EveryDAY Math

General Forum for Timberlane Regional School District (TRSD) Topics

EveryDAY Math

Postby dmh » Tue Feb 27, 2007 1:32 pm

I know we have other threads on this. Found this youtube video about EDM.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=Tr1qee-bTZI&mode=related&search=

I think we will be seeing our test scores go down even more.
dmh
 
Posts: 1209
Joined: Thu Feb 02, 2006 2:54 pm

Postby Resident » Tue Feb 27, 2007 2:02 pm

Very good video. I'd like to see anyone from the district response to this video.
Resident
 
Posts: 729
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 5:37 pm

Postby curt » Sat Mar 03, 2007 9:10 pm

Wow this is really scary.

I can't imagine going through my life not having mastered the times table and being able to multiple or divide any 2 numbers regardless of how many digits or decimal places. Stuff we were expected to have down pat by the end of 4th greade.

Sometimes I'm glad I'm over the hill. :D
Curt Springer
curt
 
Posts: 5713
Joined: Mon Jan 16, 2006 1:19 am
Location: 228 Sandown Road, North Danville

Postby Rob C » Sun Mar 04, 2007 1:52 am

I actually like EDM.

When my son brought this home and I was helping him with his homework I was shocked to see on paper the methods I've always used to figure out complex problems in my head. I do well on standardized math and logic exams and I've taken a lot of math courses in my life.

There is a vast amount of research on this topic, it's not something Timberlane stumbled upon and picked.

A Research-Based Curriculum: The Research Basis of the UCSMP Everyday Mathematics Curriculum wrote:A large number of studies of Everyday Mathematics student achievement have been conducted. These studies have been carried out by four principal groups: (i) the elementary and evaluation components of UCSMP (see above for cites), (ii) an NSF-funded group at Northwestern University, which carried out a five-year longitudinal study of the curriculum (see above for cites), (iii) individual schools and districts using the curriculum (Everyday Learning, 2001, 1998, 1996; Greene, 1996; Briars & Resnick, 2000; Mathematics Evaluation Committee of the Hopewell Valley Regional School District, 1997), and, increasingly, (iv) independent researchers (Hawkes, Kimmelman, & Kroeze, 1997; Woodward & Baxter, 1997; Riordan & Noyce, in press). These studies, which have used a wide range of instruments and methods to measure students’ progress and understanding, provide a broad perspective on the effects of the curriculum.
Generally, results indicate the following:
• On traditional topics, such as fact knowledge and paper-and pencil computation, Everyday Mathematics students perform as well as students in more traditional basal programs. However, Everyday Mathematics students use a greater variety of computation methods and are especially strong on mental computation.
• On topics that have been underrepresented in the elementary curriculum, such as geometry, measurement, algebra, problem solving, reasoning, and communication, Everyday Mathematics students score substantially higher that students in more traditional programs. Total mathematics achievement typically increases significantly following the adoption of the curriculum.
The high level of Everyday Mathematics student achievement is evidence for the validity of the research on which the program is based and for the robustness of the writing process that produced the finished materials. Everyday Mathematics shows that a research-based, Standards-aligned curriculum can lead to higher student achievement.


Following are a few of the results from a logitudinal study done comparing traditional US students, EDM students, Japanese and Chinese students.

A Longitudinal Study of Children in the Everyday Mathematics Curriculum wrote:
    Compared to U.S. performance in other international studies, EM children performed very favorably relative to their Asian peers.

    Results provide further evidence that EM students have a very strong understanding and use of place value (Table 3.2). For example, 76% correctly wrote the number “five thousand four,” 71% correctly wrote “100 less than 465,” and 66% correctly wrote “6 tens, 3 ones, and 5 hundreds.” EM students also scored high on fraction questions.

    Overall, results indicate continued progress in all areas of mathematics, familiarity with mathematical tools, knowledge of alternate solution methods, and a good ability to apply mathematics in problem-based situations.


