has compiled several
math related articles that are very interesting. Please take your time and read each one or come back later and read them.
ARTICLE
ONE:
What is Problem Solving? by Richard Rusczyk
I was invited to
the Math Olympiad Summer Program (MOP) in the 10th grade. I went to MOP certain that I must really be good
at math… In my five weeks at MOP, I encountered over sixty problems on various tests. I didn’t solve a single
one. That’s right – I was 0-for-60+. I came away no longer confident that I was good at math. I assumed that most
of the other kids did better at MOP because they knew more tricks than I did. My formula sheets were pretty thorough, but
perhaps they were missing something. By the end of MOP, I had learned a somewhat unsettling truth. The others knew fewer tricks
than I did, not more. They didn’t even have formula sheets!
At another contest later that
summer, a younger student, Alex, from another school asked me for my formula sheets. In my local and state circles, students’
formula sheets were the source of knowledge, the source of power that fueled the top students and the top schools. They were
studied, memorized, revered. But most of all, they were not shared. But when Alex asked for my formula sheets I remembered
my experience at MOP and I realized that formula sheets are not really math. Memorizing formulas is
no more mathematics than memorizing dates is history or memorizing spelling words is literature. I gave him the formula sheets.
(Alex must later have learned also that the formula sheets were fool’s gold – he became a Rhodes scholar.)
The difference between MOP and
many of these state and local contests I participated in was the difference between problem solving and what many people call
mathematics. For these people, math is a series of tricks to use on a series of specific problems. Trick A is for Problem
A, Trick B for Problem B, and so on. In this vein, school can become a routine of ‘learn tricks for a week – use
tricks on a test – forget most tricks quickly.’ The tricks get forgotten quickly primarily because there are so
many of them, and also because the students don’t see how these ‘tricks’ are just extensions of a few basic
principles.
I had painfully learned at MOP
that true
mathematics is not a process of memorizing formulas and applying them to problems tailor-made for those
formulas. Instead, the successful mathematician possesses fewer tools, but knows how to apply them to a much broader range
of problems. We use the term “problem solving” to distinguish this approach to mathematics from the ‘memorize-use-forget’
approach.
After MOP I relearned math throughout
high school. I was unaware that I was learning much more. When I got to Princeton I enrolled in organic chemistry. There were
over 200 students in the course, and we quickly separated into two groups. One group understood that all we would be taught
could largely be derived from a very small number of basic principles. We loved the class – it was a year long exploration
of where these fundamental concepts could take us. The other, much larger, group saw each new destination not as the result
of a path from the building blocks, but as yet another place whose coordinates had to be memorized if ever they were to visit
again. Almost to a student, the difference between those in the happy group and those in the struggling group was how they
learned mathematics. The class seemingly involved no math at all, but those who took a memorization approach to math were
doomed to do it again in chemistry. The skills the problem solvers developed in math transferred, and these students flourished.
We use math to teach problem solving
because it is the most fundamental logical discipline. Not only is it the foundation upon which sciences are built, it is
the clearest way to learn and understand how to develop a rigorous logical argument. There are no loopholes, there are no
half-truths. The language of mathematics is precise, as is ‘right’ and ‘wrong’ (or ‘proven’
and ‘unproven’). Success and failure are immediate and indisputable; there isn’t room for subjectivity.
This is not to say that those who cannot do math cannot solve problems. There are many paths to strong problem solving skills.
Mathematics
is the shortest.
Problem solving is crucial in
mathematics education because it transcends mathematics. By developing problem solving skills, we learn not only how to tackle
math problems, but also how to logically work our way through any problems we may face. The memorizer can only solve problems
he has encountered already, but the problem solver can solve problems she’s never seen before. The problem solver is
flexible; she can diversify. Above all, she can create.
________________________________________
Are Mathematicians Past Their Prime at 35?
By LILA GUTERMAN
Maybe not, but the idea lingers due
to an abundance of young talent.
While swimming laps, Pavel Etingof thinks about math. The crowds and
noise on a city bus do little to distract Allen Knutson from the equations he scribbles on a notepad he keeps handy. Francis
E. Su gave up his songwriting hobby to spend more time on his proofs.
The constant devotion of these and other mathematicians
to their work has allowed them to produce seminal proofs and impressive results that have won them high praise early in their
careers -- all are under 35.
