Showing posts with label Singapore Math. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Singapore Math. Show all posts
Sunday, September 7, 2008
Sunday, March 9, 2008
Singapore Math: the quiet revolution
Over at Kitchen Table Math, I cross-posted about an article in today's Los Angeles Times: At L.A. school, Singapore math has added value. If the 31 percentage point increase in one year at Ramona Elementary in Hollywood is not a clear indication of the power of Singapore Math, I really don't know what is.
It truly is a must read even if, like me, you're already convinced of the many virtues of those thin, unassuming Singapore Math books.
It truly is a must read even if, like me, you're already convinced of the many virtues of those thin, unassuming Singapore Math books.
The National Mathematics Advisory Panel, appointed by President Bush, will issue a report Thursday that is expected to endorse K-8 math reforms that, in many ways, mirror the Singapore curriculum.
The report could also signal a cease-fire in the state's math wars, which raged between traditionalists and reformers throughout the 1990s and shook up math teachers nationwide. Fundamentalists called for a return to basics; reformers demanded a curriculum that would emphasize conceptual understanding.
Mathematicians on both sides of the divide say the Singapore curriculum teaches both. By hammering on the basics, it instills a deep understanding of key concepts, they say.
While the panel isn't explicitly endorsing Singapore Math, if you place existing math curricula side-by-side in hopes of finding one that will fit the bill, this little Asian wonder certainly rises to the top.
Sagher, the Illinois professor, said that he would love to see Ramona Elementary become a training ground for L.A. Unified teachers and that Singapore math could radiate out from its Hollywood beachhead. Districtwide, only 43% of fifth-graders last year scored at grade level or above in math, 33 points below Ramona students. "If LAUSD is smart enough to do it, it will be a revolution," he said.
I say, let the revolution begin.
At L.A. school, Singapore math has added value
By Mitchell Landsberg
Los Angeles Times Staff Writer March 9, 2008
UPDATE - March 10, 2008
Chime in on the LA Times story about Singapore Math HERE.Thursday, May 17, 2007
Everyday Math: A Nimble Mind is a Terrible Thing to Waste
Okay, I think I’m going to be sick….
My first grader, who loves math and finds it quite easy, sat down to do his Primary Mathematics (Singapore) and Kumon work. This day's work involved word problems requiring subtraction of double digit numbers with regrouping. He said, “Mom, do we have a number chart?” I said, “A number chart? You haven’t used one of those since you were learning to count. Why do you need one now?” “Because” he said, “that’s how we’re subtracting at school.” “Well, you know how to subtract without one. Just set up your problem and then you can do the math!” It took him no more than five minutes to complete the entire exercise of world problems.
Why did he think he needed a number chart to subtract when he’s done this type of math before successfully? To think of him counting back to find the answer on some number chart for each question when he already knew a much more efficient way to do it is disconcerting. He finished and promptly asked if he could work ahead on the next exercise.
This is another reason to dislike Everyday Mathematics. I feel likes it's a constant fight to keep the efficient algorithms in play lest my children come under the false notion that the EDM way is actually better, cooler, or newer. The teacher is teaching it, their friends are using, so maybe it's better and mom hasn't caught on yet. I don't mind if he learns about them but doesn't EDM pride itself on letting students choose? I strongly believe that most every additional algorithm is a collosal waste of time and who has time to waste? (If you don't believe me, just check out this video on youtube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eKld7lQHKRg )
I find them to be inefficient, unnecessary. I also believe that dependence on manipulatives, charts and calcuators certainly does not allow children's minds to do all the amazing things they are capable of. These methods reinforce and even reward laziness and when they rely on these "crutches" children fail to exercise their brains and train them to work nimbly.
And a nimble mind is a terrible thing to waste.
My first grader, who loves math and finds it quite easy, sat down to do his Primary Mathematics (Singapore) and Kumon work. This day's work involved word problems requiring subtraction of double digit numbers with regrouping. He said, “Mom, do we have a number chart?” I said, “A number chart? You haven’t used one of those since you were learning to count. Why do you need one now?” “Because” he said, “that’s how we’re subtracting at school.” “Well, you know how to subtract without one. Just set up your problem and then you can do the math!” It took him no more than five minutes to complete the entire exercise of world problems.
Why did he think he needed a number chart to subtract when he’s done this type of math before successfully? To think of him counting back to find the answer on some number chart for each question when he already knew a much more efficient way to do it is disconcerting. He finished and promptly asked if he could work ahead on the next exercise.
