Gifted Issues Discussion homepage Forums Parenting and Advocacy "mathematicians today write out their answers...."

Our story: DS8 is partially homeschooled. He does all academics at home, all specials at school. I had a meeting at his school recently just to clear some issues up. This is our 4th year at this school. We've had completely wacky experiences, yet we do our specials there because DS really likes it and there is some value in it.

Anyway, at our most recent meeting, the principal was now trying to "sell" their new math teacher to me. They have never had a real math teacher before. My son was accelerated 3 years in math last year, but this year he does it all at home. The principal wants him to come back and do math there and that's not happening. They teach Everyday Math there. 'Nuff said. As part of the math teacher's pitch , he stated that the curriculum is great because it reinforces what is happening today in mathematicians' workplaces. He stated that mathematicians today "write out their answers" a la the style of Everyday Math. My son does what was formerly known as EPGY. This new teacher was telling me that EM was superior to EPGY because EM was more relevant. So, math people (or STEM people who use a lot of math at work), is this true? I assumed that he was speaking nonsense, but he says that he was working for 10 years as a mathematician and that the way math is done in the workplace is being "revolutionized" and includes far more writing now. Just curious what math people have to say about this.

I have a degree in math and I've worked my entire career in a math-heavy STEM field. I have never seen anything remotely akin to Everyday Math wordy explanations used in the working world. E.V.E.R.

So you know how I feel about that

FWIW, I have seen this need to explain math problems in words start to spread into higher level secondary school math - more so with my middle dd who is now in middle school - her school has changed math curriculums and the new books are all about explain explain explain 3 different ways and use detailed sentences etc.

JMO, but it all seems to be built around a preconceived notion that the extra words, extra explaining are necessary to help "non-mathy" folks understand math. That's all well and good - but when you're a working mathematician or scientist, your audience is going to be one of two crowds (usually) - either other scientists in your field, or people who have $ to invest but don't understand the math/science. The people who are your peers in math/science will understand your math and don't need it explained in full-length adventure novel format. The people who have the $ to invest or make decisions with don't *care* about the math, they just want to know that they trust your ability to be the math expert.

That's a bit of an over-simplification, but really, no, EM does not really exist in the working world. YET. Who knows what will happen when all the kids who grew up with EM enter the work force?

And if it seems like I'm grouchy about this, it might have something to do with my dd's math homework tonight. I won't mention what she had to explain in words. But yep, that's what she's doing. Explaining percentages in words. She's my kid who likes to write, and even she thinks it's just ridiculous.

polarbear

Well this is true in a way if you are a RESEARCH Mathematician say a university math professor who does new research you need to be able to explain your work in a written paper. This has been true for years. Writing up math is used in the field so that others in the field can understand and critique your work. But research mathematicians are only a tiny fraction of people in the world who use who use math. And I doubt very many of them learned math in the way you describe. Most mathematicians that I know (and I do know a few) work out the math, and only write out the paper when they know they have a new result they want to share with the world. And for most of those that USE math on a regular basis like scientists and engineers this is quite ridiculous. I'm still trying to imagine doing even elementary H.S. chemistry with this technique.

I can believe that for some people this may be an easier way to understand the concepts but for those who are inherently good at math concepts this is simply torture. In my mind 4 + 5 = 10 is a lot easier to understand than 'four plus five equals ten'. I agree with you that this teacher is full of hot air. I think I would be more willing to believe that Standford/EGPY has a fairly good idea of how to teach and understand math. My guess is this teacher has been sold a bill of goods and has swallowed it whole.

I published a paper that used statistical analysis earlier this year, including a series of calculations that were written up as what I'll call a big honking equation using sigma notation. I included the equation in the Materials & Methods section, with the only explanation being to state what each variable stood for. This approach is SOP, as far as I can tell.

I agree with the idea that a student should be able to explain how a method works (e.g. "Tell me Johnny, why can't we divide by zero?"). That said, one of my kids was a victim of EM for two years, and its approach is a long way from what I just described. It isn't what I'd call mathematically correct (but you know that already!).

In Engineering and physics worlds, equations is a language to explain the real world, more simple and direct, oh and also graph.

"changed math curriculums and the new books are all about explain explain explain 3 different ways and use detailed sentences etc." <- this sounds horrible to me....

