Author Archives: Dennis Regus

Unknown's avatar

About Dennis Regus

I am a 22 year veteran of education. I had the joy of teaching middle school mathematics for 10 years and now I have found a love for elementary math. In my current role with Riverside County Office of Education I have the distinct privilege of work with teachers and administrators throughout the county and state on professional development for mathematics. I am truly fascinated by the way children acquire mathematical ideas and I want to continue to learn and grow with my colleagues.

Can we just let this practice go?

Leave a reply

Yes, we CAN just let homework go!

As a classroom teacher the routine of assigning, grading, and chasing down of homework was the bane of my existence. For many years it was the reason I was grumpy on Sunday evening. Grading it, giving feedback, and recognizing who hadn’t completed it put me in a bad mood. This coupled with the constant effort to find ways to engage students with homework was miserable. When I thought more about it and watched student behavior while returning work, I realized they didn’t value the feedback the way that I wanted them too and they only saw homework as a compliance behavior. It was something they had to do with little purpose or connection to learning.

It was blissful when I gave up grading homework and just changed it to optional extra practice that would enable them to be more successful on other assignments that were graded. Guess what…the same number of kids did the work.

There has been some analysis of educational research by John Hattie and his Visible Learning work that shows homework has virtually no impact on student achievement in grades TK-8 and little impact in high school. Peter Liljedahl in Building Thinking Classrooms shares that through student interviews we now understand that student view homework very differently than we do. They see it as compliance and we see it as an opportunity to continue their learning. Traditional homework practices do not achieve what we hope.

I guess there is an argument that could be made around work ethic. Homework could help to build work ethic, perseverance, and grit in students. To this I would say there are plenty of other aspects of life that do this far more effectively.

I think if we are honest with ourselves as educators we should acknowledge that copying is rampant and the students who need the practice the least are the ones doing the work.

Finally, let’s think about reality. Kids are insanely overscheduled. They have wonderful activities outside of school or after school programs they participate in and learn through. They don’t need more work to do. Also, educators can focus more on designing engaging lessons or reading current educational texts rather than grading if you get rid of this practice.

Give this practice up. Homework can die. Let it die. Mourn it. Through a party. Do whatever you need to in order to feel better about it. Just let it go as a compliance task.

If you need to, do what I did, post problems that students can do for more practice if they choose to and remind students that the extra practice will improve how they do on graded assignments.

Stop grading it for compliance and gain back valuable time while creating better relationships with parents and students.

My Favorite Place to go in my City!

Leave a reply

My favorite place to go are these hills on the northeast side of my city. The hills have a lot of trails and you can easily get up high enough to see our whole rural city. I love sunsets and sunrises from up here and I also love the mathematical conversations about nature, distance, relative size, and population that I have with my wife and son.

Can we be more deliberate in providing access to the SMPs?

Leave a reply

Yes we can! We can plan our lessons starting with the Standards for Math Practice and focus on student sense-making.

I have been pondering this idea for a long time as I am sure many math teachers do from time to time. How can we focus on the SMPs as drivers of our instruction? How do we incorporate them in meaningful ways?

The reality is that the SMPs are rarely the focus of math instruction, they are embedded in textbooks in superficial ways, and they are difficult to quantitatively assess. The SMPS are listed below and there are great grade level explanations of each SMP in the current CA Math Framework (2013).

I argue that in order to create a more creative and critically thinking society we have a responsibility to focus on the SMPs in our math lessons. Remember, these are the habits of mind that we want to impart on all students. Focusing primarily on the computational/procedural side of mathematics with NOT get us to the reasoning, communicating, and curiosity our students need to solve current and future global problems.

So how could we do this:

  1. Start with identifying a focal SMP for a lesson or series of lessons
  2. Anticipate student successes and struggles
  3. Script possible facilitating questions that align with the SMP prior the lesson
  4. Jump in, reflect, and refine future lessons

Here is an example from 3rd or 6th grade multiplication:
I often think of area models as an example. If you consider lessons around introducing 3rd graders to multiplication through area models you could focus on SMP 4 – Model with mathematics or SMP 3 – Constructing viable arguments.

