Sunday, November 30, 2008

Conflict of interest ... ya you betcha

This is an interesting piece from Missouri.

from the post:
Understand: The amount of NSF "Research Money" that has been thrown to our largest state university...Mizzou.

The MU (University of Missouri) College of Education is a major national center for advocates of "inquiry-based" and "research-based" methods in mathematics and science education.

The list of MU College of Education faculty with multi-million dollar education grant support includes:

Barbara Reys - $25,150,773 on 7 NSF education grants
Robert Reys - $18,193,249 on 13 NSF education grants ( I do not know if he is any relation to Barbara Reys)
Kathryn Chval - $13,693,416 on 3 NSF education grants
Fran Arbaugh - $7,902,368 on 5 NSF education grants
James Tarr - $7,037,981 on 2 NSF education grants
Sandra Abell - $4,773,073 on 8 NSF Education grants
Doug Grouws - $3,407,016 on 5 NSF Education grants
John Lannin - $2,610,009 on 3 NSF Education grants

Letter to the SPS Math Program Manager

Dear Anna-Maria de la Fuentes, 11-29-2008

In the SPS board meeting of 5-16-2007 Ms. Santorno said that should the state reduce the number of topics at particular grade levels we can certainly align our EDM math program to do that. She also said she was very impressed with Singapore Math. She said automaticity of math multiplication facts was necessary by grade 3. Darlene Flynn said the SPS has a very poor track record on math adoptions.

It is my opinion that the Seattle Public Schools are currently deceiving the public by the publishing of New Mathematics Performance Expectations – Condensed format on the SPS website at:

Clearly the Seattle Schools are not focusing the k-8 math curricula on these expectations. It seems fraudulent to post math expectations without action that focuses on them. The continued following of the Everyday Math pacing plan shows the SPS to be in opposition to the performance expectations posted on the website.

For many years the SPS has deceived the public by refusing to follow School Board policies D44.00 and D45.00 in regard to the requirement for defined necessary skills at each grade level that are frequently assessed. The required interventions cannot take place because of continuing district negligence.

The SPS math folly can only continue when the board members believe they are in a position to adopt a high school math program when k-8 the program leaves huge portions of the student population unable to do high school level mathematics because of an inadequate student skill base.

The continuation of total fidelity to EDM, which is a spiraled curriculum that is ineffective, needs a full explanation. Instead of narrowing topics and focusing on mastery as happens in a strand curriculum like Singapore Math, EDM has an extremely large number of topics at each grade level. Why does the district ignore the ideas emphasized by the National Math Advisory Panel and the new WA State Math Standards k-8?

Please provide an explanation if you intend to keep the Mathematics performance expectations posted on the SPS website.

I would also like an explanation as to why the following definition of math is still posted on the website: Mathematics is the language and science of patterns and connections. Learning and doing mathematics are active processes in which students construct meaning through exploration and inquiry of challenging problems.

Is this definition of mathematics that you and the district administration believes forms the core of the learning of mathematics for our students? If so there is little possibility for substantial measurable academic gains in high school level mathematics skills in the next decade. I would encourage the board to provide much better guidance in the future for SPS math program adoptions as the decade of SPS math disaster will be continuing as long as this math definition guides the SPS.

The included attachment contains the following:

Results of standardized mathematics assessments suggest that students in the United States are increasingly deficient in mathematics as they enter middle and high school.

….. If accuracy and fluency in basic skills are necessary for acquisition of higher-level conceptual mathematical understanding (Wu, 1999), could it be that the gradual decline of U.S. students in mathematics as they progress through school is related to the inadequate foundation laid by traditional elementary mathematics basal textbooks?

The spiral design found in the majority of math textbooks does not promote mastery of the fundamental mathematical concepts on which higher-level mathematics are built. The potential for the strand curricula to improve textbooks cannot be underestimated… Although organizing textbooks around strands is not a panacea for eliminating poor performance in mathematics, it is a powerful tool for improving instruction. Textbooks are part of teachers’ toolbox and educators need to improve their “access to tools that work” (Carnine, 1992, p. 1). The strand design is one component of an effective instructional program that increases opportunities for all children to learn.

