The Algebra Proxy

Posted on by
1

In the last few years, Americans have been told repeatedly that we’re not internationally competitive because of our public schools.  We’re told that students are not college and career ready.  We’re told that Algebra is a key to being college and career ready, and the Common Core standards have pushed algebra into elementary grades, with substantially more material at the middle school level than most state curriculum models have included in the past.  Does this make sense?

Indicators of College Success

I spend several hours reviewing Google searches about the indicators of college success.  Indeed, from an educational research perspective, algebra is usually found to be the most significant high school course that is associated with college success.  If one adds other indicators, often the next most significant indicators are additional advanced math courses–Geometry, Algebra II, Trig and Calculus–the more a student completes, the more likely the student will be successful in college.

As an English and Social Studies educator who values the increased emphasis on critical thinking in the Common Core,  (see my Critical Thinking post here) this is inherently problematic to consider.  What’s going on?  Are math teachers so much better at getting kids ready for college than other teachers?  And how many of you are using Algebra in your everyday lives?  I suspect–excuse me, I know–that most adults could no longer pass a typical high school Algebra or graduation level math exam.  This assertion is regularly validated throughout the country every few years whenever reporters jump on a story about issues with high school examinations.  They get a sample test, give it to a few hundred folks, and report on how awful adult math skills are, even for college grads.

I took a strong high school program, went to a quality college, studied physics for a year before changing to English and the Humanities, and had a much better math academic training program than most adults.  I could not pass the current New York Algebra I Regents Exam within the allocated time.   Today, despite an earned Ph.D. and years of successful teaching and administration, I would have a significant chance of being labeled not ready for college and career based on scores I would earn on New York Regents exams in math and science.  There’s something amiss here.  I’ll do fine on the English and Social Studies exams: These represent the content I have used throughout my career.  I haven’t used much math, chemistry, biology, or physics, and while I still read the science section of the New York Times and understand the content, I’m glad it’s written for a general audience and not for science majors.

I think we need to consider the concept of proxies to understand the research results about algebra.  The nation is looking for a ‘quick and dirty’ way to make judgements about kids, and algebra is that way.  By a quick and dirty proxy, I mean we want a low-cost and easy to calculate measure that represents the concept of college and career readiness.  There’s something about success in high school math classes that suggests a student is ready to take on the increased challenges of life beyond grade 12.  Students who do well with advanced math classes (and for other researchers, Advanced Placement courses in general–the harder courses in high schools) do better in college.  (See p. 10 of “Moving Beyond AYP” and a good set of references here)  What underlying skills do successful math students have that correlate to the skills needed for successful college course-taking?  It’s not the math itself that is the key to college success–most students don’t go on to study math in college, so they didn’t need the math skills themselves–they needed the underlying skills for which math is a quick and dirty proxy.

There are many possible answers.  Here are a few I’ve interpreted from my scan of the research–you can add more from your own readings.  Math requires persistence from students: they often need to struggle to ‘get it.’  Math doesn’t come easily–there are problems to solve, and for many that’s hard work.  It requires a level of academic self-discipline to master.  There are right answers to the problems even when there are multiple pathways to arrive at the solutions, so results are clearly measurable and students can see where they stand.  It’s more concrete than literary analysis or historical interpretation, but there are still creative and abstract challenges in arriving at solutions, even though many folks think that because math has right answers, it’s a linear subject.

We need to look more carefully at this proxy for success.  What, exactly, are the skills kids need, and why can’t we build these skills into other high school, middle school and elementary school courses so that we open up college and career readiness to more students, and improve teaching the complex thinking college requires in all our subjects.

As I’ve said in another way in my blog on Critical Thinking, I believe that the emphasis on deep reading and analysis across nonfiction text that we find in the Common Core is the start of a pathway toward making all of our K-12 curriculum a preparation for success in college and careers.  It’s overdue. Those who teach other subjects (not math, and not the science courses that depend so much on math concepts) should be considering our roles in deepening the intellectual expectations we have for students.

Won’t Back Down – The Attacks Keep Coming

Posted on by
Reply

This new Hollywood anti-union propaganda film will be stirring up lots of commentary as it spreads throughout the nation.  Rather than comment on it’s distortions, I’ll offer two links to other sites that do a great job of identify the problems with the film.

The first comes from Professor Mark Phillips, who writes for Edutopia.  His article Won’t Back Down: An Engaging and Misleading Film includes a few additional links to expand on his thesis.

One of those links is worthy of a direct mention on it’s own.  From the newly formed and still struggling Save our Schools organization, this posting illuminates the agendas and funders who are promoting the anti-union, anti-public school movement in considerable detail.  They are also the funders behind Waiting for Superman, which was a similar distortion of educational reality.  Articles On “Won’t Back Down” The Film and “Teachers Rock” Concert

These are good reads, and shed light on some of the behind the curtain groups who are most influential among those who constantly attack public education and public educators.