Depending on which of these SMPs you are focusing on will change the questions and structure of the same lesson.

  • If you focus on SMP 4 – Model with mathematics … then sequencing student work so that students see both horizontal and vertical models or using a routine such as Connecting Representations
  • If you focus on SMP 3 – Constructing Viable Arguments … then the mathematics could easily be embedded in a contextual problem. The 3-Reads or Decide and Defend routines could be utilized and students are given time to solve using their own method. Following that the teacher would ask student to justify their and their classmates’ reasoning.

As an alternative and a parallel to these ideas I also offer this reminder from Dan Meyer’s TED Talk from 2010.

Shifting instruction at all grade levels towards facilitation and away from lecture is essential in preparing our students for their limitless future. There are many ways to achieve this and I offer this post as a way to reach this end.

Do we really need 4-6 weeks of review at the beginning of the year?

1 Reply

The short answer is NO!!! Kids know way more math than we give them credit for as we catastrophize about learning loss, the summer dip, and the few kids that hesitate trying to remember something they were once taught.

Throughout my career I have witnessed and helped create those 4-6 week units on basic facts in middle school for the beginning of the year. These seem like a wise path to take but there is a better way. Before we get to these and other questions, I think it is important to recognize two things. First, these 4-6 units have a negative affect on many of our students math identity and their perception of what math is. If you want to or are teaching these types of units that are below grade level, you also must acknowledge the impact your decision is having on many of your students. Second, these units are not solving the problem of student procedural and conceptual understanding of math and our standardized test scores are not improving (if you are worried about that measure).

Additionally, we should acknowledge that these review units give us, as teachers, the warm fuzzies. They potentially make us feel like we are setting kids up for success, and filling in gaps. In a worse case scenario they unconsciously allow us to feel as if “WE” have taught it. Thus implying that if the kids don’t get it then it is now on them.

The bottom line is we are making huge assumptions about what our students do and do not know. Also, just because the students you have in front of you did poorly on SBAC last year doesn’t mean they don’t know these basic skills. Many just need to be reminded. They need a quick refresher, NOT 4 weeks of reteaching.

So here is what to do instead:

  1. Start your year with low floor, high ceiling tasks such as those you can find on Youcubed.org under Week of Inspirational Math. This will help build positive math identity in students, positive classroom culture and help you get to know the strengths and areas of growth among your students.
  2. Spend a few days reminding students of a few truly important procedural skills they will need and then give them a quick check for understanding on those skills. This will give you a more accurate understanding of what your students need.
  3. Start with grade level content.
  4. Use just in time mini lessons to shore up misconceptions on grade level ideas and prior grade level skills.

These units need to go by the wayside. We need to recognize that 4-6 weeks spent on skills that can be done by Alexa and other computers more accurately and efficiently, is a waste of our time. It is contributing to our time issues, our students disengagement, and many other problems.

I truly believe that we cannot change each other’s minds. We can only dislodge current thinking through conversation and curiosity. I hope this has helped to dislodge or disrupt your current thinking on this topic.

@mathhiker76

Math Facts (+, – , x, /) – How do we achieve automaticity? Or is the Question – Do we need to?

Leave a reply

The short answer is through varied practice over several years and to recognize that this is a multi-faceted issue. We have to begin to acknowledge that this issue likely has more to do with student dispositions towards math, which our system perpetuates and creates, than with the students themselves.

The longer answer begs us to have a lengthy discussion about whether or not the need for this learning is outdated. In December I had the great opportunity to work with several groups of teachers and like many other 4th-8th grade teachers they were asking how they can help student learn their math facts.