Danaher M. Dempsey, Jr.

Monday, November 24, 2008

About SPS Math ... a letter

Dear Directors and Superintendent Goodloe-Johnson,

I am teaching at Lummi Nations School a k-12 school that used Everyday Math until this year. I am teaching many high school students who only know how to multiply by the lattice method and do not know the standard algorithm for multiplication. Very few students can capably divide as the lattice method is useless for the long division algorithm.

The question now goes back to the EDM math adoption of May 30th 2007 on that evening the board was assured by CAO Santorno that arithmetic fluency would be happening, is it? Given that the SPS is now in its second year of fidelity of implementation to the EDM pacing plan ... I can assure you that the promises of arithmetic fluency are not being fulfilled.

The SPS has chosen to disregard the National Math Advisory Panel recommendations as well as the k-8 math standards. This SPS refusal to depart from the EDM pacing plan and CMP2 usage is harming many of our students substanitally for yet another year. Dispite a large increase in math instructional time in SPS classrooms in 2007-2008 the WASL results for EDM grades were quite disappointing from Spring 2007 to Spring 2008. This increase of time saw White 4th and 5th graders performing worse by comparison with state numbers from 2007 to 2008 and Hispanic 4th graders scored substantially worse.

Why has the school district refused to change direction? Is there some reason to wait until SY 2009-2010 to begin preparing students to do the mathematics needed to be successful on the Spring 2010 math WASL? Why not prepare our students mathematically to eventually be successful in real high school level math rather than wait until next year?


Danaher M. Dempsey, Jr.

Friday, November 21, 2008

Math and Science WASL (just say No?)

Here is an interesting piece...

What are your thoughts?

WOW!!! Just say NO
That sure would give the SPS something to think about as they are not altering k-8 math in anyway for 2008-2009 school year. The NMAP and New State Math k-8 standards came out last Spring.... The SPS did not even notice ...supposedly because of no change in the 2009 Math WASL.

New Jersey and the State Standards fight

is the website for the New Jersey group
attempting to get the "World Class"
Math Standards in New Jersey.

Thursday, November 20, 2008

New WA Math Standards ... Seattle does not care

It is absolutely amazing....
the following comes from Director Harium Martin-Morris:

In talking with the staff, it was explained that the reason the reports still have the old GLE standards for math is because that is what the students for the 2008/2009 school year will be tested on for the WASL. The report card next year will reflect the new math standards as will the WASL

The alignment of EDM to new standards is currently underway according to Ms de la Fuente.

This means that despite the fact that new k-8 standards for math were in place in April 2008 the SPS just decided to ignore this for another school year.

SPS is prefectly content to bumble along with the Everday Math pacing plan for another entire school year. WOW!!! let us just waste another year.
Now since EDM implementation occured with a large increase in math teaching time during the school day in 2007-2008 you would expect an increase in Seattle Math WASL pass rates from Spring 2007 to Spring 2008 vs State where the math content time taught during the school day was likely nearly the same in 2008 as in 2007.

White students in the SPS compared with white students at the state level
... pass rate differentials
grade ... 2007 ... 2008 .. change
3 ... +9.6 ... + 12.2 .. (+2.6)
4 ... +14.7 ... +13.2 .. (-1.5)
5 ... +15.4 ... +13.5 .. (-1.9)

So the EDM implementation year 2007-2008 in which there was a large increase in instructional time ( at most schools from at least 25% increase to a 40% time increase at others ) was accompanied by a pass rate decline relative to state averages for white students in grade 4 and grade 5.

Is the board now telling us that they agree with the Central Staff that a continuation of the EDM pacing plan makes sense for our students..... Please explain that to parents of White 4th and 5th graders.

