The United States is rapidly falling behind the rest of the developed world in terms of math education, and the future of our economy depends on the quality of teaching that our children receive today. A recent assessment of mathematics performance around the world ranked the U.S. twenty-eighth out of forty countries in the study. When the level of spending on education was taken into account, we sank to the very bottom of the list. According to Jo Boaler, a professor of mathematics education at Stanford University, statistics like these are all too common--we have reached the point of crisis, and a new course of action is crucial.
In this straightforward and inspiring book, Boaler outlines the nature of the math crisis by following the progress of students in middle and high schools over a number of years, observing which teaching methods are exciting students and getting results. Based on her research, she presents concrete solutions that will help reverse the trend, including classroom approaches, essential strategies for students, advice for parents on how to help children enjoy mathematics, and ways to work with teachers in schools. What's Math Got To Do With It? is an indispensable book for all parents and educators and anyone concerned about the mathematical and scientific future of our society.
Dr Jo Boaler is a Professor of Mathematics Education at Stanford
University. She is an elected fellow of the Royal Society of Arts (Great
Britain), and a former president of the International Organization for
Women and Mathematics Education (IOWME). Prior to her time at Stanford
she was the Marie Curie Professor at The University of Sussex, England.
At Stanford University she was awarded an 'Early Career Award' from the
National Science Foundation in the United States. She is the author of
several books and a regular contributor to national television and radio
in the United States and the UK. Her latest book What’s Math Got To Do
With It?, is published by Penguin (2008) and aims to increase public
understanding of the importance of mathematics, and the nature of
effective teaching approaches. She has worked with members of the
British Government to bring effective research based approaches into
schools in England. Her work has appeared in newspapers across the
World, including The Wall Street Journal and The Times.
7 comments:
Reading the introduction makes me wonder am I one of those who perpetuate American's "distorted image" of mathematics (pg. 4)? I hope not, and I know I try very hard not to. I can't help, but think I must be a part of the problem.
Also, I agree that math is crucial for the world (pg. 7), but then is it really necessary to teach the specific maths that we do? Why not a more applicable and deeper math be taught instead of the great breadth that we try to accomplish?
There were two parts that I agree with, but I think are very sad realities: "Children learn, even when they are still in school, about the irrelevance of the work they are given" (pg. 10), and "[Math] has a lot to do with children having low self-esteem as they are made to feel bad in math classes" (pg. 11).
There were so many things talked about within this introduction that are exactly what we are trying to get at through the CAT Grant. One part is when the author states, "These trends suggest something interesting; school math is widely hated, but the mathematics of life, work, and leisure is intriguing and much more enjoyable" (pg.5). This only makes sense, and it is exactly what I feel we are trying to do. We are trying to present students with real problems that they would face in everyday life. Who looks forward to only learning procedures day in and day out? Let's make math meaningful and enjoyable for our students and for ourselves.
Kate, One of the hopes we have as math educators is that the Common Core will bring a renewed focus in teaching more "applicable and deeper math" as you stated is needed. This is our hope not only because it is good mathematics instruction, but because in a world that is changing no other type of instruction will suffice.
In reading the introduction I became both excited and frustrated. I am excited at the potential for change that the Common Core brings. I am excited at the potential fun I can have with my students engaging them in real world problem solving. But I am frustrated by the giant we face in our current school system. I feel so small and insignificant when I hear the statistics of where we stand as a nation mathematically. I don't feel like I can do much to change things in the 180 days I spend with these students.
Jennifer, I took note of that same line. "These trends suggest something interesting; school math is widely hated, but the mathematics of life, work, and leisure is intriguing and much more enjoyable" (pg.5). I want my students to enjoy math as much as I enjoy teaching it, and I shudder at the fact this this aversion to "school math" is so widespread. I think that we are working in the right direction, though. If we can continue to present problems that are interesting and challenging and allow students to be actively engaged in the process of learning, we will produce thinkers who will grow into adults and have a penchant for math.
While reading thru the second chapter, I found myself caught up in reading till I found the next problem that Jo was using as an example to promote a more reformed or indirect method of teaching. It then made me think of how I became motivated to want to solve the problems. Jo definetly knew the audience as to whom would be reading this book. I actually took four of the problems and gave them to my 3rd and 4th grade children. They did not want to persevere and solve the problems till a McDonalds bribe was offered ;). Pg. 37 gives a very good account as to how the "thinking method" of teaching allows students to verbalized and find out information on their own rather than being spoon fed a formula or a single method to solve a problem. I would guess that even people who chose to study mathematics or a math applied science asked themselves if they were ever going to use the math that they learned in primary and secondary school. It is for this reason why I chose engineering as my first career so that I could put meaning and real life to math that I was learning in high school. Jo also did a great job of developing her case for real problems. It seems to blend with the Common Core standards and the realia models that we have been learning in the CAT Grant.
Jo's presentation of the case for posing of problems in math education is well taken. Reflecting upon how we learn anything in life, we learn by doing...not by simply hearing and seeing. I think what many math teachers struggle with is the balance between traditional methods, which arguably still need to be taught, and the application of these in problem solving. Jo contends, "Children need to solve complex problems, to ask many forms of questions, and to use, adapt, and apply standard methods, as well as to make connections between methods and to reason mathematically." (p. 11-12) I present this idea to my students as a "math tool belt," similar to the tool belt a carpenter would wear. As we learn math, we can place various tools in our "belt," and pull them out to use them as we approach new problems. Many different tools will work with the same job, yet one might be a better tool for a particular job. The real skill comes in becoming confident in trying out the tools and developing a sense for which tool works best for each circumstance as it is presented. Students are more likely to acquire a new "tool" if they observe another student applying its use as a part of the problem solving process and justifying why this tool works well in solving this problem.
Post a Comment