I do believe in our current system that knowing basic math facts to automaticity makes learning other mathematics easier. Knowing facts means they know from memory or have efficient (for them) strategies to derive the facts they don’t know from memory.

That being said, NOT knowing these facts should never mean a student is denied access to grade level content. Give them a calculator.

I also recognize that much of what our students need math facts for in grades 4-12 are calculations that can be done more effectively with a calculator, computer, google, Wolfram Alpha, and/or PhotoMath, etc. I am often reminded of something Jo Boaler says, “We have to start teaching math as if computers exist.” Said another way by Conrad Wolfram, “Stop teaching calculations, and start teaching maths.”

With all of that comes the need to address our teachers concerns in the here and now. While working with teachers recently we discussed several issues that cause our conception of students lack of facts. There are many things to consider…

First, students know more facts than they realize and often they can’t remember because of other cognitive processes and short term memory that is being used for other things such as dealing with trauma and mindsets around mathematics.

For example, think of a time when you used to know a great deal about something that you no longer remember as well. For example, there was a point in my career when I sold real estate on the side of teaching. Mostly, short sales after the 2007-08 crash, trying to help people navigate the banks. I knew a lot about that process and I remember almost none of it now because I haven’t used the information for so long that my brain naturally made those pathways less defined. We all have learning like this. We have all forgotten things we used to know.

We have to recognize that students likely have the same challenge with math facts. If they haven’t ever created strong pathways or if there are pathways they haven’t used in awhile then this could seem like a lack of knowledge when really they just need a bit of a refresher in a safe, nurturing environment.

Although this is not an exhaustive list of the multiple facets of this conversation, there is one last thing to consider. Practice with facts should occur at multiple grade levels. 6th-8th grade teachers, stop being frustrated and simply provide opportunities to practice as a refresher of skills. This practice should never be timed or any version of forced competition. It should also be varied. Give students choice!

If you truly want to build automaticity, fluency, and flexibility simultaneously in students around math facts, you should look to Number Strings. There are great resources out there for number strings including Context for Learning Units by Cathy Fosnot and New Perspectives on Learning, Pam Harris @ MathisFigureoutable.com, and Teacher Education by Design.

There are great ways to give students practice with these skills (that aren’t BASIC for many students). Use fluency games (www.mathforlove.com), math running records that help students see which facts they know and which they need to learn, online games (many are free), and playing card or dice games that provide variety and engagement. Again, let students CHOOSE how they practice.

Many districts make the erroneous decision to purchase programs TK-5 or TK-8 such as Reflex Math, Dreambox, or iReady and then require ALL students to commit 30-45 minutes a week of class time to these programs because that is what the programs data shows will work. Here is the kicker, if a kid doesn’t like the program at that moment then you are wasting your time. You will never automatize something through forced practice. If you have students that don’t like it, let them practice another way. Have options for them.

This simple idea is the essence of UDL and creating nurturing environments in which students voice is considered in their learning.

There is still a larger conversation to be had about the outdated nature of standards that require this learning. This conversation should include the need to truly move towards mathematical understanding of how operations behave rather than the eventual algorithms that are the unfortunate end result of a great progression of standards in TK-6.

Can we finding math in our environment? Part 1

Leave a reply

Yes! It is everywhere.

When I am not working in the field of math education, I am spending time with my wife and son. One of our favorite things to do is to explore while hiking and camping.

This past November we traveled with friends through northern Nevada and Arizona and were fortunate enough to see Valley of Fire State Park in Nevada, The Vermillion Cliffs National Monument, and Wupatki National Monument. These areas were a reminder of the wonderful power of nature, the resilience of humans, and that we live on the stolen lands of the First People that came before us.

Here you can see amazing pictographs from the Valley of Fire State Park and the evidence of the rich culture of the First Peoples of this region. Sadly, you can also see the damage done by visitors of this site.

Pictographs in Valley of Fire State Park, NV

You might be wondering where the mathematics is in this. I would argue that is because our mathematics culture in the United States erroneously equates only calculations with mathematics. We have to shift that narrative.

