Bad at math? Blame your parents. (Yeah, right.)

Bullpucky.

Balderdash.

Baloney.

Bad at Math? Blame It on Your Parents
And if your kids aren't good at math, blame yourself

This hogwash is brought to you courtesy of NBC - Connecticut.

I have no doubt that what the UCLA researchers found as to faster nerve impulses resulting in faster signaling and therefore, faster processing of information is true. Clearly, some people learn things at a faster rate than others. We all have our cognitive limits.

Nevertheless, these limits can be challenged. Intelligence is malleable. (See Daniel Willingham, Why Don't Students Like School? )

We already have a problem in our country with accepting this view as part of our culture, we don't need people going around making excuses for their lack of math ability. Our children, in particular, need us to be convincing them of quite the opposite.

"In China, Japan, and other Eastern countries, intelligence is more often viewed as malleable. If students fail a test or don't understand a concept, it's not they're stupid-- they just haven't worked hard enough yet. This atrribution is helpful to students because it tells them that intelligence is under their control. If they are performing poorly, they can do something about it." -Willingham, p. 131

Math ability is the result of deliberate practice, the kind of practice that makes perfect. Doing well in math requires effort and sometimes it's not particurlarly fun. As Willingham so clearly points out, sometimes we do our best to avoid thinking altogether. That's precisely why effort matters. "When children believe that their efforts to learn make them smarter, they show greater persistence with math." (National Mathematics Advisory Panel) This is the message that we need to communicate to our children (and to ourselves as parents).

So am I saying the researchers at UCLA got it all wrong? Not at all. Science supports what they've discovered about genetics influencing intelligence. However, we must temper this view with caution. "Our genetic inheritance does impact our intelligence, but it seems to do so mostly through the environment. There is no doubt that intelligence can be changed," states Daniel Willingham. Clearly, a child born to parents who are good at math or who communicate a passion for math, and who encourage this trait in their own children are going to alter the outcome.

The environment isn't limited to home and to parenting either. This news story is irresponsible because it's letting educators off the hook and blaming parents and children for a lack of math ability! Clearly, well qualified teachers of mathematics armed with a coherent and cumulative curricula can increase mathematics ability in children. They do so in Singapore and Finland and many, many other countries that outperform us on internationally benchmarked assessments. Our children are no less capable. Our children are underperforming.

I'll close with what's now become my favorite math quote:

"The universe is a far more beautiful and elegant place than any of us can imagine. We must be ready and able to both construct and use mathematics to help explain ever more subtle aspects of it, and the phrase `I will never use it' should be deleted from our students' vocabularies."

James Milgram, Professor Emeritus
Stanford University

I would only add that the phrase "I'm bad at math" should be deleted from our students' vocabularies as well.

*See also: Ten Myths About Math Education and Why You Shouldn't Believe Them

-------------------------------------------
If you'd like to know how you can get involved with improving Connecticut's math standards, visit http://www.ctcoalitionforworldclassmath.com/
-------------------------------------------

Bad at Math? Blame It on Your Parents And if your kids aren't good at math, blame yourself - NBC CT
Study gives more proof that intelligence is largely inherited- UCLA Newsroom

He's Back

I was doing some research on Connecticut math standards when I happened across the Connecticut Academy for Education and a reference to the Algebra I Curriculum Project. Channeling the eternal optimist, I wanted to believe that perhaps there was hope and that CT might finally be on the path to joining the ranks of those states with world-class algebra standards.*

One click led to another and I ended up learning that in December 2008, the CT DOE opened up the bidding process for a curriculum grant for the Connecticut Algebra I Model. They don’t appear to have had an overwhelming response given that of 25 available spaces at the bidder’s conference, only 4 were taken. Four. Not yet ready to abandon all hope, I trudged on to the winning proposal submitted by the Connecticut Academy for Education folks.

I was stopped dead in my tracks when I hit page 8, regarding personnel:

“The Steering Committee includes a diverse group of individuals, respected within the state, nationally, and internationally, who will provide vision and guidance for the work. The committee members are Steve Leinwand…”

Leinwand.

This would be the same Steven Leinwand who in February 1994 said, It’s Time to Abandon Computational Algorithms.

"It's time to recognize that, for many students, real mathematical power, on the one hand, and facility with multidigit, pencil-and-paper computational algorithms, on the other, are mutually exclusive. In fact, it's time to acknowledge that continuing to teach these skills to our students is not only unnecessary, but counterproductive and downright dangerous."

The same Steven Leinwand who in September 1998 sealed our doom with CT Math PIRK. The very man who can take all much of the credit for our failing math standards -- earning an “F” as well as a place on the list of “states to shun”. His hand in our state standards is glaringly obvious and the result of his handiwork makes it no surprise that 40% of incoming freshman at Central, Eastern, Southern and Western Connecticut state universities are ending up in remedial math. (Courant)

The same Steven Leinwand who made decisions on which math programs recommended by the Department of Education to the tune of billions of edu-dollars, would be rated “exemplary” or “promising” despite having “personal connections with ‘exemplary’ curricula.” (Math Problems) The very programs which have prompted districts such as my own to sink boatloads of taxpayer money into well-hyped and expertly marketed snake-oil.

Yes. He’s back.

He’s crept back into the Connecticut math standards game and that’s a very, very bad thing.

In fact, I'd say it's "counterproductive and downright dangerous".


*Not surprisingly, Connecticut is NOT on the list of states with standards for Algebra I and II courses. (National Mathematics Advisory Panel Final Report: Report of the Task Group on Conceptual Knowledge and Skills- Figure 2)

Mind the Gaps