But many of them have something other than math to worry about. According to one common
belief, these young researchers may already have passed their prime.
Mr. Su, a 31-year-old assistant professor of
mathematics at Harvey Mudd College, says that idea can create pressure. "Sometimes I think, 'Gosh, my best work is done when
I'm young. Maybe I'm over the hill,' " he says.
Like many other outstanding young mathematicians, Mr. Su doesn't buy
into the folklore entirely, though. And his skepticism may be justified. On closer inspection, the question of when mathematicians
peak is not as simple as the myth makes it seem. Though great mathematical discoveries are often made at a young age, certain
factors feed the illusion that mathematical superstars flame out early, even if their creative fires still burn brightly later
in life.
The notion that youth is a necessary ingredient for great work has held sway in mathematics for decades,
if not centuries. A famous mathematician, G. H. Hardy, wrote in his 1940 memoir, A Mathematician's Apology, "No mathematician
should ever allow himself to forget that mathematics, more than any other art or science, is a young man's game."
WHEN RESEARCHERS MAKE THEIR MARKS
Discipline
Mean age of first contribution
Mean age of best contribution
Mathematics
27.3
38.8
Astronomy
30.5
40.6
Physics
29.7
38.2
Chemistry
30.5
38.0
Biology
29.4
40.5
Medicine
32.3
42.1
Technology
31.6
39.7
Earth sciences
30.9
42.5
Others
33.4
41.6
SOURCE: Dean K. Simonton, University
of California at Davis.
Certainly math, as well as its sister field theoretical physics, boasts many examples
of the phenomenon. Evariste Galois, a 19th-century French mathematician whose contributions to a branch of algebra called
group theory are now taught to all students of mathematics, developed his ideas as a teenager. He wrote a manuscript spelling
them out when he was 20, the night before he was killed in a duel. A Norwegian mathematician and contemporary of Galois's
named Niels H. Abel died of tuberculosis at age 26 after solving a 300-year-old problem and discovering what are now known
as Abelian functions. Although death cut short the careers of those two men, Albert Einstein lived for 50 years after formulating
his most famous equation, E=mc2, when he was 26.
Why might many great mathematicians make their most important
contributions at such a young age? The legend consists of two parts: Mathematical researchers make a splash early in their
lives and then do less-significant work as they grow older.
The first half of that premise has some truth behind it,
for many top mathematicians demonstrate their promise quite early, often as children. Terence Tao, a professor of mathematics
who received tenure this year at the University of California at Los Angeles before his 25th birthday, remembers that his
"favorite pastime" when he was 3 or 4 years old was doing math problems in workbooks. In grade school, he took math courses
with students four years older than he and had to sit on a special cushion to reach the desk. Like many mathematicians of
all ages at American universities, Mr. Tao was born elsewhere, in this case, Australia. He now works on widely varying problems,
but his major field involves studying mathematical functions that describe waves.
Mr. Etingof, a 31-year-old mathematician
at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and Columbia University, recalls knowing even before he started grade school
that he wanted a career in mathematics. "I did not ask for pieces of candy, but I asked for math problems." He currently studies
a physics-inspired area of mathematics called quantum groups.
Many of these superstars graduated from high school
quite young. Mr. Su, who now studies an area of game theory that deals with dividing goods fairly, was called "the Brain"
by other students at his high school because he was three years younger than his classmates. He says he didn't reveal his
age when he went to college at the University of Texas at Austin to avoid the social pigeonholing.
Ruth E. Lawrence
started college at the University of Oxford when she was 12 and received a bachelor's degree in mathematics at age 13. She
earned her doctorate at 17, went on to prestigious postdoctoral positions at Harvard, and landed her first faculty job at
22. Now 29, she is an associate professor on leave from the University of Michigan at Ann Arbor, working at the Hebrew University
of Jerusalem. She studies knot theory, an area of mathematics that describes whether two knots in separate loops of rope,
each twisted and entangled upon itself, can be transformed to look the same without cutting either rope. With no hint of irony
she says, "I did things a little bit earlier than usual."