Mathematics is embedded in all that we do. It is the unspoken language that helps us makes sense of our world and cultures that came long before us have made amazing mathematical achievements that I am still striving to learn more about. We make sense of our world through scaled/proportional drawings such as those in these pictures. We mathematize our world when we think of group size and how that relates to our own health, welfare, and comfort. You could consider this looking at this picture of Big Horn Sheep below that wandered through our campground. In a different time one of these could have provided food for a community. Consider how much food, for how many people, and for how long.

Big Horn Sheep in Valley of Fire State Park, NV

We can mathematize a beautiful scene such as the bridge with a backdrop of the Colorado River just west of the Navajo Territory in Eastern Arizona that you can see below.

Historic Navajo Bridge, Marble Canyon, AZ

Finally we can consider area of a living space, location, storage of food stuffs, and conditions that may have contributed to life span when we explore the ruins seen below from Wupatki National Monument or the Pueblo Bench Archeological site in The Vermillion Cliffs National Monument.

900 year old ancestral Puebloan site, Wupatki National Monument, AZ

Mathematics is all around us. It is in our histories, our communities, our stories, and our interactions with these things. Look for it, help others see it, and our world becomes a better place.

I hope you all have a joyous end to 2022 and I will write more in the new year!

Are we cultivating Safety or Control?

Leave a reply

The short answer is that many of our classroom expectations are truly to maintain control rather than promote curiosity, freedom, and healthy child development.

With the start of the school year upon us or shortly behind or ahead of us, I have been reading tweets and posts and blogs about classrooms expectations, rules, and procedures. Recently I read a post by @CarlaShalaby regarding 8 questions we should ask ourselves when we are creating our rules and polices. She makes a great point that “how we manage a space can be a chance to practice freedom instead of modeling control”.

The 8 questions come from various sources including Lessons in Liberation: An Abolitionist Toolkit for Educators (AK Press, 2021).

Questions to consider:

  1. Are my actions grounded in cultivating safety or control?
  2. Am I defining safety in a way that requires control or freedom?
    • Freedom means that we keep us safe, we protect everyone’s bodies and feelings.
  3. Does enforcing the rules require me to behave like a police officer or an educator?
  4. If a student asks “why?” will your reason for having the policy stand up to the uniquely smart and relentless scrutiny of 30+ young people collectively seeking freedom?
  5. Does this rule exist only because I have a personal pet peeve?
  6. Am I serving kids by having a comprehensive set of rules that eliminates all potential conflict, harm, and drama?
  7. Do I want to model how to use power to manage people in a space, or how to use it to hold and make space for everyone?
  8. Why do I teach?

This artwork by Molly Costello is a great visual for the ideas represented in these questions.

These questions also align with a few questions recently proposed on the same topic by Dr. Kristopher Childs, Chief Academic, Social Justice, and Equity officer at Open Up Resources. He argues we should consider:

  1. Have I created an environment where all students can achieve success?
  2. Do all students have windows, mirrors, and doors to see themselves, learn, and experience other cultures?
  3. Do I truly believe that all students can be successful?
  4. What pieces of themselves are students forced to leave at the door when they enter my classroom?

These ideas remind me of some of the common practices we see in our schools such as clip charts in elementary grades, rewards in a PBIS model, and the variety of expectations from classroom to classroom on middle and high school campuses. If we want to truly create environments that are safe and welcoming spaces for our students then we have to take a serious reflective look at the normal practices we believe to be necessary in school.

To be clear:

  • Clip charts are a form of bullying. No adult would allow an employer to use these in a group setting. Stop doing it to children.
  • Rewards in most situations only work when people want the reward and when their are observers present to see the desired behavior. Rewards kill intrinsic motivation.
  • Students in middle and high school settings typically have 6-8 sets of rules and expectations about pencil sharpening, bathrooms breaks, water, etc. This creates mental chaos as they move from one space to another. Work to create common expectations and free up mental space for students to learn.

