Students need better grounding in math basics

Teachers have resorted to going back to older editions of math textbooks

Luisa D’Amato’s column regarding declining math scores in provincial testing got me thinking why that is.

I am a retired elementary teacher. I had one bugbear when I was teaching; the student math textbooks. More than any other single factor in the last decade of my teaching, those textbooks were a curse on the elementary landscape. Books for students suddenly became glossy, with lots of pictures, and little to no substance.

Missing in these textbooks were enough examples and practice for students to feel successful before language-based problems were introduced. Anyone could see the frustration on their faces as they opened up their textbooks before even beginning an exercise. Something had changed because for some unknown reason there was this new blatant disregard for foundation skills, which are essential according to experts at the University of Waterloo cited by D’Amato. Something seemed amiss.

Math suddenly was less about beginning new concepts and operations with practice in a process toward tackling problem solving questions and more about solving language-based problems, period. I think it was the “Aussie” effect. Nothing wrong with this idea or emphasis, if applied at the proper time, but it looked like somebody just thought the basics weren’t necessary or just beneath our children. They were smarter than that, I guess. However, children at this “concrete operational stage” as Jean Piaget, a pioneer in child development, described those between the ages of seven and 12, still need reinforcement to solidify these concepts. They just don’t learn these skills through osmosis.

It is no wonder that secretly many teachers (like me) resorted to going back to older editions of math textbooks to help teach and reinforce these operations, skills and concepts. These books broke things down. They went step by step.

I had this idea reinforced while at a hockey coaching clinic once; when triple-A players didn’t understand an on-ice drill, the instructor said that it might help if we broke down the drill. It worked. In math, why not start off with calculations and ease into language-based questions involving the concepts being studied?

Developmentally, have more emphasis on math calculations/skills in primary with a gradual shift toward languagebased questions in junior and anchor that in both our math instruction and, of course, our curriculum.

I know math textbooks are going the way of the dodo bird, but the destructive message these newer textbooks conveyed lives on and certainly can be changed. The majority of students can’t be expected to jump into the deep end of the math pool without a “basic” personal flotation device. They need that device or skill set to help keep them afloat while they build their confidence and a positive attitude toward all facets of numeration.

Do this in an interactive learning environment and they will embrace the challenges of adding language and real-world applications. Make it a process. Engage them. Make it fun and exciting.

I used a game my students will remember that I called “In your face” to help them acquire and reinforce their times tables. It worked and it didn’t have to be passive or boring.

Without this attitude adjustment in the curriculum and in classroom instruction, I have my doubts that these dismal math scores will change.

I know there are many more issues at play here, but for now I’ll just pull into the station with this one.

Rob Kennedy is a retired elementary school teacher who lives in Kitchener.