Reading Like a Historian

Posted on by
Reply

In the August 8, 2012 edition of Education Week I read History Lessons Blend Content Knowledge, Literacy, a report on an instructional program for social studies called Reading Like a Historian from the Stanford History Education Group.  It’s been designed by historians to use in schools, and is wrapped around the use of primary source materials to teach students the analytical and reasoning skills of a trained historian.  As a former Social Studies teacher and department chair, I am impressed with this program and with the related research that EdWeek describes as a part of the early reviews in schools where the program has been implemented.

A major element of school reform, in most states, is teaching students to think critically, to navigate the ever rising flood of information that is inundating contemporary society, and to develop sound reasoning strategies that can guide their adult lives.  I’ve frequently debated with my colleagues about what constitutes proof that American schools are failing, and for me one of the biggest failures is the lack of critical thinking demonstrated by adults across the nation.  We don’t recognize, and therefore don’t expect, quality thinking or logical reasoning from our elected leaders or from our media outlets.  We tolerate the polarization of almost every broadcast news source and we can no longer separate truth from fiction on our public airways.

We have no figures like Walter Cronkite on TV today.  We expected decent information from Cronkite, and when he editorialized (as when he expressed his opposition to the Vietnam War) it was clearly identified as an opinion–a separate commentary with reasoned argument explaining his opinion.  Today, we have lots of commentary and opinion–rarely backed by thoughtful analysis–interspersed with information, and the information is frequently slanted to suit the politics of the station’s target audience or corporate backers.  If we were all good critical thinkers, I believe we would expect more.  If we have the luxury of seeing news broadcasts from other nations, we can see the stark contrast between our infotainment and their news.

But I digress from the  “Reading Like a Historian” program.  Those of us who follow the Common Core Standards know that our ELA standards are entitled  “Learning Standards in Literacy, Social Studies, Science and the Arts,” and are heavily invested in reading informational texts of all kinds in order to expect students to learn appropriate skills in understanding, evaluating, and critiquing the information around them.

Reading Like a Historian appears to be perfectly suited to the Common Core.  Students are exposed to basic source materials from the past, and are engaged in evaluating these materials in the context of real world settings, even comparing the source material with the content of their textbooks.  From the website description of the program:
“This curriculum teaches students how to investigate historical questions employing reading strategies such as sourcing, contextualizing, corroborating, and close reading. Instead of memorizing historical facts, students evaluate the trustworthiness of multiple perspectives on issues from King Philip’s War to the Montgomery Bus Boycott, and make historical claims backed by documentary evidence.” 

“…make … claims backed by documentary evidence.”  There’s the key, and the intellectual behavior change that we as educators need to support among our students everywhere.  Critical thinking is hard work, and we’ve taught our students too little of it for too long.

On Critical Thinking

Posted on by
1

While I don’t agree with many critics of public education, my critique would be that schools are failing to produce critical thinkers.  Within schools, the older generation of teachers will often be heard saying the expectations for critical essays in English or History found on state exam questions has declined over the years.  Proof that we don’t value critical thinking is all around us—we reelect politicians who don’t govern for the common good; we uncritically devour the vitriol of the Internet and broadcast media; we too often believe that all sides of an issue have to be reported or respected or given equal time even when one side is objectively or scientifically unfounded. We accept news stories without fact checking.

How would we recognize if renewed efforts to teach critical thinking work?  The next generation would demand truth in advertising, news that’s more than thinly disguised editorializing, and government of the people, by the people, and for the people rather than government by the biggest pocketbook.  We would see decisions based on evidence rather than emotions.  (Isn’t this what reformers are suggesting with changes in the way they propose to evaluate teachers–use test data, not the opinion of administrators?)  The Common Core, if done well, expects critical thinking to be deeply embedded in all that is done in classrooms.  If that actually happens, we are on our way back to the reasoned ideals on which America was built.

A good example of Common Core efforts to improve our critical thinking skills is a model lesson reading Martin Luther King’s Letter from Birmingham Jail.  Students reading this should come to understand Dr. King’s indictment of Southern white ministerial leaders for their lack of support for the civil rights of minorities. This content will make some parents and teachers uncomfortable.  So teaching critical thinking can be controversial.  Societal discomfort with teaching critical thinking is illustrated by the Texas GOP party platform passed in the early summer.  (Google ‘Texas GOP platform’ for several links, or check out Valerie Strauss’s blog on the topic.) Their platform positions exemplify the occasional local opposition to any instruction that questions authority figures and traditional societal norms.  Teaching children to think for themselves is anathema to some critics of the Common Core, and rote, uncritical classroom instruction is a highlight of some voucher programs and charter schools across the nation.

As students begin to practice critical thinking skills, teachers and parents must be open to those who reach informed and reasoned conclusions that are different than their own. I think good educational practice inevitably challenges traditional authority–we have to teach for the future, and teaching critical thinking will certainly challenge the old ways of doing almost everything. We need young people to learn the skills to pursue ideas in a critical fashion and use that skill to become our future leaders. The Common Core’s emphasis on deep reading and critical thinking is a step in the right direction.