Content deleted Content added
→Debate: changed "rediculous" to "ridiculous" |
Moved quote from Stearns to relevant section, added quote from Gonzalez to counter |
||
Line 15:
== Debate ==
Nearly every one of these distinctive characteristics has generated controversy and placed the IMP curriculum right in the middle of the “math wars,” the conflict between those that favor more traditional curricula in mathematics education and the supporters of the reform curricula that were largely an outgrowth of the 1989 [[NCTM]] standards.
IMP is among the reform curricula that have been heavily criticized by organizations such as [[Mathematically Correct]]. That organization’s Internet site begins with a statement that “advocates of the new, fuzzy math” (focus) “on things like calculators, blocks, guesswork, and group activities and they shun things like algorithms and repeated practice. The new programs are shy on fundamentals and they also lack the mathematical depth and rigor that promotes greater achievement.”<ref>[http://www.mathematicallycorrect.com/] Mathematically Correct, www.mathematicallycorrect.com</ref> Former NCTM president Frank Allen states, “Trying to organize school mathematics around problem solving instead of using its own internal structure for that purpose … (is destroying) essential connections….”<ref>[http://mathematicallycorrect.com/allen1.htm] Allen, F: “A Critical View of NCTM Policies with Special Reference to the Standards Reports”</ref>
Criticism often includes anecdotal evidence including stories of school districts that have decided to discontinue or supplement use of the IMP curriculum<ref>[http://www.thenewstribune.com/news/local/story/6051712p-5310251c.html] Abe, D: "Back to Basics on Kids’ Math:
Alarmed by Low Scores, Tacoma School Officials OK Added Saxon Textbook,” ''The News Tribune'' (Tacoma WA), August 25th, 2006 </ref> and of students who did not feel they had been prepared adequately for college.<ref>[http://mathematicallycorrect.com/impsf.htm] Datta, S: “Interactive Mathematics Program: Manifesto on an Experimental Concept Gone Awry”</ref> "Regular math is much better, it makes much more sense," says Aimee Lynn Stearns, a student at Taos High School in Taos, New Mexico.
On the other hand, some IMP students describe the program in positive terms. "It's fun, but it makes you really think," according to Ziouck Gonzalez, a student at Wells High School in Chicago, Illinois. Looking beyond student response, IMP was one of five mathematics education programs designated "exemplary" by the US Education Department in 1999, for "outstanding quality and demonstrated effectiveness."<ref>[http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_puca/is_199910/ai_2981414283] "Expert Panel Selects Exemplary, Promising Mathematics Programs," US Education Department Press Release, October 6, 1999</ref> Key Curriculum Press, the publisher of IMP, points out “the IMP first edition was published after more than 10 years of research, pilot testing, evaluating, field testing, revising, and detailed reviewing.”<ref>[http://www.mathimp.org/downloads/IMPWhitePaper.pdf] “Research Supporting the Interactive Mathematics Program”</ref>
Supporters point to statistical studies that compare the performance of students enrolled in IMP courses with their peers enrolled in traditional high school mathematics courses. Merlino and Wolff, two such researchers, report that in their several studies IMP students consistently outperformed traditionally taught students on both the math and verbal sections of the [[PSAT/NMSQT|PSAT]], as well as on the SAT-9.<ref>[http://www.gphillymath.org/StudentAchievement/Reports/SupportData/Part1Intro.htm] Merlino, J. and Wolff, E: ''Assessing the Costs/Benefits of an NSF “Standards-Based Secondary Mathematics Curriculum on Student Achievement'', Philadelphia, PA: The Greater Philadelphia Secondary Mathematics Project, 2001</ref> Kramer reported that grade 12 IMP students in his study performed better on all areas of mathematics tested by the NAEP test,<ref>[http://lmt.mspnet.org/media/data/IMP_block.pdf?media_000000002049.pdf] Kramer, S: “The Joint Impact of Block Scheduling and a Standards-Based Curriculum on High School Algebra Achievement and Mathematics Course Taking” (doctrinal dissertation), University of Maryland, 2003</ref> and Webb and Dowling reported IMP students performed significantly better on statistics questions from the Second International Mathematics Study, on mathematical reasoning and problem solving tasks designed by the State of Wisconsin, and on a quantitative reasoning test developed by a university to administer to entering students.<ref>Webb, N. and Dowling, M: “Comparison of IMP Students with Students Enrolled in Traditional Courses on Probability, Statistics, Problem Solving, and Reasoning,” ''Project Report 97-1'', University of Wisconsin – Madison, Wisconsin Center for Education Research, 1997</ref>
| |||