Math Investigations debated at Prince William School Board meeting
More than 50 people spoke about Math Investigations during a School Board meeting that lasted into the early morning hours Thursday—and they came down on both sides of the issue.
Some said the controversial elementary school math curriculum, which emphasizes conceptual understanding of math over memorization and traditional algorithms, is working and should not be changed.
Others said it's not working and parents should have the option to have their children taught using traditional math.
Supporters and opponents of the math curriculum, put into elementary school classrooms throughout the county in 2006, came out to Wednesday's meeting because of an item on the board's agenda to discuss offering parents the option to place their children in a traditional math classroom.
Chairman Milton Johns said he placed the item on the agenda at the request of several board members.
Johns asked the board to discuss allowing parents to opt their children into a traditional math instruction, beginning in September.
He suggested that parents would have to notify their school's principal in writing to opt their children into traditional math and there would have to be a minimum of 25 interested children at a given school for a traditional math class to be taught there. If there weren't enough children for a traditional math class at a school, parents could be given the option to transfer their students to another school, Johns suggested.
He also asked the board to discuss having the county's two traditional schools, Porter and Pennington, teach only traditional math, and whether the school division should expand the program, currently in place in kindergarten through fourth grade, to fifth grade.
Board members were split on those suggestions, as were the parents and teachers who spoke during citizens' comment time.
The School Board meeting adjourned shortly before 1 a.m., with no conclusion reached.
A better understanding
Speaking in citizens' comment time, James Amaral, a math and science enrichment teacher at Bennett Ele-mentary School, said Math Investigations gives students a greater understanding of math concepts.
"For most students, learning the traditional algorithm just gives them a magic process similar to punching buttons on a calculator and coming up with the answer," Amaral said. "As long as they follow the steps in process and the traditional algorithm they will come up with the right answer, but it doesn't develop the understanding and why that works."
Teachers from Porter Traditional School, who held signs that said "Mary G. Porter Traditional School + Math Investigations Success" and "Trust us," said they did not want to be forced to teach only tradi-tional math at their school.
Elementary school teachers have been instructed to use a "blended approach" to math in their class-rooms, using both Math Investigations and traditional methods, school officials said. But some parents said they're not seeing that in their children's classrooms.
Hoping for choice
Most parents who spoke against the curriculum said it may work for some kids, but it's not working for theirs.
"We're hopeful the board will consider offering parents a choice," said Greg Barlow, a parent who has frequently spoken out against the program, before the meeting.
Parents opposed to Math Investigations started an online petition to have it removed from the school divi-sion's curriculum. As of Thursday, there were 1,509 signatures on the petition.
Some School Board members said they are open to the idea of offering parents a choice in the elementary math curriculum.
"Our school division is well known for providing choices," said Michael Otaigbe (Coles), citing high school specialty programs as an example. "We have always provided choice for parents."
2 options may = problem
Others were against the change, citing their faith in the Math Investigations program and the logistical problems that could arise from having two separate math curriculums at the elementary school level.
"We're just now reaching the point where we're going to see the blessings that come from what we've been doing over the past couple of years," said Grant Lattin (Occoquan).
Board member Julie Lucas (Neabsco) suggested holding a work session so board members could further discuss the opt-in option for traditional math.
Some board members said they were in favor of having a work session, but others were against it, saying they've already talked about Math Investigations too much.
Heated discussio
The discussion was heated at times, as School Board members, parents, teachers and principals spoke passionately both for and against Math Investigations.
At one point, after midnight, a heated exchange broke out between Lattin and Barlow, causing some other parents in the crowd to storm out of the room.
Board members said they were glad that parents came to the meeting to speak.
"I want the parents and the community to know that we want to hear from them," Lucas said.
Staff writer Amanda Stewart can be reached at 703-878-8014.
Advertisement
Reader Reactions
Agreed but the blended approach pushed by the math department is not sufficient.
I want a traditional core so they learn to be efficient at math and so they know their times tables and standard algorithms early enough. Group learning is fun as an occasional diversion but not as the primary method of learning math.