Noam D. Elkies wasn't quite as precocious as Ms. Lawrence,
graduating from college at Columbia University at age 19 and finishing his Ph.D. at Harvard when he was 21. Now 34, Mr. Elkies
became the youngest person ever granted tenure at Harvard when he became a full professor at 26. He was 21 when he solved
a problem first proposed in 1769. Mr. Elkies proved it possible to find three numbers that, when raised to the fourth power
and added together, the result is another number that is raised to the fourth power. (The numbers he found are 2,682,440;
15,365,639; 18,796,760; and 20,615,673.)
Early professional success is only part of the story, however. Many researchers
in other fields show early promise but typically take more time to make important contributions because of the nature of their
work.
Mathematics, Mr. Elkies says, is one of a few fields "in which one can do top-level work without a lot of life
experience," something that might be key in the arts or humanities. "One does not have to have experience raising children
through school, dealing with family tragedies, and so forth, to be able to find three numbers whose fourth powers add up to
another one."
David A. Vogan Jr., the chairman of M.I.T.'s math department, says that experience also means more in
the other sciences than it does in mathematics. "In a lot of the sciences, there's a tremendous value that comes from experience
and building up familiarity with thousands and thousands of complicated special cases," he says. "Whereas mathematics tends
to be concerned with simpler things... . And the people who do it best are the ones who understand nothing about how it was
understood before and bring some completely new perspective."
Not only can mathematicians come up with important ideas
without spending years learning the work that came before them, but the time between idea and publication is much shorter
than in fields that require laborious experiments or reams of documentation, says Dean K. Simonton, a professor of psychology
at the University of California at Davis, who has studied how age is related to scientific discovery.
Mr. Knutson,
a 31-year-old assistant professor at the University of California at Berkeley, explains why many graduate students in mathematics
complete their dissertations so quickly: "I think it's typical for theses that the great majority [of the work] happens over
a period of a month or two. False start, false start, false start -- aha! Then you write up the stuff in the 'aha!' with a
bunch of prefatory material saying what other people have done.
"My thesis was much like this. My thesis was 25 pages.
The ones that scare me are the history ones, where you have to accumulate evidence for 800 pages. In math, all the evidence
you need may take up a paragraph, and everyone says, 'Yup, it's true.' "
The young mathematicians' experiences are
representative of a larger trend, according to Mr. Simonton. In a study of nearly 2,000 famous scientists throughout history,
he found that mathematicians were the youngest when they made their first important contribution. The average age at which
they accomplished something important enough to land in history books was 27.3. By contrast, biologists were 29.4 years old,
physicists were 29.7, and chemists were 30.5.
But starting at a young age doesn't necessarily mean one's career will
end early or that later contributions will pale in importance -- the second half of the legend. In fact, Mr. Simonton found
that mathematicians make their best research contributions (which he defined as the ones mentioned most often by historians
and biographers in reference books) at what many might consider doddering old age: 38.8. That age is very similar to those
he found in other sciences: 40.5 in biology, 38.2 in physics, and 38.0 in chemistry.
In fact, although "mathematicians
do wring their hands a lot" about becoming too old to do great work, according to John H. Ewing, the executive director of
the American Mathematical Society, numerous counterexamples show that the rule, if true, doesn't hold for everyone. Carl Friedrich
Gauss, a 19th-century mathematician sometimes called the "prince of mathematics," continued to produce important results in
both math and physics late in life, and died at age 76. Paul Erdos, the most prolific mathematician ever, having published
1,500 papers, tried to prove as many theorems as possible as he aged, working essentially constantly until he died at age
83 in 1996.
As a contemporary example, many mathematicians mention Charles L. Fefferman. As a young man, "he was a
real star," says Mr. Ewing. Mr. Fefferman got an early start, receiving his Ph.D. when he was 20 and becoming a full professor
at the University of Chicago when he was 22. His research on Fourier analysis, which looks at complicated vibrations -- as
of a violin's string -- and breaks them down into simpler ones, led to a Fields Medal, often referred to as math's Nobel Prize,
when he was 29. Mr. Fefferman, now 51 and chairman of the mathematics department at Princeton University, is still a leading
mathematician.
