“The traditional method of teaching math has failed thousands of students,” claim new math proponents. That’s a myth, writes Barry Garelick in Education News.
Garelick looked at math books and methods used in the ’40s, ’50s and ’60s.
Mathematical algorithms and procedures were not taught in isolation in a rote manner as is frequently alleged. Concepts and understanding were an important part of the texts.
Then and now, nobody argues for memorization without understanding, he adds.
Traditional math education was working reasonably well, Garelick argues. In Iowa, test scores rose steadily until about 1965, and then declined dramatically for a decade. This pattern was repeated in Minnesota and Indiana.
Source: Congressional Budget Office (1986)
Some researchers blame increased drug use and the rise in divorce and single-parent families for the decline. Garelick blames progressive education which called for student-centered, needs-based courses.
After taking not-so-early retirement, Garelick is now a student math teacher at a California junior high school.