I have an intense dislike of EM. My eldest was spared as the school started on EM with the class below her. Middle kid didn't think it was so bad, but she just "gets" math. Little one had it last year, but might only have one more year if she scores well on her placement tests.

I agree that no one does simple problems by writing them out. But as kids get a bit more advanced, they are expected to write out answers. How about this problem:

http://www.artofproblemsolving.com/Wiki/index.php/2014_AIME_II_Problems/Problem_9

While you could just write down the math for the problem without explanation, it would not be easy for someone else to follow your thinking. As a civil engineer, I don't just write down the math, but include a bit of explanation as it would be tough to sort through all kinds of calculations for a very large site without some written explanation.

While I think I know what the teacher means, most kids will never need to write out explanations like that. Or they won't need to do that for many years, and can be taught when they are older.

In NYC they use EM up to grade 5, not in all schools but many.
But in middle school they have to switch because EM methods don't scale up.
I hate EM. DD does CTY math and I never let her do the EM method.

Math is its own language. No need to translate it.

Another EM detest-er here. My oldest had it for three years in K - 2 grade. She was amazing in math in preschool. She could add, subtract, multiply, and divide prior to starting K.

By the end of 2nd grade, she wasn't adding, subtracting, multiplying or dividing. She was completely lost and confused. I changed schools, got a tutor, and after three more years she loved math again. (She loved math; it was her favorite thing prior to K. But after K, she had a burning hatred for math. She also thought she was slow in math because she was so lost in it.)

Today, she is a freshman in Pre-Calc who thinks the class is easy. She loves math again. It was always her forte, but EM nearly destroyed her passion. I'm glad she found her way back, but it did take some money and time with tutoring in late elementary to undue all the crap of EM.

Not in a STEM field but can totally empathize. DD8 scores high on math (99% on MAP) yet for this first quarter she has a C- in math. Why? She is terrible at writing. The test required so much writing and of course it's difficult for her to get one hundred seventy-eight million three hundred forty-three thousand seven hundred eleven on her test let alone other sentences to explain it all! It just seems bizarre.

All of this is IMO, and I'm going to disagree somewhat with previous posters.

As a systems engineer, I semi-regularly find myself providing mathy explanations to non-mathy business unit representatives. My personal definition of mathematics is that it's a language that describes relationships. Relationships of what? It's all a bunch of abstract principles unconnected to reality (which is why the ancient philosophers found them so beautiful). We have to connect those principles to our particular real-world applications via English, or another language of choice.

So, are they correct in saying it's important to be able to express mathematics in a wordy, English-oriented way? Yes.

Is Everyday Math the way to go about it? Absolutely not. EM has other egregious problems (spiraling and insisting every student learn and master 8 different ways to perform the same simple operation) apart from its language element, but even the language element is flawed, due to overemphasis during very early, simplistic math operations. Give the kids one or two problems at the end of the assignment where they have to write out an answer, then ramp that up when they get to something more complex, like Algebra.

Some may say this statement by the principal presents an opportunity to respond that you'd like to know more about this trend, and ask to see the source: research, articles, etc. Personally I would follow up on this and learn what the principal & teacher are basing their presentation on... setting the teacher's anecdotal experience aside, as it does not speak for the field as a whole.

Meanwhile, a quick websearch on Everyday Math brings us to the website of the University of Chicago, School Mathematics Project, Resource and Information Center, "created by the authors of Everyday Mathematics". There are tabs for home, about, parents, teachers, and teaching topics. Using their website search feature to find the keyword "writing" presents a results list including
- Teaching Topics, Individual Needs, a page in which the word "writing" appears three times in the section titled, "How can I provide enrichment within the classroom to students who are ready to think more deeply about content?" (where thinking more deeply about content may be a code phrase for gifted). Based upon what is presented, some may understand writing to be a form of differentiation for gifted pupils.
- A listserv. The results list shows snippets of teacher inquiries on the topic of having their pupils write.

Our district is requiring writing in all subjects including PE. So my middle schooler had to research and write a paper about volleyball. She also had to write a biography of a mathematician for math class. It's a bit much in my opinion.

Well, there's the fact that we're talking about Everyday Math, here. If there's a curriculum more detested by people who like and understand math, I haven't found it.

That aside, I don't think it's unreasonable to expect kids to learn to be able to explain math concepts in words. Math is a language, yeah, but it's one that can be memorized without developing deep conceptual understanding, especially at elementary level. It's harder compose a written explanation without the conceptual understanding. So it's a good exercise.