Mr. Fefferman is not sure whether his career diverges from the well-known pattern. "I did some work
that I'm very proud of between the ages of 19 and 25," he says quietly. "I've stayed productive, and whether I've gotten better
or worse or stayed about the same -- it's not so clear."
Despite such counterexamples, the idea persists that not
only do young mathematicians make early breakthroughs, they make more than their share. "This myth, if you wish to call it
a myth, is so prevalent that it's quite probable that there's some truth to it," says Christopher M. Skinner, a 28-year-old
associate professor of mathematics at the University of Michigan at Ann Arbor, who describes his work as trying to establish
a glossary to translate concepts between certain areas of algebra and analysis.
Many mathematicians explain the phenomenon
in terms common to any academic field: With increasing seniority and age comes a heavy load of responsibilities that can distract
mathematicians from their research. These demands include serving on committees, teaching and overseeing graduate students,
and attending to family affairs.
"Life takes a lot of time and effort," Mr. Fefferman says. "I think the big jump
there came with taking care of babies, taking night shifts. There's nothing like sleep deprivation to make one less than brilliant."
"Doing the great mathematical work requires a hell of a lot of energy," says Mr. Etingof, of M.I.T. and Columbia,
suggesting that older mathematicians may not be able to keep up that pace. "Doing mathematics at a very high level is really
as exhausting as any sport."
Mr. Knutson says, "There have been times when I've been thinking about something so intensely
when I lie down [to sleep at night, that] after half an hour, I have to get up and start writing again because I'd made too
many advances and I was afraid I'd lose them if I didn't write them down. I'll go to sleep at midnight and I'll wake up at
6, desperate to be working again." Though that happens only rarely, he admits that "from an external viewpoint, it could look
like a dangerous addiction."
But some of the perception that mathematicians slow down as they age may be based more
on illusion than on reality. "There's a demographic fallacy," says Spencer R. Weart, a historian at the American Institute
of Physics. Because the ranks of mathematicians and other researchers have expanded extremely rapidly until recently, most
active researchers are very young. Since more people in the field are young, it stands to reason that more discoveries are
made by young people, Mr. Weart says.
What's more, because mathematicians can make great discoveries at a young age,
they may receive awards and become highly visible as young people. In fact, the Fields Medal stipulates that winners must
be 40 or younger as a result of the wishes of John C. Fields, who left the money for the medal to both honor existing work
and encourage future achievement.
Many of these forms of public recognition are given only once to a researcher, so
"there's an impression that [older mathematicians] have run out of steam," says Mr. Simonton, even if their work continues
at the same level.
Understanding such factors has not stopped mathematicians from worrying about whether they will
soon be -- or already are -- over the hill. Several, though not all, mid-career and older mathematicians contacted by The
Chronicle say they think their best work is behind them. The younger mathematicians, in general, have a sunnier outlook. "I
don't really think that one can make an argument that over all the stuff I did in my early 20's is significantly better than
what I am doing now," says Mr. Elkies, of Harvard. In fact, he thinks that what he has learned in the intervening years has
improved his work.
Everyone has a prescription for avoiding dormancy as they age. Many suggest that older mathematicians
can work more effectively than their younger colleagues on problems that may take a long time and a great deal of patience
and confidence. Mr. Tao, for instance, says he works "obsessively" for two weeks at a time on a problem. "But if I'm not getting
anywhere, I tend to give up and try something different."
By contrast, Andrew J. Wiles, a Princeton mathematician,
solved math's most famous problem by working for seven years to prove Fermat's Last Theorem. He finished his proof when he
was 40, in 1993, but due to a subtle but crucial error, the proof was not complete for another two years. "This requires a
great amount of courage and stamina," says Mr. Etingof.
Doing significant work late in one's career involves seeking
out problems that require more knowledge than young mathematicians can have accumulated, according to George W. Mackey, 84,
an emeritus professor of mathematics at Harvard. That often means learning about several different areas of math and looking
for ways to tie them together, he says. Princeton's Mr. Fefferman agrees, adding that picking up new specialties, while risky,
is the best way to avoid going stale.