Thank you to @CarlaShalaby for inspiring this writing and to @DrKChilds for his thought provoking questions. I love number 4.

What do you have to leave at the door when you enter a space? Work? Home? With friends? With family?

Is there a place for competition in TK-5 classrooms?

1 Reply

The short answer is ONLY if students choose to compete. This should always be 100% their choice.

Collaboration promotes more learning than competition. This is true for students and adults. The reality is that there are many instances of competition that are implied throughout our classrooms systems in TK-5 education and beyond. For my purposes today we will focus on our youngest learners in grades TK-5. We have to remember that while many of our students like school for a variety of reasons they are still required to be there. If we require them to compete with one another overtly or otherwise we run the significant risk of diminishing their agency, the belief in themselves as mathematicians, and their love for learning. I don’t believe there is a single teacher whose goal it is to do this. We all want our students to thrive in our classrooms.

If we truly want our students to thrive we have to regularly reflect on how our chosen practices effect our students. We should pay particular attention to how our practices effect the least vocal, marginalized, and average students. Often times we hold up certain practices because we focus on the excitement of a few kids while not recognizing the reticence of many in the classroom. Continuous reflection and curiosity is essential as an educator.

A great example of this are the charts we see in many elementary classrooms that track progress for such things as math facts acquisition, number of books read, or other whole class record keeping that is public. These charts are a form of passive competition and the students are not getting to choose whether or not they compete. Imagine how the 5 students with the least stars/stickers on the chart feel looking at this public display of their performance. Does it inspire them to work harder or does it seem like a reinforcement of their public or self-perceived lack of ability? I would argue it is the latter. These charts should never be public. Take them down. They are not having the effect for our most struggling students that you would hope.

Timed math fact tests are another example. The general consensus among math educators is that these tests that hopefully WERE so prevalent in our classrooms a decade or more ago are bad for student motivation, create math anxiety, and do not provide us the insight into student learning that we think they do. But is there possibly a place for these tests. I might argue yes. If students are only competing against their own best times, if it is never whole class or required, and if students get to choose when and if they compete. This could be a “may do” for some students who express a desire. There are some students that enjoy pushing themselves in this way but they should be the one choosing to participate. The key is to be flexible within your classroom, be curious about your students and what they like and don’t like, and offer them choice.

Remember as adults we get choose if we compete, with the exception of public displays of state test data. Do any of us like it when this happens? As an example, we aren’t all required to play on an adult league sports team regardless of interest or ability. That would be insane. Competition is fun when we participate because we choose to compete. Let students choose! Reflect on your practices this summer and how you can utilize competition in your classroom for those who want to compete and eliminate it for those that don’t. It should be 100% student choice on a day to day basis.

Have a great summer! Keep being curious and keep learning!

Why is it all about curiosity?

Leave a reply

Here is my quick answer … To quote authors Shane Safir and Jamila Dugan, “We should be trying to maintain a stance of wonder”.1 Curiosity (or wonder) is the basis of all learning. If we are truly curious then we would not make assumptions about or judge others, we would ask questions and first seek to understand ourselves, our students, their families, and our systems.

Several years ago the district I worked for had all of its managers go through several days of training around determining our district “why” using the work of Simon Sinek.  One of the core ideas I learned from this work was that to truly have a “why” that drives you, it has to be grounded in both your personal and professional life.  After thinking and refinement I realized that my WHY was a belief in a world that valued curiosity and discourse.

I truly believe that all teachers want their students to enjoy learning, be curious about the world, and be lifelong learners. If we want students to enjoy learning it starts with curiosity. Curiosity is cultivated when students are answering questions they have asked. This isn’t as hard as it might sound. Take a look at that next problem you want to solve with students, remove the question, and ask kids what they notice and wonder. Ask them to come up with mathematical questions about the situation. They will likely ask the question that you want answered but they will have the best reason to be interested in the answer – they’re asking the question. This isn’t perfect yet it allows the problem/situation to be driven by student curiosity. 