Let us see what happens when a real math test shows up in Spring 2010. No wonder those 60 profs at UW signed a letter saying that scholastic math k-12 is in increasingly sad shape. The SPS response .... ignore everyone.

Imagine what could have happened with that large increase in instructional time and competent math leadership. .... Keep waiting.....

Tuesday, November 18, 2008

Math in Seattle on Harium's Blog

Lots of comments here.

Academic Math Leadership is apparently missing in the SPS.
New standards for k-8 math are making no difference in classrooms.

Also going on the Seattle Public Schools Community Blog at

To SAT or not ... Test passes Colleges fail

From the New York Times:

The Test Passes, Colleges Fail
Stony Brook, N.Y.

FOR some years now, many elite American colleges have been downgrading the role of standardized tests like the SAT in deciding which applicants are admitted, or have even discarded their use altogether. While some institutions justify this move primarily as a way to enroll a more diverse group of students, an increasing number claim that the SAT is a poor predictor of academic success in college, especially compared with high school grade-point averages.

Are they correct?

Sunday, November 16, 2008

Parental Rights

Parental Rights??

Being a Washington State resident I am well aware of the difficulty of trying to effectively raise uncooperative children who are age 12 or above in WA state.

The situation descibed next makes one wonder about the sanity of state law.

It requires discipline and effort to learn mathematics.
Discipline and effort contribute to a meaningful life.
Good luck with that in WA.

From the above link:

In the early 1980s, a landmark parental rights case reached the Washington State Supreme Court. The case involved 13-year-old Sheila Marie Sumey, whose parents were alarmed when they found evidence of their daughter's participation in illegal drug activity and escalating sexual involvement. Their response was to act immediately to cut off the negative influences in their daughter's life by grounding her.

But when Sheila went to her school counselors complaining about her parent's actions, she was advised that she could be liberated from her parents because there was "conflict between parent and child." Listening to the advice she had received, Sheila notified Child Protective Services (CPS) about her situation. She was subsequently removed from her home and placed in foster care.

Her parents, desperate to get their daughter back, challenged the actions of the social workers in court. They lost. Even though the judge found that Sheila's parents had enforced reasonable rules in a proper manner, the state law nevertheless gave CPS the authority to split apart the Sumey family and take Sheila away.

AP and IB a Report from Fordham

From November 2007
a 52 page .pdf

On page 40 an interesting explanation of SL IB Math
and HL IB Math.

University Calculus 1989 and 2006

Here is a comparison of two groups of Johns Hopkins Students.

The test is the same a Calculus final from 1989.
The results for the 1989 group are substanially higher than for the 2006 group.

The results are analyzed under the 1989 grading scale and the 2006 grading scale.

Massive grade inflation is apparent. Who could be surprised?

Wednesday, November 12, 2008

Achievement Gap meeting at Cleveland High on Thursday

Thursday, November 13th, 6-8 p.m. at Cleveland High School
sponsored by the Center for Improved Student Learning (OSPI) . The discussion will be:

"To explore causes and solutions to the African-American student achievement gap. The meetings will let parents, students, educators and community members share their experiences and hopes for the education of African-American students. Feedback gathered from these town hall meetings will inform a comprehensive set of recommendations to close the achievement gap that will presented to the Legislature in late December."

National Standards ... Gates Foundation

Here is an interesting piece...

Here is the complete text:

Gates will fight for national standards and make national tests

by Elizabeth Green

SEATTLE — Here’s another big development: As part of its new approach, the Gates Foundation will advocate for the politically thorny goal of national standards — and will aim to write its own standards and its own national test.

Foundation officials said that the moves are motivated by their frustration with current tests and standards for what children should know, which each state drafts individually as part of the federal No Child Left Behind law. Vicki Phillips, the Gates Foundation’s director of education programs, said the result is a “testing crisis in this country,” in which tests are losing credibility among teachers, who see them as so low-quality that they are useless.