This is another reason to dislike Everyday Mathematics. I feel likes it's a constant fight to keep the efficient algorithms in play lest my children come under the false notion that the EDM way is actually better, cooler, or newer. The teacher is teaching it, their friends are using, so maybe it's better and mom hasn't caught on yet. I don't mind if he learns about them but doesn't EDM pride itself on letting students choose? I strongly believe that most every additional algorithm is a collosal waste of time and who has time to waste? (If you don't believe me, just check out this video on youtube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eKld7lQHKRg )
I find them to be inefficient, unnecessary. I also believe that dependence on manipulatives, charts and calcuators certainly does not allow children's minds to do all the amazing things they are capable of. These methods reinforce and even reward laziness and when they rely on these "crutches" children fail to exercise their brains and train them to work nimbly.
And a nimble mind is a terrible thing to waste.
Tuesday, May 15, 2007
Open Minded Mathematics
I came across this quote this morning:
“You know, we don’t grow most of the food we eat. We wear clothes other people make. We speak a language that other people developed. We use a mathematics that other people evolved… I mean, we’re constantly taking things. It’s a wonderful, ecstatic feeling to create something that puts it back in the pool of human experience and knowledge.” --Steve Jobs
It got me thinking about math. Of course, what else occupies my mind these days? Anyway, I was wondering what some people find so offensive about looking toward other countries for examples of successful math curricula. Other countries like Singapore or Japan, for example. I'm not saying that our history, experiences, culture and social values don't differ. I'm not saying that Singapore and Japan aren't small homogeneous countries as compared to our very large and diverse one. But we didn't invent math in this country and I'm not certain that we need to throw away what we already know, what others have found out along the way, or what is being done around the globe today that is actually working. Are we so vain as to think that anything of value must come from the USA and that to look outside our borders is somehow unpatriotic and wrong?
I find it interesting that certain educators and adminstrator's take this concept of looking towards Singapore's math curriculum, or any other country's curricula so offensive. Offensive is a strong word, but the bickering that goes on between well educated people who should know better is little more than that. In fact, they can get so caught up in the rhetoric that they forget that ultimately we really share the same objectives. Or, at least we should share the same objectives. We want to find the best possible way to prepare our children for the future. I think we would all agree that math is an integral part of that equation.
What I am saying is that we are all human, and we want what's best for our children. We want to prepare them for the future, and we want them to go out and do something productive and useful with their lives. What is so wrong with looking at another country's proven track record of success in math and asking what they are doing that is working so well? How can we make that work for our children? How can we add our own spin to it? How can we make it even better? How can we "put [something] back into the pool of human experience and knowledge"? Why do we need to reinvent the wheel? National Pride? Ego? Hubris?
If we're going to find our way out of global warming, make the world a safer place, secure the future of our country in the global economy, and find the cure for cancer we are going to have to open our minds. We are going to have to stop thinking that we're the only ones who know what we're doing. We're going to have to teach our children this important lesson too. I want my children to be inspired, to be motivated, to be driven. I want them to learn to collaborate, to share, and to spread their wings and soar.
“You know, we don’t grow most of the food we eat. We wear clothes other people make. We speak a language that other people developed. We use a mathematics that other people evolved… I mean, we’re constantly taking things. It’s a wonderful, ecstatic feeling to create something that puts it back in the pool of human experience and knowledge.” --Steve Jobs
It got me thinking about math. Of course, what else occupies my mind these days? Anyway, I was wondering what some people find so offensive about looking toward other countries for examples of successful math curricula. Other countries like Singapore or Japan, for example. I'm not saying that our history, experiences, culture and social values don't differ. I'm not saying that Singapore and Japan aren't small homogeneous countries as compared to our very large and diverse one. But we didn't invent math in this country and I'm not certain that we need to throw away what we already know, what others have found out along the way, or what is being done around the globe today that is actually working. Are we so vain as to think that anything of value must come from the USA and that to look outside our borders is somehow unpatriotic and wrong?
I find it interesting that certain educators and adminstrator's take this concept of looking towards Singapore's math curriculum, or any other country's curricula so offensive. Offensive is a strong word, but the bickering that goes on between well educated people who should know better is little more than that. In fact, they can get so caught up in the rhetoric that they forget that ultimately we really share the same objectives. Or, at least we should share the same objectives. We want to find the best possible way to prepare our children for the future. I think we would all agree that math is an integral part of that equation.
What I am saying is that we are all human, and we want what's best for our children. We want to prepare them for the future, and we want them to go out and do something productive and useful with their lives. What is so wrong with looking at another country's proven track record of success in math and asking what they are doing that is working so well? How can we make that work for our children? How can we add our own spin to it? How can we make it even better? How can we "put [something] back into the pool of human experience and knowledge"? Why do we need to reinvent the wheel? National Pride? Ego? Hubris?
If we're going to find our way out of global warming, make the world a safer place, secure the future of our country in the global economy, and find the cure for cancer we are going to have to open our minds. We are going to have to stop thinking that we're the only ones who know what we're doing. We're going to have to teach our children this important lesson too. I want my children to be inspired, to be motivated, to be driven. I want them to learn to collaborate, to share, and to spread their wings and soar.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
