Friends of quality mathematics education-

On Thursday, November 18, page A5 of the Washington Post contained a letter from nearly 200 mathematicians, scientists and other academics denouncing a Department of Education report endorsing math programs such as CPM, Connected Math, MathLand, IMP and others.  To see the text of this letter and the full signature list go to <http://www.mathematicallycorrect.com/riley.htm>. 

This is a watershed event in the recent history of education as highly respected university mathematicians publicly denounced both fuzzy math and the role of the federal government in promoting fuzzy math.  We must build on the momentum of this key development by making sure that our President, VP, senators, representatives and state reps know that real people support the mathematicians.

The best way to do this is to write or e-mail the President and VP, our individual representatives, the leadership of the House and Senate and the leadership of key committees.  We must act similarly at the state level.  The federal e-mail addresses, or the methods for getting them, follow at the end of this message.

Your letters should note that you are concerned about mathematics education, especially as you are a parent/teacher/mathematician/employer etc.  Then tell how you agree with the letter from the mathematicians and note your disappointment that the Department of Ed endorsed the programs it did.  Strengthen your case by mentioning any and all programs that you have seen or had your children exposed to and note how weak you think they are.  Then you might add some remarks on the kinds of programs you would like to see in schools.  In my letter I am including a copy of the text of the mathematicians letter.

A copy of my letter follows at the end of this message.

PLEASE SEND A LETTER OF YOUR OWN

Mike McKeown
Mathematically Correct


------------

TO REACH YOUR REPRESENTATIVES

·  The President and VP

president@whitehouse.gov

vice.president@whitehouse.gov


·  Senate

To get the e-mail address of your senator go to
www.senate.gov

Near the top left is a box labeled "Your State's Senators".  Use the pull down menu to select the state and hit the go button.  Your two senators will then be listed.  Click on their names to get their web pages.  These will give you e-mail information.  In general, the senators' e-mail addresses have the form Senator@lastname.senate.gov, although some are senator_lastname@lastname.senate.gov.

Key leadership

Trent Lott R - senatorlott@lott.senate.gov

Tom Daschle - tom_daschle@daschle.senate.gov


Key committees

Appropriations

Stevens R- AK -  senator_stevens@stevens.senate.gov

Byrd D-WVa -  senator_byrd@byrd.senate.gov

Health, Education, Labor and Pensions

Jeffords R- VT -  No e-mail listed, but he can be reached from his web page

Kennedy D-MA -  senator@kennedy.senate.gov



·  House of Representatives

www.house.gov

To reach your representative, you will need to go through his or her web page from http://www.house.gov/house/MemberWWW.html

Speaker Hastert  R - speaker@mail.house.gov

Rep. Gephart D - d.leadership@mail.house.gov

House Education and the Workforce Committee

Chair - Goodling R-PA  No e-mail listed

Ranking Demo Clay D-MO  No e-mail listed

You can reach the committee via bob.sweet@mail.house.gov

----------------------------


My Letter

Dear Congressman-

I write to you as a concerned parent of three children in public schools.  In recent years my wife and I have seen a whole series of ill designed, low level mathematics programs enter our schools.  These programs do a very poor job of teaching the knowledge, understanding and skills that will be necessary for children, regardless of parental education or family wealth, to succeed in high tech, high pay professions of the 21 st century.  These programs are more mathematics appreciation than mathematics education and dangerously downgrade the key analytical and logical skills that children need to succeed.

My wife and I were aghast to see a recent report from the Department of Education endorsing the dangerously weak and watered down programs that will keep our children from achieving at high levels.  These are the very programs such as CPM, Connected Math, IMP and MathLand that have engendered parental revolts around the country.

Luckily, sanity is returning.  A group of nearly 200 mathematicians recent published a letter in the Washington Post denouncing the Department of Education report and the mathematics programs mentioned in the report.  (The text of this letter follows). 

Please read this letter and do everything possible to keep the Department of Education, as well as the Education and Human Services division of the National Science Foundation, from endorsing programs and educational philosophies that are obviously not supported by a solid consensus among either parents, cognitive psychologists, the public or academics.

Although education should be a non-partisan issue, I note that my wife and I are life-long Democrats who view watered down education, no matter what the high sounding rhetoric, a danger to our most vulnerable citizens.  Watered down programs that might make kids feel good but leave out the elements of real math only widen the gap between the children of the well off and educated and the children of the poor and disadvantaged.