Mr. Mackey says that by connecting disparate fields, he has gained a deeper
understanding of group theory. A few years ago, he wrote a summary of his ideas for a publication at Rice University, his
alma mater. "I was in a constant state of euphoria because all these things fit together," he says. "There's a huge amount
of unity within mathematics."
"In mathematics, it's not a game where the fastest wins," says Edward V. Frenkel, a
32-year-old professor at Berkeley. "But rather, it's more like who can see farther, who can see deeper. That's the one who
achieves more."
MATH'S YOUNG STARS
By LILA GUTERMAN
Some of the brightest lights in mathematics are also
among the youngest. Here are eight standouts.
Noam D. Elkies, 34, a professor at Harvard University, currently
on sabbatical at the Mathematical Sciences Research Institute in Berkeley, Calif. He earned a Ph.D. at 21, rising to prominence
in his field at about the same time. Barry Mazur, his graduate adviser at Harvard, says that in his work on number theory
as a graduate student, Mr. Elkies "seemed to have enormous insight in a field that you would otherwise imagine would take
years." The summer after he finished graduate school, Mr. Elkies went on to solve a problem that had stood unconquered for
more than 200 years.
Pavel Etingof, 31, an assistant professor at Massachusetts Institute of Technology, currently
on leave and working as an associate professor at Columbia University. He was 24 years old when he received his Ph.D. At his
first academic job, at Harvard, he did important work on quantum groups, a new, physics-inspired area in group theory. David
A. Vogan Jr., chairman of M.I.T.'s math department, says Mr. Etingof is already a leading figure in the study of quantum groups,
and adds that "he can do anything at all."
Edward V. Frenkel, 32, a professor at the University of California
at Berkeley. He completed his thesis in just a year, receiving his Ph.D. when he was 23. He has worked to find and exploit
commonalities between two seemingly unrelated fields in mathematics, representation theory and geometry. Nicolai Reshetikhin,
a colleague and collaborator at Berkeley, calls the connections "unexpected" and describes Mr. Frenkel's results as "fascinating
and important."
Allen Knutson, 31, an assistant professor at the University of California at Berkeley. He was
26 when he received his Ph.D. In 1998, he completed his best-known work, in collaboration with Terence Tao. It answers a question
in linear algebra that had remained open since it was first posed, in 1962. Calvin C. Moore, chairman of Berkeley's math department,
describes the proof as "outstanding work on a classical problem."
Ruth E. Lawrence, 29, an associate professor
at the University of Michigan at Ann Arbor, currently on leave and working at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem. She attracted
attention as a child prodigy, entering the University of Oxford at age 12, receiving a bachelor's degree at 13 and a Ph.D.
at 17. She studies knot theory to find connections to other areas of mathematics, including topology, geometry, and mathematical
physics. Igor Dolgachev, a professor at Michigan, says Ms. Lawrence's doctoral work "found some very beautiful relationships
between theoretical physics and mathematics."
Christopher M. Skinner, 28, an associate professor at the University
of Michigan at Ann Arbor. He was 25 when he received his Ph.D., but was making waves well before that. According to Donald
J. Lewis, who has retired from the math department at Michigan, even when Mr. Skinner was an undergraduate, journals "were
already aware of him and competing for his papers." Mr. Lewis calls Mr. Skinner's undergraduate thesis "a major attack" in
the field of algebraic number theory.
Francis E. Su, 31, an assistant professor at Harvey Mudd College. He
received a Ph.D. when he was 25, working on probability. But he changed his field when he started teaching at at Harvey Mudd,
and now studies problems of fair division. His best-known work solved the problem of how to divide rent in an envy-free way
in an apartment with any number of roommates and bedrooms of varying sizes. Steven J. Brams, a political scientist at New
York University, says Mr. Su's work uses "good mathematical theory [that] is truly applicable to real-world problems."
Terence
Tao, 25, a professor at the University of California at Los Angeles, currently teaching at the University of New South
Wales, in Sydney, Australia. He received his Ph.D. when he was 20, doing work on harmonic analysis to demonstrate that a certain
equation describes waves that never break, in contrast to ocean waves hitting the beach. He has received high praise for subsequent
work in two other areas of mathematics as well -- partial differential equations and linear algebra, collaborating with Mr.
