Redefining the word "effective"

Not too long ago, the Urban Systemic Initiative folks announced that they were going to evaluate a number of mathematics programs, in terms of how effective the programs were. They were then going to require all Philadelphia public schools to select one of their anointed "effective" programs.

This all sounded well and good, but we were troubled that the "effective" programs on the list all seemed to be "fuzzy math" programs, infamous elsewhere in the country for mediocre (or in some cases plummeting mathematics scores. (We're speaking of MathScape, IMP, Everyday Math, Math In Context, Connected Mathematics and MathLand.) We also were troubled that Saxon Math—one math program we knew firsthand to be truly effective in raising math achievement—was missing.

After doing a little digging, we discovered the source of the problem.

In their infinite wisdom they had redefined the word effective.

Their definition of an effective math program was one that:

1. Embraced varied learning styles
2. Integrated technology
3. Had alternative, open-ended assessments
4. Raised children's self esteem
5. Encouraged children to think positively about mathematics

Let's discuss each of these in turn.

1. When an educator speaks of learning styles that is supposed to mean that the teacher will do what is needed to reach every student. In practice that usually means playing to a student's strengths (while the weaknesses stay just that).

2. Integrating Technology in math class means calculators, the use of which is encouraged as early as Kindergarten.

3. Alternative assessments is another way of playing to a child's strengths, the end result is that there are inconsistent standards for the students in the same class. Open-ended assessments is another way of saying that there is no one right answer. (Remember, we're talking about math class!)

4. One should be highly skeptical when educators speak of raising children's self esteem. The fantasy is that self esteem can be taught, or manually raised. In reality the best thing to raise a child's self esteem is to be successful at work that is challenging! Which means hard work pays off. There's no getting around it. (Effusive praise or eliminating bad grades are transparent to even the youngest children.)

5. This was the only point to mention math, but it's in the affective domain: they wanted students to develop "math appreciation" (even if they didn't develop "math skills").

Not one of their attributes of an effective math program said anything about actually teaching or learning math.

Let's say we were to tell you that an "effective" pencil sharpener was one that was "hand-crafted by Maori tribespeople, using only natural materials harvested from sustainable forests, and decorated with culturally significant symbols using non-toxic paint."

You'd say, "That's nice, but how well does it sharpen pencils?"

People aren't interested in political correctness when their sharpener reduces their pencil to useless splinters and sawdust.

It shouldn't need to be said, but we're going to say it anyway, an effective mathematics teaching program is one that is effective in increasing student's mathematical skills and knowledge.

In a similar vein the Progressive educators who invented Whole Language and Balanced Literacy removed phonics, grammar, and spelling from the equation with their re-definition of "effective" literacy programs.

If you don't like where you're hitting, it is far easier to move your target.

Suffer the little children.