Sincerely,

Michael McKeown
San Diego

The following is the text of an advertisement that appeared in the November 18 edition of the "Washington Post", page A5.  This is also available at www. mathematicallycorrect.com/riley.htm


MR. SECRETARY, WE ASK THAT YOU WITHDRAW YOUR PREMATURE RECOMMENDATIONS FOR MATHEMATICS INSTRUCTION


AN OPEN LETTER TO UNITED STATES SECRETARY OF EDUCATION,
                                          RICHARD RILEY

Dear Secretary Riley:

In early October of 1999, the United States Department of Education endorsed ten K-12 mathematics programs by describing them as "exemplary" or "promising." There are five programs in each category. The "exemplary" programs announced by the Department of Education are:

       Cognitive Tutor Algebra
       College Preparatory Mathematics (CPM)
       Connected Mathematics Program (CMP)
       Core-Plus Mathematics Project
       Interactive Mathematics Program (IMP)

The "promising" programs are:

       Everyday Mathematics
       MathLand
       Middle-school Mathematics through Applications Project (MMAP)
       Number Power
       The University of Chicago School Mathematics Project (UCSMP)

The Expert Panel that made the final decisions did not include active research mathematicians. Expert Panel members originally included former NSF Assistant Director, Luther Williams, and former President of the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics, Jack Price.  For the current list, see the web site below.  It is not likely that the mainstream views of practicing mathematicians and scientists were shared by those who designed the criteria for selection of "exemplary" and "promising" mathematics curricula. For example, the strong views about arithmetic algorithms expressed by one of the Expert Panel members, Steven Leinwand, are not widely held within the mathematics and scientific communities. In an article entitled, "It's Time To Abandon Computational Algorithms," published February 9, 1994, in Education Week on the Web, he wrote:

"It's time to recognize that, for many students, real mathematical power, on the one hand, and facility with multidigit, pencil-and-paper computational algorithms, on the other, are mutually exclusive. In fact, it's time to acknowledge that continuing to teach these skills to our students is not only unnecessary, but counterproductive and downright dangerous."

In sharp contrast, a committee of the American Mathematical Society (AMS), formed for the purpose of representing the views of the AMS to the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics, published a report which stressed the mathematical significance of the arithmetic algorithms, as well as addressing other mathematical issues. This report, published in the February 1998 issue of the Notices of the American Mathematical Society, includes the statement:

"We would like to emphasize that the standard algorithms of arithmetic are more than just 'ways to get the answer' -- that is, they have theoretical as well as practical significance. For one thing, all the algorithms of arithmetic are preparatory for algebra, since there are (again, not by accident, but by virtue of the construction of the decimal system) strong analogies between arithmetic of ordinary numbers and arithmetic of polynomials."

Even before the endorsements by the Department of Education were announced, mathematicians and scientists from leading universities had already expressed opposition to several of the programs listed above and had pointed out serious mathematical shortcomings in them. The following criticisms, while not exhaustive, illustrate the level of opposition to the Department of Education's recommended mathematics programs by respected scholars:

Richard Askey, John Bascom Professor of Mathematics at the University of Wisconsin at Madison and a member of the National Academy of Sciences, pointed out in his paper, "Good Intentions are not Enough" that the grade 6-8 mathematics curriculum Connected Mathematics Program entirely omits the important topic of division of fractions. Professor Askey's paper was presented at the "Conference on Curriculum Wars: Alternative Approaches to Reading and Mathematics" held at Harvard University October 21 and 22, 1999. His paper also identifies other serious mathematical deficiencies of CMP.

R. James Milgram, professor of mathematics at Stanford University, is the author of "An Evaluation of CMP," "A Preliminary Analysis of SAT-I Mathematics Data for IMP Schools in California," and "Outcomes Analysis for Core Plus Students at Andover High School: One Year Later." This latter paper is based on a statistical survey undertaken by Gregory Bachelis, professor of mathematics at Wayne State University. Each of these papers identifies serious shortcomings in the mathematics programs: CMP, Core-Plus, and IMP.

Martin Scharlemann, while chairman of the Department of Mathematics at the University of California at Santa Barbara, wrote an open letter deeply critical of the K-6 curriculum MathLand, identified as "promising" by the U. S. Department of Education. In his letter, Professor Scharlemann explains that the standard multiplication algorithm for numbers is not explained in MathLand.

Betty Tsang, research physicist at Michigan State University, has posted detailed criticisms of the Connected Mathematics Project on her web site.

Hung-Hsi Wu, professor of mathematics at the University of California at Berkeley, has written a general critique of these recent curricula ("The mathematics education reform: Why you should be concerned and what you can do", American Mathematical Monthly 104(1997), 946-954) and a detailed review of one of the "exemplary" curricula, IMP ("Review of Interactive Mathematics Program (IMP) at Berkeley High School"). He is concerned about the general lack of careful attention to mathematical substance in the newer offerings.