Knutson on the latter. "If you just looked at his work and didn't know anything about him," says John B. Garnett, a math professor
at U.C.L.A., "you'd probably say he was 50 years old and an extremely productive mathematician."
MATH
IN THE UNITED STATES
Math + test = trouble for US economy
First-of-its kind study shows US lags many other nations
in real-life math skills.
WASHINGTON
– For a nation committed to preparing students for 21st
century jobs, the results of the first-of-its-kind study of how well teenagers can apply math skills to real-life problems
is sobering.
American 15-year-olds rank well below those in most other industrialized countries in mathematics
literacy and problem solving, according to a survey released Monday.
Although the notion that America faces a math gap is not new, Monday's results show with new
clarity that the problem extends beyond the classrooms into the kind of life-skills that employers care about. And to the
surprise of some experts, the US shortcoming exists even when only top students in each nation are considered.
"It's very disturbing for business if the capacity to take what you know ... and apply it to
something novel is difficult for US teenagers," says Susan Traiman, director of education and workforce policy at the Business
Roundtable.
Grim results on such international tests helped build political support for higher standards
in US schools in the 1990s, and especially for more consistent testing and tougher accountability measures in the No Child
Left Behind Act, a centerpiece of President Bush's domestic program in his first term.
The president campaigned to extend that testing regime into US high schools in his second term.
The new test results are likely to be Exhibit A as the Bush administration prepares a new round of education reforms aimed
at US high schools.
The tests also give educators some clues about teaching programs that are successful and might
be transplanted to the US.
"These tests are enormously instructive to the US, especially when we look at the instructional
programs in other countries to see what works," says Michael Casserly, executive director of the Council of the Great City
Schools.
A key to the success of students in other nations is a very focused curriculum, maintained
over time, he adds. "We can't do it nationally," because the US is a vast, diverse country with little appetite for a national
curriculum. "But we can do it in cities, and we are."
The international survey was done by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development's
Program for International Student Assessment (PISA) in 2003, testing 15-year-olds.
But PISA, unlike previous international assessments, is measuring not just whether students
have learned a set math curriculum, but whether they can apply math concepts outside the classroom. In the US, 262 schools
and 5,456 students participated in the two-hour, paper and pencil assessment. Most answers were constructed responses, not
just the multiple choice format.
In one question, students are asked to calculate the number of dots on the bottom face of six
dice, given the rule that the total number of dots on two opposite faces is always seven. Only 63 percent of US students got
it right, compared with 68 percent of their peers in OECD countries. (This question was ranked Level 2, out of three proficiency
levels.) Other problems involved constructing simple decision tree diagrams for a lending library, figuring out which gate
is stuck closed in an irrigation system, and generating graphics on computers.
The survey comes a week before another set of results of global math performance, which could
also cast the US as faltering. The results of the 2003 Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMMS), to be
released next week, will report on fourth and eighth graders' proficiency in science and math.
Where the TIMMS test has been done before, in four year intervals, PISA's math testing began
in 2003.
Math + test = trouble for US
US 15-year-olds scored measurably better than their counterparts in only 3 of 30 nations in
the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development in a new test of problem-solving in math. Below are results for
10 of the nations.
Country S. Korea Japan Canada France Czech Rep. Germany Spain US Italy Mexico OECD
average
Score 550 547 529 519 516 513 482 477 470 384 500
Source: OECD Program for International Student Assessment, 2003
Of the 41 nations participating in PISA 2003, 25 ranked higher than the US average, including
Korea, Japan, the Czech Republic, as well as Hong Kong and Macao in China. Only eight ranked measurably below the US: Greece,
Turkey, Mexico, Thailand, Serbia and Montenegro, Uruguay, Indonesia, and Tunisia.
Most striking are the wide disparities in the US data among student groups:
• Black and Hispanic students scored significantly below whites, Asians, and students
of more than one race in mathematics literacy and problem solving.