I work in software development and while I'm sure this isn't universally true of all companies, I encounter a fair amount of writing/talking about mathy concepts. Engineers who have the ability to explain their thoughts in words definitely have an advantage over those who don't as far as pushing their ideas and gathering support for their plans.

Though perhaps just not in the way, or quantity, expected in Everyday Math in particular.

Why is she writing out the numbers in words? Unless the problem is, "Explain what all the numbers in 178,343,711 mean," then I don't think there's any need to go to extremes like that. Past the basic level, writing in math should be to explain an operation or concept. If the teacher actually expects that, I think she's doing it wrong.

At my high school writing is required for most "arts" classes if they want to be counted as college prep classes. Regular PE doesn't count, so no essay required. But when my DD took dance she had to attend three outside performances and write up a review. And for her photography class she had to do a report on a famous photographer. Not necessary for math classes and in science the kids write up labs.

I work in a STEM field, so here's a real-life example: One of our brilliant researchers was presenting a paper to a group of engineers (and me, the PM). Yes of course there was an intro about the problem space and the challenge we're looking at solving. Then he says "so as you can plainly see..." and pulls up whole page of equations. I topped out in Calc II in college and these looked only vaguely familiar. But he lead a spirited discussion of the results with the group and there was general agreement as to the ramifications.

This is about as far as EM as you can get IMHO.

Oh, and EM confused and killed my daughter's love of math too.

This. To add to what Polarbear and Val (and so many others) have already said.

It's not like I need to "explain" how I've written something in, say.... Spanish, right? I only need to do that if I am translating it for someone who does not Habla Espanol. Same thing here. EM only teaches students "how to explain basic math to people who have no idea how to use either hand OR the provided flashlight."

Ahem.

I am not in the US and have no experience whatsoever with the actual Everyday Math. But I am studying to be a high school math teacher, and there is a lot of emphasis on the need for literacy to be developed within the mathematics classroom. As mentioned by Aufilia, a lot of mathematical processes can be memorised without actually understanding the mathematics behind it. I did quite well in mathematics all the way through university, but when I try to explain ideas, I realise that I lack a lot of the conceptual underpinning and authentic understanding of why I am doing what I am doing. An example that really drove it home for me was the process of how to divide fractions. I know to invert and multiply, but then to try to think why that process works and how to explain why it works is an entirely different issue. And at a higher level, I took calculus twice, about 10 years between each time. The first time I memorised the process for integrating to find the area under the curve, which worked perfectly well. The second time, I actually developed an understanding of why it works, and this was a much richer understanding.

I feel that my own education let me down by not building a strong foundation in the conceptual understanding of mathematics, and I hope to help my students with that. I didn't find the actual lack of understanding affected my ability to succeed in the mathematics classroom, but does affect my ability to teach effectively. We learn through language, and being able to write the mathematical processes is important, but also being able to explain them helps to develop a deeper understanding of what you are doing.

Word problems are dreaded by many students. They are not always an ideal way of presenting mathematical problems, but students often struggle because their ability to use mathematical language needs further development, not because they do not understand the mathematical processes involved in the problems.

I don't think writing should be arbitrarily thrown in, and students should not have to write down every thing. But I do think language and writing are powerful tools for math learning.

I'm interested in what people here think explains the teacher's assertions as quoted in the OP.

My theory is that the teacher is a complete nutcase. He's brazenly describing some kind of recent writing "revolution" among math or STEM professionals. He seems to have no concern that he'll be caught out by the more astute parents. What on earth is he thinking? I certainly wouldn't want my kid in a classroom with someone like that.

My charitable assessment could be that he's exaggerating; or that's what he's been told; or he's massively simplifying; or he's putting a marketing spin on it to get your buy-in to head off parent complaints. After all, he didn't choose the curriculum--it was selected by some committee he likely wasn't involved with--he's stuck with it as much as you arm.

You know what it makes me think of? When DD was in 1st grade, she was in literally the worst classroom ever built. But that teacher stood up there on curriculum night and claimed with a straight face that she LOVED her room. She was clearly lying through her teeth because I've been a teacher, and no teacher could love that room. I think she just didn't want us parents all complaining how our students had been relegated to a walking closet crossed with a fishbowl.

On the less charitable side, perhaps he doesn't understand the connection between understanding a concept and being able to explain it. Hopefully this isn't the case.