I agree that the "Reading Wars" and "Math Wars" are different. I suspect the Gates Foundation is focusing on math because comparing literacy rates with numeracy rates in America, the levels of proficiency in math are in far worse shape than reading and writing for all demographic groups. It tends to be easier to measure numeracy because you get one correct answer when solving math problems. Math is a "language" you learn in sequence, and memorization of math facts to a level of automaticity is mandatory. Memorizing your math facts is in a way the "Phonics of math". Other than Bill Gates children accidentally discovering Khan Academy I don’t recall any Gate’s foundation education programs having much if any positive impact.
I recently published a book that covers these issues in detail. "The Doom Loop" chronicles my twenty-year experience working within and around education reform. The subtitle outlines the contents and the target audience. "A parents field guide to mitigating the math wars, reading wars, and teacher wars". There are separate chapters detailing the math, reading and teacher wars and what a parent can do to mitigate their impact.
The reason the Gates foundation is focused primarily on math these days is two prong. One is providing resources for those interested in STEM fields. The other is teaching “equitable” math.
“A coalition of left-wing educators introduced A Pathway to Equitable Math Instruction, a toolkit introducing "an integrated approach to mathematics that centers Black, Latinx, and Multilingual students in grades 6-8." The group hopes educators will help remove white supremacy culture from math classes "as they navigate the individual and collective journey from equity to anti-racism."
The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation funded the groups behind A Pathway to Equitable Math Instruction with nearly $140 million. That includes millions to The Education Trust, a fringe education advocacy group that refers to student loan debt for black students as "Jim Crow debt," and Teach Plus, which encourages teachers to become "social agents of change."”
To get the “live links” from this quote go to this article:
You have to be kidding. Natalie Wexler's post is not about politics or race, although politics and biases about groups may play into how math and reading are taught and how those strategies don't work. It is about good teaching, helping students to develop flexibility in their math skills so that they can use them to navigate fields where math is necessary as well as everyday life. The same being true for reading.
Natalie Wexler is spot on in her ideas about reading and she is onto something with math. All children need to be exposed to the same content - color and politics play no role. Please keep your politics to yourself.
I didn't read Collette Greystone's comment as characterizing my post--which, as you observed, isn't about politics or race. Instead, she was expressing her opinion as to why the Gates Foundation is funding math education.
I don't know whether she's right or wrong about that, but I personally would not ask her to "keep her politics to herself." Commenters should feel free to express their political views, when relevant, and we should all be able to disagree respectfully and politely.
Here’s the link to page that shows the amounts (scroll down) The Gates Foundation is funding The Education Trust, one of the groups behind A Pathway to Equitable Math
The Gates Foundation is into good things and some not-so-good things. The focus on math is what I stated above. I wish they’d go back to the basics with reading and math as well.
I am sorry if you saw my remarks as not being respectful. I felt that Collette's were moving toward the issue of the cultural wars that we are now experiencing across the country. That is why I said what I did. I was disagreeing with the words that I thought were not respectful - calling a large Foundation "a fringe educational advocacy group".
I decided, after reading your comments to me to look up The Education Trust on the Internet to see who is involved in that project. The Gates Foundation is one of a many foundations supporting their work. I do not know if the math content in their program is good or bad in presentation or focus but I am sorry if you felt my remarks were not respectful.
I did not want to look at what you wrote through the lens of race or culture but that is the direction where the comments were going. The Education Trust is looking into developing more racially and culturally responsive ways/strategies of teaching to meet the needs of low income students in particular. I did not see academic content presented on their website through the lens of culture or race.
I have been in this field for more than 50 years. Very little really changes. Those with policy power and money come forward with ideas that require a different way of doing things and, in most cases, imposing from them from the top down. Doing this usually does not work except to take away teachers' professional role to make the best decisions for their students in their particular teaching context. And it leads teachers to focus on skills without content or application in order to make sure that the students are ready for the "big" tests that will be used to evaluate the learning of their students and the teachers as well .
The Gates Foundation is into big data, which doesn't always give us a good picture of what is going on in the classroom. And, as you have stated often, if all we are interested in is test scores on skills, then children will not be taught what is not tested; therefore, teachers will concentrate on what is tested for many reasons, particularly because they, themselves, will be evaluated based on that one item.
I think what you missed was I pulled that quote from the article in Newsweek. It wasn’t my comment at all, but a pull quote from the article I provided the link to. The article had many live links I couldn’t copy that showed some interesting data regarding the Gates Foundation. Might be an interesting read.
