Getting math wrong

New York is getting math education wrong, writes Danyela Souza Egorov of the Manhattan Institute in City Journal. The state education department's new Numeracy Briefs, which aim to instruct educators in “best practices for effective mathematics instruction," ignore the research on what works in favor of popular fads.

The guidance to teachers is "critically flawed," writes Benjamin Solomon, a University of Albany professor, in a letter to Education Commissioner Betty Rosa. More than 160 teachers, parents, and researchers have signed a petition calling for the briefs to be withdrawn.

Among the "factual inaccuracies" is the "myth" that timed tests cause math anxiety, Solomon writes. Research shows brief timed tests enable teachers to know when students need more help.

Also inaccurate, he writes, is the idea that teaching new material explicitly is only appropriate for students with disabilities. Direct instruction is vital for all students, and has been shown to "promote efficient learning and reduce anxiety," produce engagement and allow "the most rapid mastery of new concepts," enabling creative problem solving.

"The myth that structured repeated practice of math facts and standard algorithms isn’t useful" also ignores research, Solomon writes. Students must be fluent in foundational skills to learn advanced math.

The briefs prioritize "discovery learning" when a new skill is introduced, he writes. Discovery learning may be useful "after students have demonstrated high levels of fluency on underlying skills," but it shouldn't be the first step. And there's no evidence it increases "student interest, motivation, or engagement."

"The Numeracy Briefs seem to draw inspiration from a movement — led by Jo Boaler, a professor at Stanford University and coauthor of the 2023 California Mathematics Framework — that prioritizes equal outcomes in math instruction over rigor and merit," writes Egorov. The framework calls for all students to take the same math classes until 10th grade, preventing advanced eighth-graders from taking algebra.

In 2021, amid Covid disruptions, Mayor Bill de Blasio phased out entrance exams for selective public middle schools, and several schools canceled advanced math classes, she writes. Most New York City middle schools don't let students accelerate in math, she writes. Affluent or highly motivated parents pay for private math instruction, such as the very popular Russian School of Math. Equity it's not.

San Francisco pioneered math "equity" in 2014, writes Kelsey Piper in The Argument. "Too many kids were failing eighth-grade algebra, so San Francisco got rid of it." All students were in the same classes, regardless of ability.

"Detracking" would end inequities, said the National Council of Supervisors of Mathematics (NCSM).

“Tracking mirrors the segregation in our society, maintains the haves and the have-nots," math teacher Kentaro Iwasaki told Piper. "If we walk down a hallway and we see a high-track class, it’s generally white and Asian students, and low-track classes generally Black and brown students.”

It didn't work, Piper writes. "The share of Black and Hispanic students scoring “proficient” in math didn’t budge. The racial gap in student enrollment in AP classes didn’t budge." Algebra 1 failure rates fell, but only because the district dropped the end-of-year exam. "On every objective measure of math knowledge, the kids were not doing better." Students with STEM ambitions found after-school or summer school classes to get on track for AP Calculus.

"Detracking, like so many cheap attempts to end racism with one cool trick, does not help disadvantaged students reach their potential," she concludes. "It just makes it harder for any kids to do so."

And it drives parents to private or suburban schools. “A lowest-common-denominator approach repels parents, and ultimately it weakens public schools,” says Virginia education policy expert Andrew Rotherham. “Parents are not going to put up with it. Parents who have the option to opt out will.”

Again, not equity.