“Let’s admit it,” she said. “We can’t dispense with assessment, but neither can we keep adding low-quality tests.”

How will the foundation jump into the fight? They’ll start with standards, working with states and school districts to develop a common set. Phillips said the goal will be to make the standards “fewer, clearer, higher” and to make sure they match what students need to know to succeed in college.

The next step will be to help create tests. Phillips said the foundation will usher a few trial assessments into development, and then test them out to see which are best at predicting whether students succeed in college. (From what I understand, this would involve having students take the test when they enter college and then following them through the process, to see whether high scores predict college completion.)

Whichever test wins, Phillips said, the Gates Foundation will make it available to any state who is interested — at no cost.

Organizing a Math Curriculum ( or not)

I ran for Seattle School Board last year and did not make it through the primary. I wanted to have the Superintendent and the Board follow policies and state laws that were in place and would have in my view increased student academic achievement. This still has not happened nor does it appear likely to happen in the near future.

Here is a short email chain from Director Harium Martin-Morris's Blog.
Harium said...

On 11/4 you asked if there was any plan to change our K-8 text books. To my knowledge there is no plan to change the text we have just adopted a couple of years ago.

We are not ignoring the state math standards. The work we are doing in math for K-8 is against the state standards.

Policies D44.00 and D45.00 are 23 years old and part of the policies that we will be either updating or deleting during our policy work.

November 11, 2008 10:27 PM

dan dempsey said...

Thanks for the response on D44 & D45. The problem is more than just neglect of D44 & D45.

The problem is the disregard for organizing what students should be learning and the failure to provide effective focused interventions so the students learn the important material.

This is an enormous failing on the part of the Seattle Public Schools. The fact that the board and the Superintendent allow this to continue is absurd. This would be malpractice in any other venue.

The EDM pacing plan in fact does not actually encourage mastery of much arithmetic at any level. A comparison with the K-8 State Math standards and the EDM pacing plan followed by the SPS for k-5 and the CMP2 curriculum for 6,7,8 makes the enormous magnitude of the failure of current SPS Math leadership and their recommended practices very apparent.

This is absurd that the board is considering a high school math adoption for many students who have been failed by the SPS in k-8 math without any attention to fixing k-8 math.

I've got it. After a decade of disaster the SPS will just ignore the problem and hope it goes away.

NO reasonable PLAN is apparent.
The SPS has continually failed to apply the relevant data in any intelligent manner. In the words of Brita Butler-Wall: "We choose to follow our hired professionals." Now that the SPS math plan is out of alignment with the National Math Advisory Panel and the new State Math Standards ... the SPS continues to do nothing of substance.

Let us all wait for D44 & D45 to be revised or discarded. The neglect of these needed policies has played a large part in the current mess.

Public schooling in the SPS has become a sad situation when content is neglected and mastery of important content is viewed as unnecessary. This situation is rampant not only in math but in many other subject areas.

In social studies the emphasis on process over content often leaves students with so little content knowledge many students have next to nothing to process.

November 12, 2008 7:19 AM

Harium's blog can be found at
My posting was under Middle School Math.

Sunday, November 9, 2008

No Shift in Priorities at OSPI ... Seattle Times Article

The ideas expressed in the Seattle Times in regard to education reveal a lack of understanding of the situation.

Here is the article:

Here are the comments:

Secretary of Education thoughts

First from Bill....

Regarding my favorite for Secretary of Education, I think Colin Powell would be a terrific choice. My reasons include:

(1) His name has been mentioned, and therefore there is some chance he would accept if offered, and may actually be interested in the job.

(2) He is a registered Republican, and therefore he may take seriously the very strong recommendations regarding early algebra preparation which was made by the presidents National Math Panel under Bush (nobody else is, including the present DOE).