Many schools are introducing the concept of ethnomathematics, which serves no one, especially BIPOC.
A pull quote from the essay I wrote on the problems with math instruction:
“ I did my graduate work in Engineering at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) in the 80’s where there were other students from just about every country you could imagine. While we couldn’t ever agree where to go get lunch, math was one language we all spoke. We all worked very hard, in Math, in getting the correct answers in order to get into MIT. We all worked very hard, in Math subjects, in getting the correct answers in order to receive our degrees.
What American educators seem to forget, in order to compete, to communicate, to survive in a technological world, getting the correct mathematical answer is essential. And if they believe BIPOC (Black, Indigenous, and People of Color) are disadvantaged and unable to get the right answer, here in the United States, I would ask them too look within their own house, at how basic math was presented in early education.”
As a member of the STEM community for many years, I watch what’s going on with that field and point out facts where it might be helpful to look into further.
It is very sad to see how people jump to conclusions about motives.
The Gates Foundation made a bad call in my opinion in pulling funding for solid basics in reading and math and the direction they are headed in education funding is worrisome. This path will put American students at a greater loss in education.
Considering that our public schools are largely controlled by the far Left, not the least of which part is the teachers' unions, I find it naive to imagine that motives and politics can be left out of education. The public schools have been systematically destroying reading education in this country for 80 years. After that much time, I've abandoned the idea that such malfeasance could be anything other than intentional: http://mychildwillread.org/
I agree about the background experiences that children need in order to read well and to apply math skills to other fields where appropriate. And I agree that it is not a one to one correspondence.
I take umbrage when you make sweeping statements about all teacher educators following one approach to learning where phonics is de-emphasized and learning basic math is not encouraged. Still, as with reading, more is needed to become a good math student who can use math in everyday life and transfer or use math in other curriculum areas. That being said, I will give you an example of what is wrong with just teaching algorithms when there is no conceptual knowledge of what you are doing.
One year, back in the late '80s, I assisted a high school teacher with a class that was focused on "Consumer Math" rather than having them move on to pre-algebra. This class of students performed poorly on math tests, so that is why they did not go into higher math classes. What I saw convinced me that when children are younger, they need a two pronged approach to math - memorizing number facts along with experiences that provide them conceptual understanding of math operations. These high school freshmen could not perform a math operation that varied in the least from the way they learned it. Take a problem that they are used to seeing presented vertically, present it horizontally and they are then unable to process what to do. Why is this??? I was actually shocked because my field is early childhood education. These young people had no idea of what the numbers represented and therefore could not do the problems. Somewhere back in their earlier school years, the emphasis was only on algorithms without combining that with experiences that would give them conceptual understanding of what they were doing. To me, this parallels the reading issue of providing only a focus on phonics and skills without expanding students' background knowledge so that when they have mastered skills, they can understand complex texts.
Even very bright children who read well if given texts that cover historical periods or contexts unfamiliar to them will not understand fully what they are reading. Context is everything. Having a broad background in history or experiences outside your immediate environment helps with comprehension.
If young children learn basic number facts and operations and importantly have experiences with activities and play that provide them with conceptual understanding of mathematical concepts supported by their teachers, which assumes they have teachers who understand the importance of this, their performance in math will/should be higher.
Phonics has been de-emphasized in the public school system since the late 70’s.
The majority of schools in the United States, use an approach to reading instruction called “balanced literacy”. In 2019, a national survey done by EdWeek Research Center found that about 72% of American educators report using balanced literacy to teach reading.
During the period of whole language fad, phonics was de-emphasized and in some cases, districts refused to allow the teaching of phonics. Idiotic! As is the case with all extreme ideas, the pendulum tends to swing toward the center eventually, which is what "balanced literacy" was. The textbooks for teacher education students set out a vision that included all the different aspects of reading and writing, a move away from "whole language" as the only way to learn to read. As with everything, there were and are some children who learn to read this way, but the vast majority do not learn this way. My children went to school in the '70s and were taught using phonics along with reading books with rich content. There were very specific places where phonics was thrown out with the bath water.
I agree that the "Reading Wars" and "Math Wars" are different. I suspect the Gates Foundation is focusing on math because comparing literacy rates with numeracy rates in America, the levels of proficiency in math are in far worse shape than reading and writing for all demographic groups. It tends to be easier to measure numeracy because you get one correct answer when solving math problems. Math is a "language" you learn in sequence, and memorization of math facts to a level of automaticity is mandatory. Memorizing your math facts is in a way the "Phonics of math". Other than Bill Gates children accidentally discovering Khan Academy I don’t recall any Gate’s foundation education programs having much if any positive impact.
