=e JOHN SAXON al-ge-bra \"al-ja-bra\ n ho Dies pamela MADE.. UNDERSTANDABLE SS aha RM gc Algebra is not difficult. Algebra is only different. And time is required for things that are different to metamor- hose into things that are familar. ‘Tretaset'mattennia tou te bd, over the lat several yar neh, ingles than & national gui conpiee Where have we gone wrong? How have we filed our chiden? Are thes ling scores a harbinger of the ttl solaes of our educational. system? What oe We do? Is al hope lon All hope it not ost and thee i something we can do. Lets sun by taking Took at the recent history of the teaching of algebra where it went wrong, and how it can Be put ight aim The tom quoted a the heed ofthis antl implies that review of some pe is necesary in the study of alge Some have postlated that leroy Spiral in nature and that mustmun benefit could be obtained by designing courses of study so that pene rece of concepts at include. Each attempt to adapt the spiral to the teaching ot mathemati has ruled. ‘nature When the tine came for the periodic review, the adents had forgot the Concept to be reviewed, The teacher wae faced with two tasks: reseaching the forgotten concept and teaching the new top for the day. When the tne come forthe next review, the task was crea Mr. Saxon, @ former Air Force Tet pilot, teaches at Oscar Rose Junior College in Oklahoma. more difficult because this time two forgotten concepts had to be re-taught as well as the new topic. Soon, the mountain of forgotten concepts became insuperable; and the teacher and the textbook author both quietly deleted the Periodic reviews in order to devote all of their attention to the new topic. This led back to the old problem of algebra students being unable to pass a com- Prehensive final examination because they had not studied any topic long enough for assimilation and retention, Now, from out of the gloom, a new fallacious theory appears: mastery learn- ing. We will let cach student take a unit test again and again until he dem- Onstrates mastery of the topic. Then We will move to the next topic and ‘ever again discuss the topic just mas- tered. Of course, the student still cannot Pass @ comprehensive final examination since he has had no opportunity for re~ View. This objection is ovecome by Simplify each expression. (29 nie.) $= 64+ T= (9) + Cay “50-2 3) C2 22 = -29¢-9) jews paeg 29 = 2) - (6-29 (3 - 6) 2. Cay? Fats (ay? C2) weighting the final examination lightly or dispensing with it altogether. The problem isn't solved—now we just don't talk about it. The student who is not brilliant will not attempt the next course, for he knows he is not pre- Pared. Thus, rather than teach and pre- pare, we will let them weed themselves out—only the gifted will be permitted to survive Mastery learning and spirals might be applicable (0 some subjects but not to algebra. Neither allows the time neces- sary for the abstractions of a particular concept to be digested and retained, ‘There just is not space for review when the homework consists of 25 problems of the new kind. What Would Happei But—what would happen if the em- Dhasis in the problem sets was on re view? What about 25 review problems and only four or five problens of the new type? What about an easytortond development of a small increment of a few topic in the text, while the, prob. lems inthe problem set reve ail Previous concepts? Then the now incre ment could be practiced for four or five homeworks until the next increment of the same topic was presented. The sss dent could stand on a firm understand ing of the rst increment to reach for understanding of the next increment What would happen, in shor, it we were to try an incremental developmen with @ continuous review? To find out, 1 augmented my Pren- tice-Hall college-level beginning. agsbre May 29, 1981) Navionat Review 611book with 130 extra problem sets so it could be used for a full year by high- school students. In August 1980, over 1,300 Algebra | students in 21 Okla- homa public schools* were given the California Achievement Test in mathe- matics (level 18C) to determine indi- vidual preparedness and capabili Teachers in these schools are teaching one section out of my book and one or more sections out of their regular book, The experiment is being monitored by the Oklahoma Federation of Teachers (AFL-CIO), who will certify the results Sixteen tests, ten to twenty minutes each, will be given on 16 fundamental topics of elementary algebra. These tests will be spread out over four months ‘and will be given only after the topic hhas been completed in both books. The first four tests were given in February 1981; the topics tested were signed num- bers, evaluation of expressions, solution ‘of simple equations, and addition of Tike terms; the problems were selected from problems submitted by the teach- ers. (A sampling of the tests is re produced here.) Please note that the tests test learned skills. Vocabulary, 1Q, and game-playing ability will not help ‘on these tests. They have no cultural bias. For the purpose of analysis, the stu- dents were grouped according to their ‘August CAT scores as low (below 44 per cent), low-medium (45 per cent to 663 per cent), high-medium (64 per cent to 78 per cent), and high (above 78 per cent), Not every student took every test ‘One school used two different teachers. No CAT scores were available for about 10 per cent of the students, but their scores on the algebra tests were in- cluded in the totals. Before drops, trans- fers, etc, the control group had 841 members and the test group had 519 ‘members, “The first thing to note is that the Saxon students outscored their control counterparts on every test at every abil ity level by a considerable margin. Then notice that on every test the low Saxons ‘outscored the high-medium controls and that, with one exception, the low-me- dium Saxons outscored the high con- trols. Lastly, look at the totals and note Scamegie, Cushing, Del Ciy. Holden, Lex lagion, Lindsay, Mail, Marlon. Moore, Oba toma City (2). Okemab, Okmulgee, Ponca City 2), Purcell Semele, Silleater,Tecumeh, Wetumka, 612 Nariovat Review / May 29, 1981 that the Saxons outscored the controls by 109 per cent on signed numbers, 64 per cent on evaluation of expressions. 