As practitioners we also must realize that curiosity is not cultivated in isolation.  Math is a community endeavor and should be done in partnership with other students.  Collaboration is the only road that leads to deep thinking and learning.

So let’s ask ourselves … How often do we ask our students to be curious in math class TK-12?  Are there opportunities for curiosity in your lessons? Do you value curiosity in your students as a means of learning? How do your homework assignments value curiosity?  Are you curious about what mathematical knowledge your students bring to class?  Are you curious about what mathematical understanding you could more deeply develop in yourself? These and many other questions like them can help frame the shifts we make in our classrooms. 

Teachers can make a few simple shifts to transform their classrooms into curiosity generating environments.  Teachers and administrators can begin by shifting how we view ourselves.  We can shift from viewing ourselves as teachers to teacher-learners who are curious in their own right about the process of facilitating learning.2 In elementary school we can also be curious about how we are teaching mathematics.  Is our daily instruction focused on acquiring skills or models, following a textbook, and/or direct instruction?  Or are we helping students to be curious about how the operations of addition, subtraction, multiplication, and division behave.  “Children spend much of their time in mathematics solving individual problems.  But the core of the discipline of mathematics is looking across multiple examples to find patterns, notice underlying structure, form conjectures…”.3 Curiosity is at the heart of concept and our discipline. We need to start taking more advantage of curiosity and reimagine the way we teach mathematics. 

We often design lessons or follow textbooks or pacing guides that do not promote curiosity or take into account what mathematical knowledge our students already bring to the classroom. As the founders of Make Math Moments explain, if you want to generate curiosity-rich math lessons, then you should embed these 4 key elements: 1) Withhold information; 2) Build anticipation; 3) Notice & Wonder; 4) Estimate (Make Math Moments 3-Part Framework)

As a final thought, when we shift to a stance of curiosity we put student sense-making at the forefront of our planning and instruction.  As an example, when we make this shift, the algorithm becomes a representation versus the finish line.

I have an elementary age student that helps remind me of my “why” every day.  I believe in a world that values curiosity and discourse.  I want nothing more than for him to maintain his curiosity about the world. If he does then learning will always be his compass.

References

  1. Safir, S., Dugan, J. (2021). Street Data: A Next-Generation Model for Equity, Pedagogy, and School Transformation. Sage Publications Inc. 2021
  2. Ostroff, W. Cultivating Curiosity in K-12 Classrooms: How to Promote and Sustain Deep Learning. ASCD, Alexandria, VA. 2016.
  3. Russell, Susan Jo, et al. Connecting Arithmetic to Algebra: Strategies for Building Algebraic Thinking in the Elementary Grades. Heinemann, 2011.

Why do people hate math?

Leave a reply

Here is my quick answer…many people are afraid of math because they grow up being unsuccessful and hating “school” math and the education system as a whole isn’t concerned with whether or not students enjoy learning.

A few weeks ago a colleague asked “why are people afraid of math?”. It was a good question and it was asked sincerely.  People in our society regularly say they are “not a math person” or freely admit “I was never good at math” or, my favorite, “you taught middle school math, bless you.” Others are regularly impressed with people who are good at math.  As if we are somehow smarter than other people because we teach and/or understand math (or at least we seem to). The question has plagued me for several weeks, and it is the reason why I finally decided to write some of my thoughts down to share.

For a moment I’d like to share that I do not believe myself more qualified than any other math education professional to write about the teaching and learning of mathematics.  In fact, many of the ideas that I share are those of others which I will give credit where credit is due.  I truly stand on the shoulders of those around me and those who came before.  That being said, perhaps the way the ideas are shared might be exactly what and how you need to hear them.