I recently published a book that covers these issues in detail. "The Doom Loop" chronicles my twenty-year experience working within and around education reform. The subtitle outlines the contents and the target audience. "A parents field guide to mitigating the math wars, reading wars, and teacher wars". There are separate chapters detailing the math, reading and teacher wars and what a parent can do to mitigate their impact.
The reason the Gates foundation is focused primarily on math these days is two prong. One is providing resources for those interested in STEM fields. The other is teaching “equitable” math.
“A coalition of left-wing educators introduced A Pathway to Equitable Math Instruction, a toolkit introducing "an integrated approach to mathematics that centers Black, Latinx, and Multilingual students in grades 6-8." The group hopes educators will help remove white supremacy culture from math classes "as they navigate the individual and collective journey from equity to anti-racism."
The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation funded the groups behind A Pathway to Equitable Math Instruction with nearly $140 million. That includes millions to The Education Trust, a fringe education advocacy group that refers to student loan debt for black students as "Jim Crow debt," and Teach Plus, which encourages teachers to become "social agents of change."”
To get the “live links” from this quote go to this article:
https://www.newsweek.com/math-racist-crowd-runs-rampant-seattle-portland-opinion-1701491
I wrote about issues I saw with math education here: https://collettegreystone.substack.com/p/do-you-know-how-to-count
You have to be kidding. Natalie Wexler's post is not about politics or race, although politics and biases about groups may play into how math and reading are taught and how those strategies don't work. It is about good teaching, helping students to develop flexibility in their math skills so that they can use them to navigate fields where math is necessary as well as everyday life. The same being true for reading.
Natalie Wexler is spot on in her ideas about reading and she is onto something with math. All children need to be exposed to the same content - color and politics play no role. Please keep your politics to yourself.
I didn't read Collette Greystone's comment as characterizing my post--which, as you observed, isn't about politics or race. Instead, she was expressing her opinion as to why the Gates Foundation is funding math education.
I don't know whether she's right or wrong about that, but I personally would not ask her to "keep her politics to herself." Commenters should feel free to express their political views, when relevant, and we should all be able to disagree respectfully and politely.
I found this Gates Foundation information researching my own piece on math education.
Here are the links I found:
Here is the link to A Pathway to Equitable Math that describes what they do:
https://equitablemath.org
Here’s the link to page that shows the amounts (scroll down) The Gates Foundation is funding The Education Trust, one of the groups behind A Pathway to Equitable Math
https://www.gatesfoundation.org/about/committed-grants?q=The Education Trust Inc
The Gates Foundation is into good things and some not-so-good things. The focus on math is what I stated above. I wish they’d go back to the basics with reading and math as well.
I am sorry if you saw my remarks as not being respectful. I felt that Collette's were moving toward the issue of the cultural wars that we are now experiencing across the country. That is why I said what I did. I was disagreeing with the words that I thought were not respectful - calling a large Foundation "a fringe educational advocacy group".
I decided, after reading your comments to me to look up The Education Trust on the Internet to see who is involved in that project. The Gates Foundation is one of a many foundations supporting their work. I do not know if the math content in their program is good or bad in presentation or focus but I am sorry if you felt my remarks were not respectful.
I did not want to look at what you wrote through the lens of race or culture but that is the direction where the comments were going. The Education Trust is looking into developing more racially and culturally responsive ways/strategies of teaching to meet the needs of low income students in particular. I did not see academic content presented on their website through the lens of culture or race.
I have been in this field for more than 50 years. Very little really changes. Those with policy power and money come forward with ideas that require a different way of doing things and, in most cases, imposing from them from the top down. Doing this usually does not work except to take away teachers' professional role to make the best decisions for their students in their particular teaching context. And it leads teachers to focus on skills without content or application in order to make sure that the students are ready for the "big" tests that will be used to evaluate the learning of their students and the teachers as well .
The Gates Foundation is into big data, which doesn't always give us a good picture of what is going on in the classroom. And, as you have stated often, if all we are interested in is test scores on skills, then children will not be taught what is not tested; therefore, teachers will concentrate on what is tested for many reasons, particularly because they, themselves, will be evaluated based on that one item.
I think what you missed was I pulled that quote from the article in Newsweek. It wasn’t my comment at all, but a pull quote from the article I provided the link to. The article had many live links I couldn’t copy that showed some interesting data regarding the Gates Foundation. Might be an interesting read.
Another: https://www.newsweek.com/math-suffers-white-supremacy-according-bill-gates-funded-course-1571511
Many schools are introducing the concept of ethnomathematics, which serves no one, especially BIPOC.
