What is the University of Chicago Math Program Thinking?
Mar 04
How about a math program that works, please.
Here is a mother’s rant on yet another example of math taught badly in American public schools. It breaks my heart when something so logical – mathematics – is taught in a convoluted way that makes children doubt their abilities and makes parents pull out their hair to make their children understand simple concepts.
Today my focus is on the University of Chicago Math curriculum. It goes by the name “Everyday Math.” I really wanted to like this program, as I have nothing but respect for the University and the brilliant minds who attend the school. It’s won all kinds of major awards for effectiveness. Personally, I don’t see it.
One of the biggest selling points of the University of Chicago’s touted math program is it “spirals” throughout the years. The concept is that children are exposed to math ideas but are not expected to master them, and then the following year they revisit the concepts for a layered approach toward eventual mastery. “Spirals out of control” is more like it. Tell me, what possible good can it do for a child to be “exposed” to a math concept that is not fully explained or fleshed out, then dropped, then picked up the same time next year? By the time I have figured out what my child is expected to do, the unit is over and, since it wasn’t explained or taught properly in the first place, it leaves my child with lower self-esteem and a belief that she isn’t good at a given topic. I won’t have it, and my school district finally agrees.
Here’s a disclosure: as a child, I was math-phobic. I would avoid math at every turn. It ruined my chances at my post-college dream job to work at an advertising agency because the company wanted me to start with all the other recent grads in media buying. I turned down the job because I was afraid of the numbers. Sad but true. How many other opportunities had I missed out on by being math phobic?
Math Manipulatives that Actually Work, Please.
Finally, enough was enough. I enrolled in a Montessori teaching program after seeing the concrete math materials at my child’s preschool. A number squared actually looked like a square. A number cubed actually looked like a cube. Learning place values for ones, tens, hundreds, thousands, ten-thousands, hundred-thousands and up were easy for these children. They had concrete materials they could touch in their hands that allow numbers to make sense to them. Finally, the world of numbers made sense to me, too. These preschool kids took it for granted that numbers work in a logical order. It didn’t stop there. Fractions materials, geometry materials, equivalency and volume materials helped these kids understand concepts that many middle school children struggle with today because they are given concrete representations of math that they can hold in their hands instead of abstract ideas that make no sense on their own.
Karl Dahlke in Troy has written a complaint as well, and has linked to math teachers who are critical of this so-called“Chicago Math”. Take a look and see that there are numerous problems with this approach.
Parents, if you have the chance, take back your school’s math program. Tell them you want a curriculum and manipulatives that make sense. And by all means, if your school district is considering the University of Chicago Math program, make sure you make your voice heard. Tell them no!