• Even the highest US achievers in mathematics literacy and problem solving were outperformed
by their peers in industrialized nations. This contrasts with PISA results in a reading test done in 2000, where the US had
a greater percentage of students at the highest level than the OECD average.
• Males outperformed females in mathematics literacy in the US and two-thirds of the
other countries, but there were no measurable differences in problem-solving scores by sex in 32 out of 39 countries, including
the US.
These results track findings that most US high school students don't know enough mathematics
to do well in college courses or the work force. "Only 40 percent of high school graduates are prepared to earn a C or higher
in a college level course, and these are also the same skills needed for the workplace," says Ken Gullette, a spokesman for
ACT Inc. in Iowa City, a college entrance exam.
The study also comes amid heated debate over whether the US has enough skilled workers for
the high-tech industry. At the urging of US business groups, Congress expanded the number of H1-B visas - designed to let
US companies hire technology-proficient workers from other countries - by some 20,000 in 2005. The measure is included in
a spending bill heading to President Bush this week.
"At a time when many companies can hire talent all over the world, there's a choice about whether
to hire in the United States [or] go where the talent is. So it's absolutely "The PISA results are a blinking
warning light," sessential for young Americans to leave high school prepared for college or the work world," says Ms. Traiman
of the Business Roundtable.aid US Secretary of Education Rod Paige in a statement. "It's more evidence that high standards
and accountability for results are a good idea for all schools at all grade levels."
ARTICLE TWO:
Why Few Girls Choose Science, Math
By Valerie Strauss
Washington Post Staff Writer Tuesday, February
1, 2005; Page A07
In Sarah Wise's section of a computer systems laboratory at the elite Thomas Jefferson High School
for Science and Technology, the 18-year-old senior is the only girl.
That's a better ratio, though, than in 17-year-old David Banh's computational physics class at
the Fairfax County school. It has only boys.
Abbie Des Rosiers, an 11th-grader, is the lone female student in an advanced computer
class at Thomas Jefferson High School for Science and Technology. (Photos Gerald Martineau -- The Washington
Post)
There aren't any girls in the school's top mathematics class, either, the one with seven students
who must be invited to enroll. Senior Rachel Miller, 17, who took algebra in fourth grade, was asked to join, but she decided
biology would be more fun.
Ask teachers, administrators and students at Thomas Jefferson -- where about 55 percent of the
1,694 students are boys -- why such discrepancies exist in these classes, and they will say it has nothing to do with ability.
So what explains it?
"It's a fabulous conundrum," said Josh Strong, the school's division manager for science and
technology.
The issue has new relevance since Harvard University President Lawrence H. Summers roiled the
academic world last month by suggesting that the country's shortage of elite female scientists might stem in part from "innate"
differences between men and women. Critics accused him of saying that women are not genetically capable of doing math and
science as well as men; Summers said he was misunderstood.
The notion that girls and boys cognitively develop differently is hardly rocket science. "Any
elementary teacher can tell you that a class with 15 boys and five girls is very different from a class with 15 girls and
five boys," wrote Scott Hollinger, principal of McAuliffe Elementary School in McAllen, Tex., in an e-mail response to questions
about the issue.
Young boys are more physical and seem more spatially aware at a younger age, while girls are
more social and learn language faster, educators say. (Thomas Jefferson once was 65 percent male, and the admissions test
was made more verbal, although other factors helped bring in more girls, and the challenge remains to bring in even more,
according to Principal Elizabeth Lodal.) But because girls and boys develop differently on average, research suggests that
they can be directed to develop in different ways.
"Experience matters," said Susan Levine, a psychology professor at the University of Chicago.
Harvard University Professor Kurt Fischer, who is director of the university's Mind, Brain and
Education Program, said none of the developmental differences mean anything about actual abilities.
Teachers and scientists say that there are greater differences in learning styles within each
sex than there are between the sexes and that any school or teacher that doesn't approach students as individuals is missing
the mark.
At Thomas Jefferson, nobody says girls, in general, can't do what boys in general can do academically
-- if they want to. "It's not an issue of innate capability," said physics teacher John Dell.