While we do not necessarily agree with each of the criticisms of the programs described above, given the serious nature of these criticisms by credible scholars, we believe that it is premature for the United States Government to recommend these ten mathematics programs to schools throughout the nation. We respectfully urge you to withdraw the entire list of "exemplary" and "promising" mathematics curricula, for further consideration, and to announce that withdrawal to the public. We further urge you to include well-respected mathematicians in any future evaluation of mathematics curricula conducted by the U.S. Department of Education. Until such a review has been made, we recommend that school districts not take the words "exemplary" and "promising" in their dictionary meanings, and exercise caution in choosing mathematics programs.

Sincerely,

David Klein
Professor of Mathematics
California State University, Northridge

Richard Askey
John Bascom Professor of Mathematics
University of Wisconsin at Madison

R. James Milgram
Professor of Mathematics
Stanford University

Hung-Hsi Wu
Professor of Mathematics
University of California, Berkeley

Martin Scharlemann
Professor of Mathematics
University of California, Santa Barbara

Professor Betty Tsang
National Superconducting Cyclotron Laboratory
Michigan State University

The test of this letter with links to other web sites containing referenced documents is available at:  http://www. mathematicallycorrect.com/riley.htm

The following endorsements are listed in alphabetical order.

[ A LIST OF NEARLY 200 PEOPLE, NEARLY ALL MATHEMATICIANS, SCIENTISTS OR ENGINEERS, FOLLOWS IN THE ORIGINAL.  THE LIST INCLUDES MATHEMATICS PROFESSORS FROM MAJOR PUBLIC AND PRIVATE UNIVERSITIES FROM ACROSS THE COUNTRY.

TWO FIELDS MEDAL WINNERS, THE TOP HONOR IN MATHEMATICS, AND FOUR NOBEL PRIZE WINNERS HAVE ENDORSED THIS LETTER.   THE FIELDS MEDAL WINNERS ARE VAUGHAN JONES AND EDWARD WITTEN.  THE NOBEL PRIZE WINNERS ARE STEVEN CHU, SHELDON GLASHOW, LEON LEDERMAN AND STEVEN WEINBERG

A SELECTION OF ENDORSERS INCLUDES]

Alejandro Adem
Professor & Chair
Department of Mathematics
University of Wisconsin-Madison

Henry L. Alder
Professor of Mathematics
University of California, Davis
Former member of the California Board of Education
Former President of the Mathematical Association of America

Frank B. Allen
Professor of Mathematics Emeritus, Elmhurst College
Former President, National Council of Teachers of Mathematics

Steven Chu
Theodore and Francis Geballe Professor of Physics and Applied Physics
Chair of Physics
Stanford University
1997 Nobel Prize for Physics

Robert Fefferman
Louis Block Professor of Mathematics
Chairman, Mathematics Department
University of Chicago

Patrick M. Fitzpatrick
Professor and Chair
Department of Mathematics
University of Maryland

Sheldon Lee Glashow
Higgins Professor of Physics
Harvard University
1979 Nobel Prize in Physics

Deborah Tepper Haimo
Visiting Scholar
University of California, San Diego
Trustee of Association of Members of the Institute for Advanced Study at Princeton
Former President of the Mathematical Association of America

Peter W. Jones
Professor and Chair of Mathematics
Yale University

Peter J. Kahn
Professor of Mathematics and
Senior Associate Dean
College of Arts and Sciences
Cornell University

Lisa Graham Keegan
Superintendent of Public Education
State of Arizona

Steven G. Krantz
Chairman and Professor
Department of Mathematics
Washington University in St. Louis
St. Louis, Missouri

Leon M. Lederman
Resident Scholar
Illinois Mathematics and Science Academy
Director Emeritus Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory
1988 Nobel Prize in Physics

Peter Li
Professor and Chair of Mathematics
University of California, Irvine

Saunders Mac Lane
Max Mason Distinguished Service Professor, Emeritus
University of Chicago
National Medal of Science, 1989
Former Vice President, National Academy of Sciences, 1973-1981
Former Member, National Science Board, 1973-1979

Steven Pinker
Professor of Psychology
Department of Brain and Cognitive Sciences
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Author of How the Mind Works

Douglas C. Ravenel
Professor and Chair of Mathematics
University of Rochester

Barry Simon
I.B.M. Professor of Mathematics and Theoretical Physics
Chair, Department of Mathematics
Caltech

Leon Simon
Professor of Mathematics and Chairman
Department of Mathematics
Stanford University

Alan Sokal
Professor of Physics
New York University

Harold Stevenson
Professor of Psychology
University of Michigan, Ann Arbor

Sandra Stotsky
Deputy Commissioner for Academic Affairs and Planning
Massachusetts Department of Education
Research Associate
Harvard Graduate School of Education

Steven Weinberg
Josey Regental Professor of Science
University of Texas at Austin
1979 Nobel Prize in Physics

Edward Witten
Professor of Physics
Institute for Advanced Study at Princeton