RE: TERC Investigations math
From
David Huston To jposti@mtlsd.net
Cc
gwensell gwensell@southfayette.org, schoolboardemaillist@mtlsd.net
Mon, Nov 26, 2012 4:15 pm
Ms. Posti,
Thank you for correcting me regarding Mr. Wensell.
You can understand my confusion because you never mentioned his first name.
Please see the attached booklet from 2009, when Mr. Wensell was employed by the District.
Mr. Wensell's presentation was:
Creating a Balanced K-12 Mathematics ProgramIs your school district seeking a balance between procedural and
conceptual learning opportunities for students? Come learn how
one district's approach led to the incorporation of both reform and
traditional resources.
Obviously, when Mr. Wensell recommended TERC Investigations, he
thought it was best to include traditional resources.
Now Mr. Wensell is using traditional resources along with Investigations at South Fayette.
The Mt. Lebanon School District is now using 100% TERC investigations,
which goes against Mr. Wensell's recommendation.
Who made the decision to go all TERC in our district?
I included Mr. Wensell so he can provide clarification beyond the spelling of his name.
David Huston
***
From: JPosti@mtlsd.net
To: David Huston, SchoolBoardEmaillist@mtlsd.net
Subject: RE: TERC Investigations math
Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2012 20:35:26 +0000
Ken Wentzel is a retired high school physical education teacher so I'm not sure what report you'd be referring to. You may want submit a RTK request.
Josephine Posti
President
Mt. Lebanon School Board
412.667.1479
http://jposti.blogspot.com
Mission: To provide the best education possible for each and every student
***
From: David Huston
Sent: Monday, November 26, 2012 3:20 PM
To: Josephine C. Posti; School Board Email list
Subject: RE: TERC Investigations math
Ms. Posti,
The 138 parents signing a petition to scrap TERC in 2011 were not overly satisfied:
http://www.amherstbee.com/news/2011-04-13/Education/Parents_want_examination_of_elementary_math_progra.html
The man's name is Ken Wentzel, not Wensell.
Please provide Mr. Wentzel's report for the public to review.
David Huston
***
From: JPosti@mtlsd.net
To: David Huston; SchoolBoardEmaillist@mtlsd.net
Subject: RE: TERC Investigations math
Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2012 20:11:41 +0000
Mr. Huston,
FormerSchoolDirector's rationale is the same rationale most Board members follow when making decisions about curriculum. With few exceptions, we are not educators and rely on recommendations of the District's educational professionals on curriculum decisions. This was no exception.
Mr. Wensell's recommendation was brought to the Board for our approval after he conducted research and evaluation of tools that could help better prepare our students for middle school math, was vetted within his department, shared with Curriculum Council and evaluated by our administration. If you look at the District's student achievement results since these program change proposals were approved, it appears to have been a wise decision that has resulted in academic success for our students and, anecdotally, an increased love of math that our middle and high school teachers have observed since its adoption. As with any part of our curriculum, if there are opportunities to improve it, we will pursue them. Our goal is to teach a balanced math program that meets PA common core standards and prepares students for success.
Regarding the information you shared below, did you know that Amherst Central School District continues to use Investigations as a core resource in elementary math and that when surveyed, parents were overwhelmingly satisfied with the math curriculum?
Thanks and best regards,
Josephine Posti
President
Mt. Lebanon School Board
412.667.1479
http://jposti.blogspot.com
Mission: To provide the best education possible for each and every student
****
From: David Huston
Sent: Saturday, November 24, 2012 6:46 PM
To: School Board Email list
Subject: FW: TERC Investigations math
Hello Board,
Please see the exchange I had with a former school director 2 years ago.
Ms. Posti and Mr. Remely were on the board at the time and voted to approve Investigations.
Why did Ms. Posti and Mr. Remely approve it?
Also, the link below is informative.
From: FormerSchoolDirector
To: David Huston
Date: Tue, 7 Sep 2010 17:37:46 -0400
Subject: Re: TERC Investigations math
I have no idea. Don't remember the discussion. Probably bc supervisor said to...
On Sep 7, 2010, at 5:37 PM, "David Huston" wrote:
Former School Director,
Why did the 2007 school board choose TERC Investigations
for the Mt. Lebanon math curriculum?
http://amherstmathprogram.com/math/main.php
Update November 27, 2012 1:37 AM Josephine Posti updated her blog to include this post, More on Math.
If you look at our comparator districts in Pennsylvania, many of them use Investigations, including local districts like Baldwin, Elizabeth Forward, Fox Chapel, Hampton, Peters Township and Upper St. Clair.But according to PG readers, Meetings will discuss new math curriculum in Mt. Lebanon schools, USC dropped this years ago. Dr. Steinhauer weighed in on the subject in the PG article. Josephine admitted that she is not an educator and relies on the educational professionals, yet the "educator" addresses more important issues such as Chinese proverbs and construction on his blog.
Ms. Posti's reply is somewhat odd... "FormerSchoolDirector's rationale is the same rationale most Board members follow when making decisions about curriculum. With few exceptions, we are not educators and rely on recommendations of the District's educational professionals on curriculum decisions..."
ReplyDeleteSo basically, we can assume that Center Court offers little in the way of research or investigation concerning SD affairs.
This is borne out by the preference of articles supporting the NEA and Pennsylvania School Board Assiciation.
Again why no articles or evidence supporting opposing views on curriculum etc.
I was always under the opinion that the last thing directors were supposed to be were rubber stamps for approval.
That explains why the board consistently believed the renovation would come in under $100 million.
This doesn't sound like a glowing review of TERC.
