of math!!!
I have spoken with schools and districts doing Singapore math. It requires special training for teachers to be able to teach it. It is not beyond our teachers' capabilities. Ten years ago Singapore teachers were 90% non-college graduates. The program was producing these results with minimal teacher education. Today 50% of the elementary teachers are still non-college graduates.
The top performing school in AZ for several years was a Saxon school. Last year they were surpassed by a Singapore school. In NYC and LA there are major improvements in students math abilities (which would have happened under Saxon as well), but Singapore has a different approach that is both visual as well as rigorous. It is the reason Singapore leads the world in math.