First, I cheer Gallagher on when he argues against NCLB, especially when he itemizes the disaster that was called the "Texas Miracle." I also cheer him on when he challenges us all to "hard talk." I don't mind hard questions that demand from ourselves authentic educational endeavors, even if it's harder work than what we've been doing.
Gallagher also irritates me, though. I'm a math teacher, and my goal for my statistics students was that they be able to read a newspaper with the inevitable statistical information they would find there. Gallagher's use of statistical charts is frustrating because those charts are unclear to the reader. Examples of these unclear charts are on pages 3, 15-16, and 21-22. I actually looked carefully at all three of these sections, and I'm still not sure I know what he is talking about. On page 3, does the chart tell me that 54% of nonliterary readers read literary texts? If so, then 4% of avid readers read in the same category of "literary text." What is a "literary text" anyway? Part of statistics is learning how to present your data in a readable way, and Gallagher did not do that here.
On pages 15 and 16, Gallagher replicates two charts with such fine print that most people will not be able to read the most important labels--those he refers to in the text. In the third paragraph that Gallagher calls "The Paige Paradox," he attempted to point out some of the most appalling results of the data in the charts. First, he mentioned the thirteen states that have African-American students reading three years below grade level in fourth grade. As best I can figure out, he counted the states that fall between 20 and 30 points on the left of the chart. What about the state that is more than 30 points (therefore more than three years) behind grade level? I'm pretty sure we'd want to count them, too, in the way he summarizes the chart. What I still don't understand is his statement about the eighth grade group and the 36 states with students two or more years behind. The chart doesn't even show all of the states, and it certainly doesn't show 36 states with students 2+ years behind. Another problem with his two statements of summary for the chart is that he has compared fourth graders with eighth graders and which states are exactly three years behind and which are two or more years behind. That's no way to write about data.
The last section that bothers me is about the stagnant reading scores for eighth graders on pages 21 and 22. In particular, the last chart bothers me most, but I think I can figure out what he means. Gallagher says that the gap between poor and nonpoor eighth grade students in 2002 is 23 points. As best I can figure, he hasn't actually given us data for the nonpoor group specifically. He's mixed a lot of data, so I tried to subtract the scores from the first two charts to get the differences shown in the second chart. But, the numbers don't work. I think there's data that says nonpoor 8th graders in 2002 scored 272 points, but we don't have it here. Similarly, there must be data about the nonpoor 8th graders in the other years, too.
My point is this: Gallagher wants me (among others) to be convinced that reading is being killed by government and by schools as well as others, but his own writing only serves to confuse me not convince me.
I don't like to read. There, I said it. I never have liked to read.
The idea of this reading class made me roll my eyes when I heard about it from a colleague years ago. But, the longer I taught, the more I became convinced that reading has a place in mathematics classes. The problem with word problems is not the math usually, but the words themselves. The problem with tests in general is not the problems, but the directions many times. I've spent the last four years working with students who struggle to succeed in math, and I've concluded that their inability to read that has made a large contribution to their struggles.
So, I'm convinced that reading is important in math, and I'm convinced that students don't know how to read in math. But, Gallagher's poor use of math did not help me get convinced at all. It only made me ask, "What about mathicide?" I'm okay if we only talk about the killing of arithmetic and data interpretation skills. What makes reading so important and math not important enough for its own course? Why do we have EDRD but not EDMH? For that matter, what about a course to help us foster those skills that make "expert citizens" called EDEC? Even if citizenship is not tested or valued by the government, math skills are.
Your blog makes me want to reread Chapter 1 based on your analysis. I agree with you about mathicide and wonder what that looks like -- and more importantly what can be done about it. Perhaps the future chapters of Readicide (Gallagher leaves statistics and goes to more familiar zone) will give you ideas for ways to address the impact of testing in teaching math. I look forward to your blogging!
ReplyDeleteI totally agree with your statement, "the problem with word problems is not the math, usually, but the words themselves." This is so true! I too teach mathematics and find my main challenges stem from reading difficulties. With the new math curriculum, students must not only be profficient in mathematics, but in reading as well. The problems now are wordier than ever and require critical thinking and critical reading. My students often stumble over the wording, the vocabulary, and even the directions. If they can't read the directions, it is difficult for them to accomplish the task. I still hold to the idea that reading to learn is different then learning to read. Many of my students can sound out the words on the page, but comprehension is next to none. And, lack of comprehension transfers to lack of ability to complete math problems. You are right - students need to learn how to read mathematics. But, more importantly, they need to learn to read anything critically - critical reading could help them in a variety of subjects.
ReplyDeleteRemeber, Galagher was an English teacher, so he thinks differently than a math teacher. I think he is trying to point out the differences in background knowledge that students bring to the classroom. If we know that many African-Amaerican and Latino students are behind on their reading scores, then we know that they will need additional information to be successful in the classroom. Reading is important in every subject area. When you can use the sports section of the paper to teach some math skill (I teach English so I can't give you an example) then students are learning how to read a text that is used everyday, especially after they graduate. Isn't that one goal we reach for, students who are successful in the "real world".
ReplyDeleteJennifer, I agree with you on Mr. Gallagher's inaptitude when it comes to his statistical analysis. I too took a second look over those charts on pages 15 and 16 when I was reading the first chapter. If anything the presentation of the graphs need work. Perhaps he could have used a different kind of chart that would have better illustrated the data. However, he is an English teacher and not a mathematician, so I will have to give him a little slack.
ReplyDeleteYour final point about reading the need for reading in math class is spot on. Especially when it pertains to these new standardized tests. On those exams students are typically given a number of word problems and asked to disseminate the data. If they can't read there is no way they will be able to pass their basic math exams.
-Jake Quilliams
I agree with your frustration that math skills are lost over the summer - as all content area principles taught so diligently over the school year. Reading is just easier to do independently than learning math concepts, and probably more appealing to a wider range of students whose mathematical education hasn't had the necessary scope or support, or foundational knowledge needed for mastery, which usually accompanies independent interest. Math like anything else is attractive to those who are good at it. Sorry to say most of us are not. Its a unique segment of the population who really loves mathematics, and its abstract and irrational concepts (math humor there lol)! I think practical, everyday math should be taught in summer programs - most of these young kids can't make change if their computerized cash registers go down- that's frustrating!
ReplyDelete