ReplyDeleteInvestigations In Number, Data, and Space (TERC) by Wilfried Schmid, Harvard University (June, 2001). Opening remarks at the NYC HOLD math forum at NYU. "A TERC teacher doesn't explain, and a TERC teacher doesn't teach! I don't want to be misunderstood: group learning and discovery learning are parts of the tool chest of every accomplished teacher, but it is folly to turn these techniques into an ideology. If we mathematicians had to re-discover mathematics on our own, we would not get very far! And indeed, TERC does not get very far. By the end of fifth grade, TERC students have fallen roughly two years behind where they should be."
Another troubling review.
ReplyDelete"A Partial List of my Objections to the TERC Investigations Curriculum, by Thomas Parker, Professor of Mathematics at Michigan State University. Professor Parker concludes: "TERC students will hit a wall, probably at the end of middle school. They are not being given the grounding needed to understand the abstractions of high school algebra and geometry. Their options for careers in science and engineering are being closed off by their elementary school program."
Excerpt from the Frederick News Post on throwing out TERC.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.fredericknewspost.com/sections/archives/display_detail.htm?StoryID=139659
"But high praise also goes to the 140-member team of elementary teachers who worked diligently last summer to create the new math curriculum that students used this year. They obviously did a great job.
This curriculum was built around revised state standards and a new primary resource that replaced the TERC math text. Readers will recall that in recent years the TERC text became the focus of intense criticism from some parents, teachers and others who believed it to be an inferior approach to teaching the foundations of math.
It seems clear that discarding TERC and adopting more traditional, tried-and-true methods and materials for math education -- plus the work of the math curriculum committee -- are responsible for this notable rise in math proficiency among second-graders.
It is also evident that those who sought to replace TERC -- we think especially of the group FrederickEducationReform.com -- were truly agents of change because of their dedication and perseverance.
This story provides an excellent example of how parents, teachers, administrators and all those concerned about the level and quality of public education can make a positive difference if they present a solid case for change and stick to their guns."
That last paragraph says it all... "parents, teachers, administrators can make a positive difference... ."
As opposed to an attitude recently offered somewhere: "we're the math professionals."
Whether it is building a curriculum or a high school, the answer cannot always be are are not educators or architects so we have to listen to the "professionals" , What the #&*! is the point of the board? First and foremost they are parents, in almost all cases. They should get that there are "do overs" with our children. We get one shot at their primary and secondary education and it should not be left to individuals without a clue, or even board members that would not recognize a clue if it jumped up and bit them on the nose.
ReplyDeleteDon't miss the update. It includes a link to Center Court and a link to a recent PG article.
ReplyDeleteElaine
I thought you were a friend of David Houston. By running these emails you show everyone how stupid he really is. Was this what you had in mind?
ReplyDelete"Many of them use Investigations." Our comparator school districts may "use" Investigations - there are certain aspects of Investigations that are excellent. But they do not use 100% Investigations as do the Mt. Lebanon Elementary Schools starting this year. Our comparator schools are still teaching traditional math concepts, supplementing that with Investigations. So let's compare apples to apples here. Why is Mt. Lebanon going full-speed ahead with 100% Investigations Math curriculum despite parent outcry and volumes of negative research?
ReplyDelete7:59 AM, yes I am friends with David. What his emails show is how inept the school board is. David has been on top of this for several years.
ReplyDeleteIt finally got Josephine to address this on her blog. Now, if we could just get Timmy to write something about it on his blog. After all, he is the highest paid educational professional we have.
Elaine
Some math teachers in Mt Lebanon do not have a full understanding of the math curriculum they are teaching and don't want to teach students in AP or Honors because these students ask questions.
ReplyDeleteSearching on youtube for TERC Investigations, I found a number of videos by parents who were concerned with this curriculum.
ReplyDeleteTERC Investigations on YouTube
Doing a search on Google for TERC Investigations brought up petitions to remove TERC Investigations, calling it fuzzy math, illiterate,etc.
But hey, Timmy says that they are the professionals.
Another weakness in the District is teaching cursive. The kids can't write in cursive. I guess that is a lost art. That and long division.
Elaine
Elaine, you might want to visit -
ReplyDeletehttp://parentingsquad.com/7-reasons-why-cursive-writing-should-still-be-taught-in-schools
Reason #7:
7. Finally, it comes down to the grandparents and great-grandparents.
How many times over the years will your kids receive a birthday or Christmas card with the traditional $5 to $20 bills tucked inside from Grandma? How many times will your child hand over the card to you and ask you to read it because cursive seems like a foreign language in code? Grandparents already feel alienated from contemporary culture through their scary apprehensive acceptance of all things technological in their households. Help foster better communication between the generations and lobby for cursive!
Will we survive as a culture without it? We might. But cursive writing might become another one of those subjects in school that rich districts have and poor ones don't. Remaining silent as it gets kicked out of curriculum in middle class and working class districts around the U.S. means one more way to widen the class divide in America.
I added a new poll on the Lebo Citizens blog home page. What has been your experience with TERC Investigations?
ReplyDeleteElaine
Wasn't it not so many years ago that the district was promoting the newest and best way to test math was by using the Carnegie Math Tutor software in the middle schools? Which was abandoned as a failure a few years later.
ReplyDelete"The federal review of Carnegie Learning’s flagship software, Cognitive Tutor, said the program had “no discernible effects” on the standardized test scores of high school students. A separate 2009 federal look at 10 major software products for teaching algebra as well as elementary and middle school math and reading found that nine of them, including Cognitive Tutor, “did not have statistically significant effects on test scores.” - GRADING THE DIGITAL SCHOOL
Inflating the Software Report Card
By TRIP GABRIEL and MATT RICHTEL 10/8/11