I want teachers to be free of intimidation to teach what works best; right now, that’s not how the system is operating.
I was not at the meeting, but the discussion has come up as we have children on both sides of the investigations learning. I believe that where this failed is an either/or approach. It appears from the comments section, that, once we get past all of the finger pointing, most agree that we need to use a blended approach to our childrens learning. I hope that this will be the approach that is taken. I do not want my child to lose out on a different form of learning just because we have chosen the traditional school. This will only cause the same issue as children who move in or out of the area. The approach has to be what is best for the children, not what parents and administrators “believe” is best. Let’s move past He said/She said and the polical/media hype and look at all of the possibilities.
While the meeting was a bit heated, I actually found the discussion to be very informative. I was pleased to hear the feedback from so many teachers and parents.
I found it interesting that so many parents were opposed to Investigations (I believe 20 spoke) while only 5 parents spoke in favor of the program. That speaks volumes to me.
One item which seems to have been lost in the heat of the moment is that supporters of the opt in option don’t want to take anything away from anyone. They simply believe that the current program lacks the academic rigor they believe their children need to excel at mathematics and would like the county to offer their children that opportunity.
I am concerned that the school board will attempt to micro-manage the opt in program and would advise against straight jacketing it. Our schools have great teachers and administrators who do so much with so little.
Were it left up to me, I’d ask the board to consider simply voting a statement of intent to provide an alternate instructional track, with logistical and program details like class size, method of delivery, assessment, and notification, to be reported to the school board at a later date. That way the school system would be authorized to survey parents to determine how many might be interested in such a program from each school and each individual school would be empowered to develop implementation plans for their student populations.
Lattin was completely out of line. Lattin needs to learn to show respect to others. He was the one who made the offensive comment about Greg Barlow telling others what to say. Lattin needs to show proper decorum like the citizens do. Personally, I don’t care if he is tired of hearing about Math Investigations. If it is a concern to parents in this community then he needs to listen and do something about it. Afterall, that is his job!
I think Richardson is the one who needs to act like an adult. Parents have every right to get up and walk out of a meeting if someone personally attacks them. Richardson needs to cool it and act professional as an elected official.
Lattin and Richardson behaved like children. They are an embarrassment to our community. No wonder it is difficutlt for parents to stand before the board. I certainly hope that citizens in their district are paying attention and vote them OUT on the next election cycle. Better yet, start the impeachment process!
I think the answer may just be in the article. It is great that the parents, teachers and board are looking for new ways to enrich the students. The problem revolves around the fact that the Investigations is supported in limited areas. In a transient area such as Northern Virginia, there can’t ba an “all or nothing” approach to our childrens learning. Growing up, counting on fingers was just not acceptable, now it is a viable means for coming to a solution…but only in Prince William County. try sitting in a college class and count on your fingers. The program will only work if we use the two programs together. Our Children will, as they are in many other curriculums be the brightest in the country. Let’s find a way to integrate both into every classroom. Our teachers know how to teach both, so there must be a way to make this work for all.
I was extremely offended at the accusation by Mr Lattin that Mr Barlow tells us what to say. I do my own thinking and advocate for my own children. The only reason the citizen responded from the back is that the same rules of decorum apply to board members and Mr Lattin should have been shut down.
Mr Lattin was not “attacked”; responses were made to what he said at the last board meeting. His rant about “running his campaign” was completely unfair.
Now let’s get back to the issue of relegating this damaging math program to the supplementary role in lower grades where it belongs.
I applaud Mr. Lattin for speaking out and addressing bully behavior. Interesting he had been personally attacked. You approve of that?
That jerk he responded to should be the one apologizing. He was making comments from the back of the room. Real mature.
Mr. Latin was completely OUT OF LINE during School Board member comment time! A personal attack on Mr. Barlow and the rest of the parents who don’t support math investigations; OUT OF LINE and UNCALLED for. If any citizen made comments like that during citizen time, you would have stopped them right then and there. I’m asking you and the other members of the board to request a public apology from Mr. Latin to ALL of the parents at the next school board meeting.
Advertisement