02 Aug 2005 - 16:41

'easy math' is harder

Another slide from the Department of Ed.



Unfortunately, they don't have the lecture notes up along with the slides, but I think this is self-explanatory. Assuming I'm reading the slide correctly, it tells us that for all but the lowest quarter of students, 'hard' math is easier than 'easy' math.

In other words, the top 75% of students get better grades in college prep math than they do in 'low-level' math.

This is one of those cool findings that inspires me to search for terrific, high-level material for Christopher.....but I'm afraid the reasons for this phenomena may be that the college prep kids have better teachers. The report includes numerous slides showing that the poorest teachers are assigned to the lowest level classes, and that the quality of teacher makes a huge difference in children's achievement. (I'll drop those slides in soon.)

Still, I wouldn't rule out the possibility that 'real' math is more learnable than stripped-down, pretend math.

update

This slide, and a number of others in the presentation, is based on a study of 3000 high schools done by the Southern Regional Education Board, Middle Grades to High School: Mending a Weak Link.

This research brief is based on an SREB study of nearly 3,100 students from 44 middle grades schools and 38 high schools. It shows that ninth-graders in higher-level courses have a lower failure rate than students with similar characteristics in lower-level courses. The report offers specific actions that schools can take to improve student achievement.

The finding that the same level of student will do better in college prep courses than in non-college prep courses wasn't limited to math. It was true across the board.

from the SREB report (pdf file):

Take 100 ninth-graders with similar characteristics and test scores in the eighth grade. Place 50 in higher-level ninth-grade courses. Place 50 in lower-level courses. What happens? If you said fewer students fail in the higher- level courses, you are correct. Please read on.

The Southern Regional Education Board conducted a follow-up study of nearly 3,100 students from 44 middle schools and 38 high schools and found:

Ninth-graders who are placed in higher-level courses have a lower failure rate than students with similar characteristics who are placed in lower-level courses.

This fact begs the question:

Why do we continue to place large numbers of students in lower-level courses where they have little or no chance of gaining the skills and knowledge they need to succeed?

Here is what we know …

Our studies suggest that students who are assigned to higher-level, more challenging work are more successful in high school.

We also know that about one in five students in SREB's network of middle grades schools fails at least one course in the ninth grade, and about 10 percent do not earn enough credits to stay on track for graduation with their classmates.

Clearly, raising the achievement of high school students requires three actions:

1. Students must be challenged to perform at high levels.
2. Students must be prepared before they enter ninth grade to meet these challenges.
3. Students must be given the extra help and extra time they need to succeed.

Key Findings

• Many students who expect to go to college are not taking the necessary courses in high school.

• Some schools enroll many more students in college-preparatory courses than others. The difference is not explained by differences in students or demographics.

• Enrollment in more demanding courses does not result in more failures. In fact, the evidence suggests that challenging content results in lower failure rates. It appears that many students in all kinds of schools can handle more challenging intellectual assignments than schools are willing to give them.

• Taking algebra or pre-algebra in the middle grades leads to enrollment in higher-level mathematics courses in high school and does not increase failure rates.

• Middle grades schools that successfully prepare students for college-preparatory courses in ninth grade provide extra help and link students with an adult mentor. Successful schools come in many sizes, and their students vary by ethnicity and socioeconomic status.

• Teachers matter enormously; middle grades students who have teachers as advisers are more likely to have educational goals and plans for high school.

• There are simple steps that middle grades and high schools can take to make sure almost all students will be successful in college-preparatory courses.

Now that I've had a chance to look at the report, I think we're seeing confirmation that people rise to expectations.

I notice, too, that this report does not find that differences in college-prep placement can be explained by 'differences in students or demographics.' I'm inclined to believe this, given my own experience here in Irvington. Last year we had, I believe, 40% of 6th graders enrolled in pre-algebra; next year this figure will be subtantially lower.

Reducing the number of students in accelerated math was a plainly stated objective of the middle school administration and math faculty.

We're talking about a super-affluent suburban district spending $18,000 per pupil.

Meanwhile 80% of 8th graders at the KIPP Academy, in the Bronx, pass Regents A. Compared to 40% of kids here.

I continue to find this utterly shocking.

Back to main page.

---

---

Comments

After entering a comment, users can login anonymously as KtmGuest (password: guest) when prompted.
Please consider registering as a regular user.
Look here for syntax help.

---

This is strange -- how do you suppose this squares up with the 'middle-school slump' that we see in all the math test statistics?

-- CarolynJohnston - 02 Aug 2005

---

I think we do need the course notes -- this chart is confusing. It seems to say that kids enrolled in college prep courses do better in their courses than kids enrolled in remedial courses do in theirs, which is no surprise at all; kids enrolled in college prep courses have been filtered out for math ability and good attitude.

-- CarolynJohnston - 02 Aug 2005

---

You have to look at the top 3 groups.

They're contrasting college prep with 'low-level' math, which isn't just remedial math.

Remember the old distinction between 'algebra' and 'business math'?

Business math wasn't remedial; it was just low-level.

What they're saying is, I believe (and here I would need the notes), that when you sort kids by their 8th grade scores....some of them with the same scores will be put in college prep classes & some of them won't. (I also just found a presentation by Ray Ohrbach, whom we knew a little at UCLA, about which kinds of classes Hispanics get tracked into.....you can probably guess the resuts.)

So, take a high-scoring 8th grader and put him in college-prep math, and take another 8th grader with the exact same scores & put him in non-college-prep math and the student in college-prep will get a better grade.

-- CatherineJohnson - 02 Aug 2005

---

I just found the report; they're looking at equivalent kids in college prep versus non-college prep.

-- CatherineJohnson - 02 Aug 2005

---

Can we really expect to find comparable kids in college prep versus non-college prep? That's a lot of variables to normalize out.

-- CarolynJohnston - 02 Aug 2005

---

Can we really expect to find comparable kids in college prep versus non-college prep? That's a lot of variables to normalize out.

Not when you consider the HUGE difference in quality between schools.

When you see a tightly-run ship, the difference is vast.

Look at the KIPP ACADEMY compared to any other urban school.

It's obvious to me that my own town could have many, many more kids taking 'accelerated' math than we do.

So, sure.

Irvington has kids in 'average math' who, in the Bronx, are accelerated.

-- CatherineJohnson - 02 Aug 2005