A pull quote from the essay I wrote on the problems with math instruction:
“ I did my graduate work in Engineering at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) in the 80’s where there were other students from just about every country you could imagine. While we couldn’t ever agree where to go get lunch, math was one language we all spoke. We all worked very hard, in Math, in getting the correct answers in order to get into MIT. We all worked very hard, in Math subjects, in getting the correct answers in order to receive our degrees.
What American educators seem to forget, in order to compete, to communicate, to survive in a technological world, getting the correct mathematical answer is essential. And if they believe BIPOC (Black, Indigenous, and People of Color) are disadvantaged and unable to get the right answer, here in the United States, I would ask them too look within their own house, at how basic math was presented in early education.”
The link to that essay: https://collettegreystone.substack.com/p/do-you-know-how-to-count
People are far too-on-edge these days when it comes to anything that might look political. It is possible to learn from opposing viewpoints.
As a member of the STEM community for many years, I watch what’s going on with that field and point out facts where it might be helpful to look into further.
It is very sad to see how people jump to conclusions about motives.
The Gates Foundation made a bad call in my opinion in pulling funding for solid basics in reading and math and the direction they are headed in education funding is worrisome. This path will put American students at a greater loss in education.
Considering that our public schools are largely controlled by the far Left, not the least of which part is the teachers' unions, I find it naive to imagine that motives and politics can be left out of education. The public schools have been systematically destroying reading education in this country for 80 years. After that much time, I've abandoned the idea that such malfeasance could be anything other than intentional: http://mychildwillread.org/
You may find my take on the Reading Wars interesting: http://mychildwillread.org/
I agree about the background experiences that children need in order to read well and to apply math skills to other fields where appropriate. And I agree that it is not a one to one correspondence.
I take umbrage when you make sweeping statements about all teacher educators following one approach to learning where phonics is de-emphasized and learning basic math is not encouraged. Still, as with reading, more is needed to become a good math student who can use math in everyday life and transfer or use math in other curriculum areas. That being said, I will give you an example of what is wrong with just teaching algorithms when there is no conceptual knowledge of what you are doing.
One year, back in the late '80s, I assisted a high school teacher with a class that was focused on "Consumer Math" rather than having them move on to pre-algebra. This class of students performed poorly on math tests, so that is why they did not go into higher math classes. What I saw convinced me that when children are younger, they need a two pronged approach to math - memorizing number facts along with experiences that provide them conceptual understanding of math operations. These high school freshmen could not perform a math operation that varied in the least from the way they learned it. Take a problem that they are used to seeing presented vertically, present it horizontally and they are then unable to process what to do. Why is this??? I was actually shocked because my field is early childhood education. These young people had no idea of what the numbers represented and therefore could not do the problems. Somewhere back in their earlier school years, the emphasis was only on algorithms without combining that with experiences that would give them conceptual understanding of what they were doing. To me, this parallels the reading issue of providing only a focus on phonics and skills without expanding students' background knowledge so that when they have mastered skills, they can understand complex texts.
Even very bright children who read well if given texts that cover historical periods or contexts unfamiliar to them will not understand fully what they are reading. Context is everything. Having a broad background in history or experiences outside your immediate environment helps with comprehension.
If young children learn basic number facts and operations and importantly have experiences with activities and play that provide them with conceptual understanding of mathematical concepts supported by their teachers, which assumes they have teachers who understand the importance of this, their performance in math will/should be higher.
There is no simple answer to any of this.
Phonics has been de-emphasized in the public school system since the late 70’s.
The majority of schools in the United States, use an approach to reading instruction called “balanced literacy”. In 2019, a national survey done by EdWeek Research Center found that about 72% of American educators report using balanced literacy to teach reading.
I wrote about this idea here (Links to statistics and reports included in my essay): https://collettegreystone.substack.com/p/the-forever-gift-teach-reading-early
It’s one of the reasons I homeschooled.
During the period of whole language fad, phonics was de-emphasized and in some cases, districts refused to allow the teaching of phonics. Idiotic! As is the case with all extreme ideas, the pendulum tends to swing toward the center eventually, which is what "balanced literacy" was. The textbooks for teacher education students set out a vision that included all the different aspects of reading and writing, a move away from "whole language" as the only way to learn to read. As with everything, there were and are some children who learn to read this way, but the vast majority do not learn this way. My children went to school in the '70s and were taught using phonics along with reading books with rich content. There were very specific places where phonics was thrown out with the bath water.