So do I trust anecdotes and speculation about EDM from a meteorologist or years of research? I'll go with the research.
Rob C
Rob C
 
Posts: 2021
Joined: Wed Jan 25, 2006 10:51 am

Postby curt » Sun Mar 04, 2007 2:28 am

I admit that I use EDM-like logic as a shortcut for doing operations on simple numbers in my head. I also do well on math and logic.

That said, I am thankful that I was instructed at an early age in foolproof methods for multiplication and division that will work on 23 x 425, which I can do in my head as 20*425 + 3*425, and 23355.875 x 57788.300457, which would do via the standard method if I weren't using a calculator.

I view the "EDM" approach (meaning computations in my head, not the pedagogy) as an acceptable shortcut for smaller numbers, the exception to the rule. I'm not sure if it is part of the aging process or the fact that I do fewer computations in my head than when I was younger, given the qubiquitousness of computers, but I feel less confident doing computations in my head quickly and accurately than when I was fresh out of college, and I am happy to know I can still do everything quickly with pen and paper.
Curt Springer
curt
 
Posts: 5713
Joined: Mon Jan 16, 2006 1:19 am
Location: 228 Sandown Road, North Danville

Postby dmh » Sun Mar 04, 2007 9:01 am

Interesting thing about this is about 3 years ago, I tried to get my child who was getting grades of about 100% in math into pre-algebra. Child was totally bored and could not understand why kids did not understand the basic math learned in 5th grade.

The school, including the curriculum coordinator for the 6th grade, indicated that child was not mature enough in math education to learn pre-algebra. Yet, now they have a program that starts with pre-algebra/algebra skills in 1st grade. Luckily, they changed the program so next child will not have this issue, but they might just change the program again.

I think they changed the math program 2 times in the elementary school while the kids were there. Each time with a PROVEN TESTED program.

As the gentleman said at the school board meeting, why can't they just teach the basics like we used to have. No gimmicks are needed.
dmh
 
Posts: 1209
Joined: Thu Feb 02, 2006 2:54 pm

Postby dmh » Sun Mar 04, 2007 9:10 am

curt wrote:Wow this is really scary.

I can't imagine going through my life not having mastered the times table and being able to multiple or divide any 2 numbers regardless of how many digits or decimal places. Stuff we were expected to have down pat by the end of 4th greade.

Sometimes I'm glad I'm over the hill. :D



With this program, if you don't know the answer, a calculator is your best friend.

On another note: there are many tasks which are learned in a progressive manor. I know the elementary school does a program each fall on reading the the process of learning to read and how each step builds on another.

If we have a math program that does not stress what we learned as basics, I wonder what building blocks them might be missing in future years. I imagine calculus would be very hard to understand if the student has to use either a calculator to do the simple math of the calculation or relies completely on a computer program to solve the issue.
dmh
 
Posts: 1209
Joined: Thu Feb 02, 2006 2:54 pm

Postby Rob C » Sun Mar 04, 2007 11:17 am

curt wrote:...I am happy to know I can still do everything quickly with pen and paper.

What makes you believe those with EDM won't be able to do everything quickly with pen and paper?
Rob C
Rob C
 
Posts: 2021
Joined: Wed Jan 25, 2006 10:51 am

Postby Resident » Sun Mar 04, 2007 1:37 pm

Rob C wrote:

What makes you believe those with EDM won't be able to do everything quickly with pen and paper?


The answer is in the video.
Resident
 
Posts: 729
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 5:37 pm

Postby curt » Sun Mar 04, 2007 2:52 pm

This discussion reminds me of how my mom was dissed by the "new math" experts of the day, more than 40 years ago. It also reminds me of how long this has been going on.

They introduced the "new math" to my school when I was in 5th grade, so I had already learned computational skills. From my POV it was mildly interesting but seemed irrelevant to anything that I could contemplate in my life at that time. To be fair, I re-encountered the concepts in HS and college, so maybe it wasn't bad to get a taste of them at an earlier age, AFTER learning basic skills. My younger siblings got the full dose of the treatment.

