Comment regarding “Even When We Make the Pie Higher, Our Children Isn’t Learning”, by Rachael Larimore

Rachael,

If I didn’t know better, it sounded like you would ban calculators and computers from math class. As it turns out, my son's school uses Everyday Math. No, they do not use calculators when doing the timed drills for addition, subtraction, multiplication and division. Yes, they use calculators and computers to facilitate learning of higher level concepts, which are critical to mastery of math. Ask a child the area of a closet that's 6 feet wide and 2 feet deep: if you get the rapid-fire answer "8 or 4 or 12 or 3!", as I have, you've run across the difference between rote skills and mastery. As far as I can tell, Everyday Math recognizes that rote skills are necessary for mastery. But to say that rote skills are all our kids need to know, well, that sounds like "dumbing down" to me.

I am not sure what you think is wrong with breaking problems up into multiple simpler problems. In my opinion, that is the essence of good mathematical technique.

As for "color", after several years of Everyday Math, my son and I haven't run across that particular question. But if we did, what of it? When I learned calculus, I thought it was so beautiful how Isaac Newton broke down a certain problem into multiple simpler problems (Oops - sorry about that!) that I compared it to a symphony. What is so terribly wrong with a comparison like that? Some of the best writers include unexpected comparisons, and I fail to see why math and the sciences should be any different. A few years back someone compared an electron to a string (the nerve!) and set the scientific community atwitter with a new theory for subatomic physics.

I'm no apologist for new math, and I did perfectly well with the old math. But I think your post represents a remarkably limited view of mathematical acumen. It is analogous to saying that to be a good writer all you need to know is spelling and grammar.

The critics you cite complain that the Everyday Math curriculum doesn't care whether kids get the correct answer. My son can assure you that that’s not the case at his school. But exactly how far are the critics you cite willing to take things? If a child wrote the literary equivalent of a Shakespeare play, but misspelled a word on page 43, would they flunk him? If a child learning how to spike a volleyball connected perfectly but the ball lands 3 inches out of bounds, would they berate her? A "yes" answer to either deserves one of the red marks I've seen on my son's tests.