Aspiring Teachers Flunk Math Test
Almost three quarters of aspiring elementary-school teachers in Massachusetts have failed a new math section of the state's licensing exam—the first time teaching candidates' knowledge of the subject has been assessed on a separate test. Administered in March, the new assessment—which includes questions on geometry, statistics, and probability—is the result of efforts to raise standards in a subject in which, until now, teachers were not necessarily required to excel.
Mitchell Chester, the state's commissioner of elementary and secondary education, says the new assessment makes Massachusetts the first state to approve a math-specific test for elementary licensure, as opposed to a multiple-subject exam yielding a single composite score, as is common in most states.
In light of the high failure rate—only about 27 percent of the 600 teaching candidates who took the test passed it—and the state's critical shortage of special education teachers, a temporary measure has been enacted that allows those who just missed the mark on the math section to still obtain teaching licenses. The teachers then have five years to retake and pass the test.
The debate over the test results' significance is raising some sticky issues in Massachusetts education circles. But at a time when so many other states are lowering their standards in an effort to avoid sanctions and loss of federal funds under the No Child Left Behind law, the Bay State's effort to buck the trend is commendable. But making the licensure requirements harder is one thing. Producing teachers who can pass the tests—and lay the foundation for students' knowledge in the building blocks of mathematics—is another.
Tags: Massachusetts | teachers | education | math
Tools: 
Share
|
| Comments (17) | Print
Reader Comments
Huh!
"I feel pretty safe in assuming geometry and statistics are NOT being taught in Elementary (grade 5 and lower)."
Yes, they are. A lot of geometry is taught at the elementary level. Perimeters, diameters, angles, etc. are typically taught in 3rd to 4th grade. Statistics aren't taught as a separate area of math but do come up a lot.
Relativity
I agree teachers should be able to break things down and teach things step by step. However, should ELEMENTARY teachers need to pass a standardized test for information NOT TAUGHT IN ELEMENTARY school? I'm from MA originally, and while times have changed and more is being asked of our children earlier, I feel pretty safe in assuming geometry and statistics are NOT being taught in Elementary (grade 5 and lower). How much was wasted studying this issue, devising a test and debating the issue? While there are precursors for these subjects in elementary school, I doubt the test was on the names of typical geometric shapes or ratios of one color of discs in a bag of so many other colors. These are how these precursors are taught at the elementary level. Maybe what we are now seeing is the last "improvement" to teaching coming to fruition. 25 years or so there as a big move to "new math", as well as non-phonics based reading programs. "Time-savers" they called them back then. In the long run, more kids needed more time to grasp what they would have grasped the old way...in some cases...they never grasped it, as the first poster testified. These teachers that now have 5 years to learn the required material and retake the test surely wouldn't consider it a time-saver, if in fact the change contributed to the issue. I am only speculating, but I think it bears consideration that going back to the tried and true is sometimes a progressive attitude, especially if what was "fixed" was never broken to begin with.
Teaching Math
I have the experience to know that a teacher must know math well to teach the subject. I use to fail math every year in high school. Then I found a book at the U of Windsor that explained basic algebra. By showing me step by step what was happening, I realized the teachers in high school were skipping many steps at a time to go from one equation to the next. No wander I thought it was magic. When I realized how simple math is if you explain it step by step, I even saw how derivatives were only algebra, but using a pattern so you don't have to repeat 7 steps each time to calculate a rate. I was even told by the dean of technicians at Devry in Toronto to stop making a remedial class they assigned me to teach, so easy, because it was getting difficult to keep the students back to repeat a term. If a first year calculus student can not figure out at what time two trains will pass each other at different speeds, it is probably because, starting in grade 4, the teachers did not know the basics so well, that they could not show that math is not complicated. Even inter-dimensional and none-real numbers and triple integration should be fun. If at any time you have to think 'What the heck?', it is only because the equation or how to derive the equation was not taught properly.
Note: State choice did not include Ontario, the closest state to me is Michigan.
advertisement