(3) His children are doubtless partially the products of the Department of Defense School System, and although the present DOD elementary school standards seemed to have been fuzzed up, it used to be that the DOD dependents schools were the closest to a Singapore type school system of anything run by a North American entity, and showed exemplary success in educating the children of parents who represented large minority percentages, and who mostly were not college educated themselves.

(4) I believe his foundation is focused on education issues.

(5) Since he is a registered Republican, the DOE would be a good location for Obama to place a Republican in order to have a mixed cabinet.

(6) He, of all possible candidates, is likely to care little about maintaining good relations with the various corrupt “stakeholders” in the education-industria l complex, including schools of education, textbook publishers, teachers unions, etc. He is more likely to be impervious to pressure from the various fuzzy persons who have been mentioned in connection with Obama’s education advisers.


Next from Mike ..........

Please think deeply about what I’m going to say.

We should not recommend or endorse anyone for the Secretary of Education. We should ask Senator Obama to dissolve the U.S. Dept. of Education. It is (as presently constituted & administered) an illegal organization, perpetrating criminal coercion on the sovereign states of the United States . The federal government itself realizes and admits this, and has pointed to the 10th amendment as the limiting principle in law. The only way that it can “compel” the states to comply with federal education reform laws is with “voluntary compliance.” This supposedly “voluntary compliance” is not voluntary at all, as it involves the federal government coercing the states by making receipt of federal dollars conditional on compliance. These “federal dollars” are our dollars, and the federal government has no legitimate authority to use them as a “coercive carrot” in the domain of public education.

..... reform mathematics is not the disease, but rather a symptom of the disease known as education reform. This will never go away as long as the federal government is permitted to continue its coercive social engineering through “education reform.”

... start thinking “out-of-the-box.” If Obama did dissolve the Dept. of Ed (which he won’t), think of both the freedom and accountability this would give Dorn to make the changes needed in WA State. We will never achieve our goals as long as authority & accountability rest in Washington D.C.


From Niki:

I agree totally with Mike's remarks that the federal department of education
should be abolished. The money spent there would be welcomed by states. I
would go further and say all parents should be issued vouchers to choose any
school, public or private. Those public schools that don't get chosen would
be closed. That old business model would be applied about "satisfying your
customers" in order to stay in business.

The public education system doesn't need to be reformed. It needs to be
transformed in every state according to that state's needs and mission
without interference from federal officials. If Louisiana wants to produce
dummies, for example, that's fine. Their business climate will suffer and
people will move to states that are producing capable learners. (On the
subject of transformation, the whole military system was transformed in the
past eight years (with great resistance by many entrenched souls), but
theirs is not a "democracy." They did battle politics. They didn't have to
battle unions, though.)

Since such transformation is unlikely to happen in the present political
climate of expanding federal government, I suggest the following questions
be considered/answered before recommending Colin Powell or anyone else:

1) Are we choosing someone who can be a "politician" and thus knows how to
maneuver within federal circles? Are we looking for a competent manager or a
real leader?

2) How well versed is the proposed Ed Sec in the "troubles" within
education "reform" today? If you were to ask him/her, "What three issues do
you see that need to be addressed immediately? ", would you get spin, a
litany of reformists' claims about "critical thinking" learners for the 21st
century, or would it be serious and thoughtful responses?

3) What is this person's philosophy about vocational education, charter
schools, vouchers, merit pay, teacher preparation (including alternative
programs), testing, etc.?

4) What, therefore, is his "vision" about the role of the fed govt in
public education? private education?

5) Can he/she name five persons or groups s/he would use for resources
and insight? Wouldn't this give us our own insight about his/her "direction"
and "support system" that s/he'll need as the leader?


Friday, November 7, 2008

Mike salutes the Teachers

Although several of them have been my adversaries at one point or another, what I’ve learned about education during the last few years has given me about as much empathy for the teachers as it has for the kids. These poor teachers (especially the younger ones) are spoon-fed dribble, lied to, brainwashed, intimidated into silence and/or compliance, required to spend their own time & money for professional development, most of which is garbage, and that which does have value should have been part of their training before they ever stepped into a classroom.

