With Congress due to complete reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) by the end of the year, hearings continue on a variety of federal education issues. The House, which is considering its ESEA reauthorization as a series of separate bills, has approved two of its measures (H.R. 2, H.R. 1995). An omnibus package is expected from the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee.
Mathematics instruction for public school students was the topic of a joint hearing held on February 2 by the House Education and the Workforce Subcommittees on Early Childhood, Youth, and Families and Postsecondary Education, Training, and Life-long Learning.
During his opening remarks, Rep. Dale Kildee (D-MI), ranking member of the Subcommittee on Early Childhood, Youth, and Families, emphasized efforts to improve math education for girls and minorities. With “fewer women and minorities in careers that require math and science backgrounds,” he said, “we must find a way to reverse this trend.”
However, most of the hearing focused on ten math curricula endorsed by the Department of Education and the National Science Foundation (NSF). A group of math and science teachers has sent a letter to Secretary of Education Richard Riley, asking him to rescind the endorsement. Rep. Mike Castle (R-DE), chair of the Subcommittee on Early Childhood, Youth, and Families, said, “In their letter, the scholars presented evidence that the endorsed programs adhered to a common philosophy of math that minimized essential computational skills, were not based on sound scientific research, and promoted a lower level of proficiency in mathematics than the newly-adopted California state standards.”
Dr. Judith Sunley of NSF said her agency supports new methods for teaching math because the uses of technology in the modern world make it “important to have a much broader range of the population with a much stronger background in mathematics.” She said that her agency and the Department of Education “see math education as a ‘pump’ leading students into the mathematics necessary for high quality jobs, rather than its traditional role as a ‘filter’ allowing only the best students to have access to opportunities for advancement.”
However, Dr. Jim Milgram of Stanford University criticized the changes endorsed by NSF and the Department of Education, saying the ten curricula “represent a single point of view towards teaching mathematics, the constructivist philosophy that the teacher is simply a facilitator.” He said that hand-held calculators are always used and “there are no means for students to develop mastery of basic arithmetic operations; algebra is short-changed as well.”
Further testimony on both sides of the argument was presented. While all of the witnesses expressed strong support for their opposing approaches, all agreed on the need to improve American students’ math skills. Assistant Secretary of Education C. Kent McGuire described the Third International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS), which was conducted in 1995, saying, “The eighth grade mathematics results show lackluster performance with U.S. students, with scores slightly below the international average. Most disappointing, the mathematics results at the end of secondary school show American twelfth-grade students among the lowest tier of the 21 participating countries.”
Dr. Milgram said, “Since 1989, the percentage of entering students in the California State University System—the largest state system in the country—that were required to take remedial courses in mathematics have increased almost two and a half times, from 23 percent in 1989 to 55 percent today.” He said that few students are obtaining technology-related degrees as a result, adding: “The total number of technical degrees awarded to U.S. citizens recently is approximately 28,000 yearly, while there are currently 100,000 new jobs in those areas each year.”