As for the question at hand: Why are people afraid of math?  Truly I don’t believe people are afraid of math. A fear of math is just the manifestation of our fear of failure.  No one wants to seem inadequate or feel like a failure at anything.  In fact we naturally avoid things we regularly fail at. I can’t think of a person that would willingly continue to try something they have been made to feel a failure at for years.  When we reduce mathematics to sets of skills and procedures through instructional methods like “I do, we do, you do” and strict sequential following of a textbook (just to name a couple), we convey to students the ideas that if you aren’t good at the procedures and don’t “master” the skills then you must not be good at math.

If we accept this as a possible premise, then the real question is why do people feel a failure in their relationship with math.  While there are many possible reasons, my thoughts continue to return to the role that our educational system plays in our society’s dislike for mathematics.  We must acknowledge that most of the mathematics we stress in elementary and middle school is a by-product of an age prior to the ubiquitous availability of computers.  And yes that thing we call a phone in our pocket, that is a computer.

The key idea here is that young students bring an exceptional intuitive knowledge of mathematics to elementary school.  Simply reference the research and success of Cognitively Guided Instruction in grades TK-5. Our pacing guides, textbooks, and the breaking down of knowledge into unconnected procedural steps leads children to believe that math is nothing more than memorizing these unconnected procedural skills.  When children fall behind the pace set by districts, schools, and textbooks they inevitably begin to construct a negative relationship with mathematics. Combine all of this with grading practices that do little to convey what children truly know, ability grouping in elementary, tracking in middle and high school, a focus on speed and memorization, and intensive intervention and all you get is a large group of children that feel like failures at mathematics. These practices and programs play a major role in producing the fear and disdain that so many people have for mathematics.

The truth is that we need a drastic change in the way that we teach mathematics and many other subjects.  To quote one of my favorite mathematicians, Dan Finkel, “we can’t afford to misuse mathematics to create passive rule followers.”  We live in an age of technology that provides unprecedented access to information.  We have to begin to teach as if these tools exist.  We must stop ignoring these tools, stop being frustrated by students who use them to work around our assignments.  We have to truly change our instruction to provide more authentic learning for students. 

How do we do this?  It begins by recognizing that our personal understanding of mathematics needs to be deeper than it currently might be.  We can also move toward more humanizing practices by standing up and saying, “I have more to learn about the openness of mathematics.”  Most importantly we can begin to shift our instruction by deeply believing that a textbook is not the solution, it is a resource at best. If we truly believe this we must then ask, what should I be using/doing. And thus begins your journey of learning and exploration. What a wonderful journey it will be!

We have to focus on teaching students to see relationships and connections in mathematics.  This cannot be done through direct instruction alone.  We have to recognize that when we provide answers to basic questions or solution pathways prior to student exploration, we rob students of true learning. Essentially we need to redefine what we want from math education.  Algorithms, procedures, skills, and improved standardized test results cannot be the sum of our ambition. 

I will write more on this topic in future posts with specific teacher recommendations.  For now I challenge districts, sites, and teachers to want more for our elementary age students than simply doing well on SBAC tests, covering required content, and automaticity of basic facts. These goals will not lead to increased numbers of students seeking STEM fields and it will not rehumanize mathematics for our students of color. 

And middle school teachers, your students knowing their basic facts will not fix the issues in your math classroom and will not make it significantly easier for students to learn your grade level content.  I used to believe it would but I was wrong. If you do believe this to be true, give them a calculator, and see if that solves the problem because it should but it won’t.

To be clear, I completely recognize the benefit of students gaining automaticity with facts. It can make future math easier to understand but this should not be done by sacrificing understanding of the operations.  Students should understand how the operations behave and how to derive facts they have trouble automatizing. Timed tests and rote practice are not achieving the goal we hoped and they are anxiety producers for students.  The fear and anxiety that these practices  foster in students is not a trade off that is worth making for any reason.  

Curiosity should be cultivated first and centered always!