Here’s a toast to all you teachers out there. You certainly earn your way, and are endowed with a much better temperance than I.


A message from Bob ...
then back to normal programming

Out of the trenches where the real work is done
comes a message from Bob:

good riddance terryb.

trying to stay 'positive', whatever kind of sugary pap that means, I say to people --
I applaud their efforts to try something new,
I applaud their efforts because they worked really hard,


The results were a disaster for our kids,
and their response was to blame teachers for NOT implementing unproven practices.

While some of these practices could be good supplements, they are NOT the cure alls the philosophy turned ideology and turned dogma promised.

I can NOT applaud their efforts in digging in their heels AND I OPPOSE
their efforts blaming those of us doing the job 50++++ hours a week OUT IN REALITY.


p.s. back to our normal programming - GOOD RIDDANCE.

Thursday, November 6, 2008

Tim's SBE testimony on 11-06-2008

November 6, 2008

Honorable Superintendent and Board Members,

Thank you for the privilege of serving on your Math Advisory Panel. It has been an interesting and rewarding experience.

Today you will be making your final recommendation to the SPI on the Math Curriculum programs. There has been a lot of heated rhetoric and sour grapes from both sides. I’ll not add to that part of the debate.

As an engineer from the High Tech Business & Industry sector, I would offer you another more practical viewpoint. I urge you to make a good business decision.

You have before you two excellent K-5 programs, Math Connects and Math Expressions, upon which there is no disagreement. You also have before you three 6-8 programs, Math Connects, Holt Mathematics and Prentice-Hall Mathematics, about which again there is no disagreement. These five programs will serve Washington children and teachers well. They are programs which are high quality, complete, supportable and affordable. I believe that Math Expressions will quickly become a tasteful delight to both reform and traditional palates.

I fully concur with the findings of Strategic Teaching.

The point of contention surrounds the Bridges in Mathematics program for K-5.

From a good business decision standpoint I ask you if Bridges in Mathematics rises to the same level as the other five programs.

Desire for Quality. Washington students, parents, teachers and districts deserve to have only unquestionable quality programs recommended to them. Not withstanding the publishers’ mathematicians’ comments, it remains clear from Strategic Teaching’s independent findings and mathematical analysis, that there are serious questions about the mathematic quality of Bridges. Does Bridges in Mathematics enjoy the same high level of confidence in quality which Math Expressions and Math Connects enjoy? If not, how can we burden the tax payer with a questionable recommendation?
Complete. K.I.S.S. principle. Bridges’ publisher concedes to requiring heavy supplementation, and Strategic Teaching finds that Bridges has gaping holes in its mathematics which would require even more extensive supplementation. It is unquestionable that Bridges is incomplete. Washington is already littered with incomplete programs that are supplemental puzzles for the teacher to navigate, make sense out of, and present in some sort of coherent way. Why would we add another puzzle to the list?

Cost Containment. Bridges represents an open ended investment in hidden costs. These intangible costs of providing supplementation to such programs are already evident in existing adoptions throughout the state. They require more teacher prep time, much higher professional development investment, more resources for oversight and management, and higher untracked costs associated with home-grown supplements, duplication and distribution. Supplementation puzzles require “more of everything” to make them work. These are hidden costs which quickly spiral out of control.
Supportability and Sustainability. In districts where supplementing programs such as Bridges has worked, you will also find the story of a strong champion exerting almost super human effort to ensure success. You will also find that when the champion steps out of that role, the program quickly collapses. It is very hard to duplicate success, because it is so dependant upon that strong champion. On our panel we have a very experienced member, Brad Beal, who has shared with us that very scenario in which he was the champion. You as directors and administrators have seen the same in many districts. Extensively supplemented programs such as Bridges are brittle in their nature, difficult to support, and almost impossible to sustain.