As now, the program of the day involved a trademarked curriculum from a single vendor. To this day, I think "new math" whenever I see the name of that publisher, Addison-Wesley. Being a cynic from a young age, I remember thinking it was a good way to justify buying all new books without competition.

My mom went to the PTA meeting where the experts explained the program. Then they asked for questions. My mom's question: "How do you teach fractions?" The answer: "They are not called fractions. They are called rational numbers." I was more upset about it than she was. She forgot all about it, but I did not.
Curt Springer
curt
 
Posts: 5713
Joined: Mon Jan 16, 2006 1:19 am
Location: 228 Sandown Road, North Danville

Postby Rob C » Sun Mar 04, 2007 5:17 pm

Resident wrote:Rob C wrote:

What makes you believe those with EDM won't be able to do everything quickly with pen and paper?


The answer is in the video.

I saw the video and it didn't answer the question. It showed me a different long hand method for multiplication and division, one that I understood completely. She said she is confused and makes mistakes and she makes many statements that are not tied to any published info. I assume these are all her own comments (what is she reading from?).

She also presents some anecdotal evidence, one of which was a college professor who told her a student didn't know 6 X 4. That may be true but it wasn't because of EDM. I asked my son, who is in second grade, what 6 X 4 is. In less than 5 seconds he had the answer and he has ONLY been exposed to EDM. Sounds like the college student was simply simpleminded.

What the video doesn't have is any results from children taking EDM, any studies supporting her understanding of EDM, or anything to suggest that EDM is worse than traditional methods. What it did show is that a meteorologist in WA doesn't understand how it works and obviously didn't read any of the many studies that proves it creates far better students in math than traditional methods.

Everyday Mathematics Research Summary wrote:The research evidence about Everyday Mathematics (EM) almost all points in the same direction:

Children who use EM tend to learn more mathematics and like it better than children who use other programs. This finding has been supported by research carried out by the University of Chicago School Mathematics Project (UCSMP), by independent researchers at other universities, and by many school districts across the nation. The absolute amount of this research is large – the reports fill several large binders – but, compared to what is available for other curricula, it is enormous.

As a recent report from the National Academy of Sciences (NRC, 2004) makes clear, no other currently available elementary school mathematics program has been subjected to so much scrutiny by so many researchers. The agreement about the curriculum across so many research studies is, itself, perhaps the strongest evidence that EM is effective.

Attached to this memo is an annotated bibliography of research about EM.

One of the articles in this bibliography, the chapter by Carroll and Isaacs in Standards-Based School Mathematics Curriculum:

What Are They? What Do Students Learn? (2003), summarizes research about EM before roughly 1998. Here we briefly summarize some of the more important studies that have been completed since then. Note that all but one of these studies has appeared in a peer-reviewed journal; the one that has not (Sconiers, Isaacs, Higgins, McBride, & Kelso, 2003) is currently under review at the Journal for Research in Mathematics Education.


Another example:

Everyday Mathematics Research Summary wrote:Carroll, W. M., Fuson, K. C., & Diamond, A. (2000). Use of student-constructed number stories in a reform-based curriculum. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 19, 49–62.

Carroll, W. M. (2000). Invented computational procedures of students in a Standards-based Curriculum. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 18(2), 111–121.

Fuson, K. C., Carroll, W., & Drueck, J. (2000). Achievement results for second and third graders using the Standards-based curriculum Everyday Mathematics. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 31(3), 277–295.

• These papers report results from a five-year longitudinal study of EM funded by the National Science Foundation and carried out by Karen Fuson’s group at Northwestern University.

• The project followed several hundred children using the first edition of EM in Grades 1-5 from 1992 through 1997. The project produced two dissertations, many articles in peer-reviewed journals, and a series of reports about strengths and weaknesses of EM that were used in the
revisions that led to the second edition.