141 per cent on solving equations, and 108 per cent on adding like terms. ‘These differences will increase with each passing month, as the Saxon students practice every concept every night. We Should take special note of the control- group scores on solving equations. After six months of algebra, they were able to solve only two of the ten equations, and the lower three groupings were al- most without any ability in this erucial area of mathematics. Indescribable ‘A minimal statistically significant dif- ference in the scores would have been gratifying, because in the past no book hhas ever been shown to be statistically superior when both groups had the same teachers. An overall gain of 5 or 10 per cent would have been amazing. and a gain of 20 or 30 per cent would have been unbelievable. But what ad- jectives can adequately deseribe gains ‘of 64 per cent, 108 per cent, 109 per cent, and 14] per cent when both groups had the same teachers, and the only Jifference was in the books used? Over~ all, Saxon students’s seores were more than double those of the control group. What is responsible for this tremen- dous gain? The incremental, continuous development is a giant step forward, bit it alone cannot explain the extreme TEST ONE SIGNED NUMBERS n TEST TWO EVALUATION. disparity in the results of these first four tests, The so-called new mathe- matics per se is not to blame, for my book gives adequate coverage to the topics and vocabulary of the new math- matics. The teachers certainly are not to blame, for these results show that they can do wonders if given adequate teaching tools. “The real culprits are the self-appoint- ed standard-bearers of the new mathe matics, who, with arrogant ineptness, have written the books from which the teachers have been forced to teach for twenty years, They brought with them fan aura of omniscience and righteous ress that placed them above criticism by people whose only attributes were brains, education, and common sense. ‘Their books have not harmed the brilliant students, but their effect on the rest has been devastating. A litany of their defects would be almost end- less, but a few of the most egregious should be mentioned, All the words have been removed from these books because some children read poorly. The words have been replaced with arrows fand shaded areas that make the books look like Chinese puzzles. This takes ‘care of the poor reading but does not ‘id algebra instruction, because poor readers are notorious for their inability to solve Chinese puzzles, The good stu- Gents also suffer, because they find the Chinese-puzzle development inscrutable at best. Look at your child’s algebra book and see for yourself. These books confuse and frighten TEST THREE EQUATIONS: s_| 10 Problems TEST FOUR ADDING TERMS| 10 Problems Controt contro! 123 1.90apenas on keyGety) 2 0 + yy + a. XG? = 2) Bebe. & yong -e students by belaboring concepts that are trivial and by giving insufficient em- Phasis to concepts that are fundamental, ‘They teach under the function, associ. ativity and commutativity, and they neg- lect signed numbers and the solution of simple equations. Because students haven't acquired adequate equation-soly- ing skills, they are unable to handle any but the most rudimentary word problems. The authors ignore this fact and clutter the books with word prob- lems that would be too difficult for Algebra I students anyway. The word Problems that are not too difficult are Poorly written, and problems requiring several different thought patterns are Presented at one time and then snatched away before even one type can be un- derstood. These problems instill in many students a fear of word problems which is never dispelled The Most Wounded The standard books also neglect sim- ple manipulatory skills and almost total- ly ignore scientific notation. Ask your local high-school teachers of science, chemistry, and physics to detail their struggle to teach meaningful scientific concepts to students who are algebrai- cally unprepared, This almost complete denial of knowledge of Algebra I is especially harmful 10 minorities and dis- advantaged students because many of them lack the verbal and game-playing skills necessary to catch up later, Go back to the chart again and note the extremely poor scores of the less gifted control-group students in signed mum- mest wuraen 14o Find fhe valve of each of the folloving expressions by replacing the variables uth the prome mowers (20 in.) bers and equation solving. By February of their freshman year, inadequate text- books have crippled these students for life. ‘They have been weeded out and will never be doctors, dentists, engineers, or physicists, nor will they ever do anything else that requires the know!- edge that they have been denied. We have sat back and let these sei lists destroy our children's mathematical ability, and undermine the perception ‘of mathematics itself. We are all guilty for letting this happen. The first time a seventh-grader brought home a mathe- matics book that his college-graduate father could not decipher, he should have raised unmitigated hell. Instead, we have all let these well-meaning Pscudo-theoretical mathematicians con vince us that they were teaching the students great thoughts that we, as adults, were not smart enough to under- stand. This was to be a matter between the teacher (who also did not under- ( soutons of equkttons i ote vareaauz Of Solve each of the folloving equath Le SG2n = 2) - Cade ae + 0) 2 le 2) 2 5-5) stand), the child, and those who had written the books—parents definitely not Welcome. Also culpable are our com- etent theoretical mathematicians who have stood idly by and watched without Protest as this fiasco came to full bloom. Shades of Alice in Wonderland and New Clothes for the Emperor! We have let this go on for twenty years If the Federal Government had been allowed to assume control of education, it would be impossible to straighten this ‘mess out. But, fortunately, we still have functioning, locally controlled schools and a free-enterprise economy. The De- Partment of Education refused to help me on this project, and my overtures were rejected by six of the largest text- book companies because 1 was not a committee of experts. But the book will be published—probably by Grassdale, Inc., Box 1456, Norman, Oklahoma 73070. The first hardback high-school fy the foLLoting expressions Dy aidise Tike termes (20 nis.) aly + 28y + ye? = oy? version will be printed in August 1981, The first printing will be used by select: ed Oklahoma schools and possibly a few others. Private schools could use it, but the book won't yet be on the state adoption lists so public schools could not. It will be difficult to fill large orders in the short time remaining before the beginning of the school year, first come, first served. This summer we will submit a detailed analysis of all 16 tests. We intend to rove, among other things, that students who have been taught to handle signed Numbers and to solve equations can also be taught to handle scientific no- tation, to perform fundamental algebra- jc manipulations, and to solve meaning- ful word problems without fear. There is no reason Johnny can't do math— ‘and maybe learn to read as well. May 29. 1981 | NatioNaL Review 613,