Several socially conservative members of the elected State Board of Education (SBOE) have a message for textbook publishers: leave the calculators for high school students.

The discussion of the role of calculators in mathematics education capped a full week of education news. Here’s a quick update.

Math textbooks. At the SBOE’s Committee of the Full Board on Nov. 15, the board debated the slate of elementary school math books submitted for fall use.

One textbook, Everyday Mathematics, drew the fire of board member Gail Lowe (R-Lampasas). Lowe wanted to move the book onto the nonconforming list because of its treatment of multiplication tables. Lowe said she believed the book did not sufficiently require students to memorize multiplication tables and did not meet the state standards for third grade.

The Texas Essential Knowledge and Skills (TEKS) for third grade requires students to “learn and apply multiplication facts through 12 by 12 using concrete models and objects.” This standard contrasts with the fourth grade standards that require students to “recall and apply multiplication facts through 12 x 12.”

Lowe interpreted both standards to require memorization of multiplication tables in both the third and fourth grade. The agency has traditionally only interpreted the fourth grade standard as requiring memorization of multiplication tables.

Representatives of the book’s publisher, McGraw Hill and the Wright Group, argued that the book complied with the TEKS but offered to add material addressing the concerns of Lowe and other board members. The book is currently used by three million schoolchildren nationwide and is based on research done at the University of Chicago. The Dallas and El Paso school districts currently use a prior version of the text.

There are two schools of thought in mathematics education. One argues that students should know how to do math, should memorize math facts, and should be able to perform mathematical operations without the use of calculators. The other school of thought argues that understanding mathematical ideas is more important than the ability to do mathematics. This line of thought is often nicknamed “fuzzy math” by its critics.

One of the most notorious fuzzy math books, Investigations in Numbers, Data, and Space by Pearson Scott Foresman was not submitted for the current Texas adoption.

Everyday Mathematics encourages the use of calculators in the third grade, though not for all types of problems. Its adoption prompted a debate over the role of calculators in mathematics education.

Board member David Bradley (R-Beaumont) told a story of TV news, on the first day of school, showing a Beaumont student writing 4x6 on the chalkboard. The kids had to go get a calculator to find the right answer, he said.

Bradley noted that Texas law prohibits the use of calculators on the state mathematics test up through the seventh grade. Besides Bradley and Lowe, board members Cynthia Dunbar (R-Richmond), Terri Leo (R-Spring) and Ken Mercer (R-San Antonio) vocally criticized the

use of calculators in elementary school mathematics and expressed concerns about Everyday Mathematics.

Board member Geraldine Miller (R-Dallas) suggested that adding more material about learning multiplication tables would be an excellent addition to the book and that the publisher prepare an outline of additions they would make to the book to address concerns raised.

Board member Mary Helen Berlanga (D-Corpus Christi) said she would vote for the book, because it meets all the essential knowledge and skills as they currently exist. She suggested that if board members want multiplication tables memorized in the third grade, they need to revise the curriculum (the Essential Knowledge and Skills), instead of penalizing the publisher after the fact.

Berlanga attributed the controversy over the math books to Educational Research Analysts, the organization founded by the late Mel and Norma Gabler to review Texas textbooks.

The board, departing from usual practice, postponed a vote on the book until the Friday (Nov. 16) meeting. Members gave preliminary approval to all other submitted books.

New textbook rules. Much of the controversy over Everyday Mathematics relates to another serious concern the board members have – how much coverage of the Essential Knowledge and Skills is expected.

Formerly, mere mention of a curriculum standard would count as “covered” for purposes of determining whether a textbook covers the curriculum. Board members now say they want at least three examples, prominently placed.

When the board adopts textbooks, it either rejects them (if they have factual errors or cover less than half the curriculum) or places them on the conforming or non-conforming lists. The conforming list covers all the curriculum, whereas the non-conforming list covers most but not all of the curriculum. Historically, districts tend to favor conforming books, when available.

Everyday Mathematics mentions multiplication and the table, but its coverage of that item did not satisfy several board members.

The message from this week’s board meeting is clear: a textbook’s success in covering a curriculum standard will get a closer look than before.

Textbook adoption process. The board is now revising its rules for textbook adoption in response to the Legislature’s HB 188, the textbook credit bill. The bill was carefully negotiated between lawmakers and Miller. It gives school districts a credit they can use to purchase other books when they buy books that cost less than the state maximum set by the board.

The bill also sets up a mid-cycle adoption process and allows districts to purchase SBOE-approved supplemental textbooks that do not cover all the curriculum but are helpful in teaching. An example would be a copy of Macbeth in a high school literature class.

Rules proposed for adoption at the Nov. 16 meeting would allow mid-cycle adoptions to the extent the commissioner certifies that funds are appropriated for that purpose. (The bill does allow the board to set a fee to cover that cost, but fees can only be spent if appropriated.) The board will follow the same review procedure for mid-cycle adoptions that it follows for regular adoptions of books, including submission of the books to review panels.

In the course of formulating rules for the mid-cycle adoption process, board members repeatedly emphasized they are serious about ensuring thorough coverage of each portion of the TEKS adopted books. Miller also emphasized that faithful execution of the changes in HB 188 is important to maintain good relations with lawmakers on textbook issues.

TEKS revision. The board is currently undergoing major revisions to the Texas Essential Knowledge and Skills, especially in language arts. Board members are actively involved in these efforts. There appears to be a consensus that the English, Language Arts, and Reading TEKS need more emphasis on phonics at the early grades, more grade-level specificity, and additional emphasis on measurable standards. The board asked many questions about the revision process.

The board also had a presentation on the work of the Vertical Teams – groups of higher education and college faculty appointed to devise college readiness standards for the curriculum. Commissioner of Higher Education Raymond Paredes appeared before the board and spoke about the vertical teams process.

Some board members expressed concerns about the emphasis on multiculturalism in the social studies as draft college readiness standards, saying they wanted more standards pertaining to early American history. Board members were told the vertical team members understood that the social studies standards required some work and revision.

Merit pay for teachers. More than half of the state’s school districts are refusing to participate in the state’s new incentive or merit pay program for teachers, The Dallas Morning News reports. The state, though providing a pool of money that can be used for salary enhancements for high-performing teachers, requires districts to put up a 15 percent match from local allotment to match the state funds. This has caused participation to trail off, the News reports — though with one amusing side effect. The lack of interest among school districts means each school district that does participate gets more money.

Comments (2)

Comment	smaller | bigger
Name
Write the displayed characters
Subscribe via email (Registered users only) I have read and agree to the Terms of Usage.
	Add Comment