• The project found that EM students outperformed comparison students across all grades and raised achievement to levels approaching that of high-performing Asian countries. “On traditional vertical symbolic multi-digit addition and subtraction, EM students performed as well as students using traditional approaches. On a wide range of other mathematically and conceptually demanding tasks, EM students outperformed other groups” (Fuson, Carroll, & Drueck, 2000, p. 292).


More data:

Image[/img]
Rob C
Rob C
 
Posts: 2021
Joined: Wed Jan 25, 2006 10:51 am

Postby dmh » Sun Mar 04, 2007 6:34 pm

I don't have time right now to cherry pick out a few studies, but here is another view of EDM.

http://www.nychold.com/em.html

edit to add

http://www.mathematicallycorrect.com/ which also has information on some of the other math programs the district uses.
The review for the geometry book is not good.
dmh
 
Posts: 1209
Joined: Thu Feb 02, 2006 2:54 pm

Postby Rob C » Sun Mar 04, 2007 8:01 pm

Found this:

Everday Mathematics Center wrote:How does Everyday Mathematics address basic facts? When should students be expected to know their facts?

Helping children learn the basic facts is an important goal in the Everyday Mathematics Curriculum. Most children should have developed an automatic recall of the basic addition and subtraction facts by the end of the second grade. They should also know most of their 1, 2, 5, and 10 multiplication facts by this time. By the end of the fourth grade most students should have an automatic recall of all the basic multiplication facts and be familiar with the basic division facts. Multiplication and division facts are reinforced at the beginning of fifth grade.

The Everyday Mathematics curriculum employs a variety of techniques to help children develop their "fact power", or basic number-fact reflexes.

I wonder if all of the "hype" around Everyday Math was based on the first version and the second version has added what the first lacked?

I do know that my son was learning the Fact Triangles:
Everday Mathematics Center wrote:Fact Triangles
Fact Triangles are Everyday Mathematics' flash cards with a difference. The difference is fact triangles help children learn fact families rather than isolated facts. Partner practice with addition and subtraction fact triangles begins in first grade. Multiplication and division fact triangles are introduced in second grade. Practice with Fact Triangles is often suggested in the Home Links homework assignments.

We were doing these at home. These are essentially the same thing as the tables.
Rob C
Rob C
 
Posts: 2021
Joined: Wed Jan 25, 2006 10:51 am

Postby Rob C » Sun Mar 04, 2007 8:51 pm

About calculators:

Everday Mathematics Center wrote:How and why does Everyday Mathematics encourage the use of calculators?

Based on research that has shown calculator use can enhance cognitive gains in the areas of number sense, conceptual development and visualization, the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics recommends the integration of calculators into mathematics programs for all grade levels. Everyday Mathematics offers appropriate applications for the calculator at each grade level.

In the Everyday Mathematics program, emphasis is placed on using the calculator as a tool for learning mathematics. In kindergarten, for example, calculators add a visual dimension to oral counting routines as children count forwards and backwards by 1s, 2s, 5s, and 10s. Seeing the numbers on the calculator display as they count also helps children learn written number sequences.

In first and later grades, students play a calculator game called Beat the Calculator. This game challenges students to develop an automatic recall of the basic facts, and demonstrates why it is better to develop quick mental math skills instead of always relying on a calculator. The program also includes a number of calculator games that are designed to provide practice with place value and problem-solving skills.
Rob C
Rob C
 
Posts: 2021
Joined: Wed Jan 25, 2006 10:51 am

Postby Rob C » Mon Mar 05, 2007 10:42 am

This is a fact triangle.

Image

The student learns from this:

6 + 4 = 10
4 + 6 = 10
10 - 6 = 4
10 - 4 = 6
Rob C
Rob C
 
Posts: 2021
Joined: Wed Jan 25, 2006 10:51 am

Next

Return to Timberlane General

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron