Multiplying Math Woes

Congressional debates over how to dole out federal education dollars usually turn on social issues like whether to incorporate Judeo-Christian values into school lesson plans. This time, however, Washington is inexplicably debating whether students should be learning the most basic of lessons: the multiplication tables. Cultural disagreements are understandable. This one is not.

In international math surveys, U.S. students have consistently lagged behind students in nations like Japan and the Czech Republic that emphasize memorization. Nevertheless, the National Science Foundation continues to lavish most of its yearly grants on school districts that implement so-called nontraditional math programs emphasizing concepts, not facts. In 1977, a foundation official threatened to cut off federal funds unless California education officials reversed a state mandate that third-graders memorize multiplication tables.

Last month, the U.S. Department of Education sent its clearest signal yet to local school districts, issuing a report that praised only nontraditional math programs as “exemplary and promising.” The report claims to have used a “rigorous . . . research-based process” to identify effective programs, but math education experts like Wayne Bishop of Cal State Los Angeles assert that its authors, well-known proponents of nontraditional math, based their conclusions on a highly selective set of student achievement tests.

Education Secretary Richard W. Riley ought to withdraw the report, as a coalition of 200 mathematicians and scientists asked in a letter last week. At the very least, he should make it clear that nontraditional math may complement but not replace traditional math.

Some skilled math teachers have managed to inspire students by making the best of nontraditional math’s murky goals: “linking past experience to new concepts; sharing ideas; developing concept readiness through hands-on explorations,” according to Mathland, a program the Education Department report calls promising and which has strong advocates in Los Angeles schools. But what are teachers to make of this second-grade exercise from Mathland? It asks students to think up a lunch, draw it on paper, then cut out the foods, supposedly in the name of learning division.

Even state Supt. of Instruction Delaine Eastin, who has supported nontraditional math, admits that the method works only when teachers “have a deep understanding of mathematics content,” and such teachers are in short supply in California classrooms. To help correct that, Gov. Gray Davis should promise to sign a pending bill by Sen. Hilda Solis (D-La Puente) that would forgive more of the college loans of teachers who take courses that increase their math proficiency. But California’s efforts to improve math education are being undercut by the federal Education Department’s funding of nontraditional math nearly to the exclusion of traditional math.

If public leaders cannot agree on the importance of lessons as basic as the multiplication tables, it’s fair to ask whether they are leaders at all.