The Bridges program is tainted in too many ways. It is a 2nd generation reform program which in terms of a quality, completeness, cost effectiveness and supportability, is just not there yet. I am encouraged that 3rd generation programs such as Math Expressions demonstrate that achieving high quality in these critical business aspects is doable. I believe we will see more of these 3rd and 4th generation high quality programs emerge over the coming years. But Bridges in Mathematics just does not live up to the expected threshold of quality, completeness, cost or support expected by our state.

On these practical business principles, I would urge you to clearly discourage adoption of Bridges in Mathematics.

Most Respectfully,

Timothy Christensen

Math Advisory Panelist
Sr. Research & Development Engineer
Agilent Technologies, Inc.

Parent East Valley School District

Dorn up by 39,000 votes

As of 10:30 PM 11/05/2008
In the race for Superintendent of Public Instruction:
Randy Dorn leads the incumbant Dr. Terry Bergeson by 39,000 votes and appears to be pulling away.

Curriculum and the Supplements by Niki Hayes

If mathematics curricula need supplemental materials all year to make them productive in terms of student learning, then those base materials need to be thrown out and new ones selected that can stand on their own. It's about starting with cake and adding some frosting if necessary, rather than starting with frosting and trying to build cake underneath it.

The extra costs to coordinate and integrate different learning materials continue to suck away valuable teaching and learning in terms of money, time and energy. Teachers know this all too well.

This "rebuilding" of curricula represents both a lack of critical thinking skills and “real world” application. (Time is money in the real world.) It is a prime example, however, of government work: That is, paying twice or three times for the same work. Continued acceptance of bad behavior enables it.

Supplemental services and materials may indeed secure many new jobs for professional development and tutoring, but that is not the purpose of public education. It is about children, not about teachers. It is about families, not unions. It is about our future, not our present.

Mike's Thought:
Well said Niki.

Niki Said… “Time is money in the real world.” I would add, “… and the currency of education is (should be) student academic achievement.”

I chose the words “academic achievement” instead of “learning”, because “learning” has been co-opted to become an umbrella concept, encompassing both cognitive and affective domains.


Wednesday, November 5, 2008

Vote Counting week

Well it looks like a razor thin edge (+ 22,000) for Randy Dorn over Terry Bergeson at this time.
I wonder if votes will be found (weeks later)like in the Rossi-Gregoire Contest four years ago.

The lead has grown as of 2:50 PM 0n 11/5/2008
Dorn leads by 25,000

In the primary this same type of thing happened ...
as time passed Dorn got closer to Bergeson.

Hopefully he will continue to get a larger lead.
Randy's lead has increased by 3,000 votes since this morning.

Monday, November 3, 2008

Real World .. Advanced math ? Washington Post

Try this:

In the Real World, Advanced Math Doesn't Always Add Up

Digital Math Texts

Check this out:

We as a nation sure have lots of technology ....
but do we have much in the way of expectations for either learning or behavior?

Look to succeed ... involves desire coupled with effort... Sustained effort over time.

We have massive numbers of programs aimed at improving things but "Where's the Beef?"

Chicago has a Plan to get Teachers ....
Using NSF Money,0,841900.story

NORMAL, Ill. -
Illinois State University is offering two years of free tuition and $10,000 a year to education students who commit to teaching in Chicago.

The new scholarship program is being funded by a $750,000 grant from the National Science Foundation.

Under the program, students have to commit to teach math or science in the Chicago Public Schools for two years.

Healing America's Sick Schools .. Boston Globe

Check this one:

GROVER WHITEHURST, who heads the research arm of the US Department of Education, says that the quality of education research today is the rough equivalent of medical research in the 1920s. That's a scary thought. After all, Americans of that era enjoyed not much greater than a 50-50 chance of benefiting from an encounter with the medical system.

"We're trying to fill huge deficiencies in knowledge," says Whitehurst, the director of the federal Institute of Education Sciences. "The problem is out in front of the research."