But in some subjects, it appears they don't want to. Although all Thomas Jefferson students are
required to take computer science, the more advanced elective courses are heavily populated with boys, as are advanced physics,
engineering and math, teachers and students say; biology and chemistry classes are more attractive to girls, as are the humanities.
Students, teachers and administrators attribute class enrollment to factors including personal
interests and personality, levels of exposure at younger ages and the subtle -- and not so subtle -- stereotypical signals
sent by adults.
Boys, for example, are more often exposed to computers and blocks at an earlier age than girls
-- perhaps because they like them more, perhaps not -- and thus come early to engineering, a subject that requires early interest
for proper sequential course enrollment, teachers said.
Girls are usually more social -- something Jan Taylor, an engineer turned school counselor at
Thomas Jefferson, believes is "hard-wired" -- and physics and math are commonly seen as more individual pursuits. Biology,
on the other hand, is usually seen as more collaborative, students said.
Boys, Dell said, are more generally programmed for conflict, and part of scientific endeavor
is to challenge conventional wisdom with an argument. And boys don't mind being wrong as much as girls, both boys and girls
said.
"I like to be safe rather than put myself out there," said 16-year-old junior Beth Martin.
Many girls find some classroom environments intimidating. Take, for example, the computer systems
labs. All day, nearly all of the chairs are occupied by males. The teachers admit testosterone rules the room. The atmosphere
"is intense," and many girls don't see the room as "friendly," said Strong, who is considering moving the computers to the
back of the room to make it more welcoming to girls.
One traditionally male-dominated laboratory already has attracted more girls by taking "gender
out of the classroom," said Rick Buxton, director of the prototyping laboratory, where students often use heavy equipment
to build things.
Buxton stopped making assignments by sex -- "We stopped saying, 'You can't do that because of
your size' " -- and banned profanity and off-color jokes. Now enrollment is split evenly.
"The girls began to see it as a safe place," Buxton said. "They like working with their hands
as much as anyone else. Give them an environment they are comfortable in, and they will come."
It was one teacher's insistence on calling on boys more often than girls that helped lead to
the creation in 2001 of Tomorrow's Women in Science and Technology, aimed at helping empower women at the school.
Now TWIST, along with two other organizations for girls, helps mentor young elementary and middle
school girls.
Part of the goal is to help them overcome social pressures, which weigh more on girls. Lisa Marrone,
16, a junior, said in middle school she was torn between academics and not "having a reputation for being a bookworm." When
she got to Thomas Jefferson, she realized she could be social and smart.
Dell said that critics might be looking at the whole issue of sex in science wrong. "Physics
and math are traditionally lonely pursuits," he said. "Society places value in having a good pool of physicists and mathematicians.
But just because the country has a desire to have this pool, that doesn't mean it is a natural choice for an individual."
The natural choice for Rachel Miller this year was to take a break from math. She took AP calculus
as a freshman, multivariable calculus and linear algebra as a sophomore and complex analysis and differential equations as
a junior.
While the boys on her math level joined the top class, she decided to take a break
and have some fun. "High school," she said, "is a time to explore."
ARTICLE
THREE:
Schools
+ kids = math tests
The Best Way To Teach Math Is....... In no
other subject does the pendulum swing as much as it does in math. Currenty another wave is occuring (math reform) about the
way children learn math. Is math a spectator sport? Is it better to teach math using hands on, engaging, authentic strategies?
Is math about thinking or memory? You decide which side of the fence you sit on with the 'math wars'. See what teachers in
Arizona are doing.
Monica Mendoza The Arizona Republic Feb. 22, 2005
The
lights were dimmed in the Glendale Elementary School District boardroom. The overhead projector was on and Associate Superintendent
Mark Joraanstad was showing four math problems to a silent crowd of educators.
These, he said, were the first four
problems of the high school AIMS math test. A nervous laughter rippled through the crowd. The problems were tough.
"This
is the test our current eighth-graders will take in two years," he said. "It's extremely high-stakes."
High-stakes testing and
low academic performance in mathematics are the reasons Glendale teachers have overhauled their math program, ramping up the
rigor of the courses in grades K-8 and devoting time to extra training for teachers. They're not alone.
Across the
Valley, there is a buzz about math. The third "R," which may have taken a back seat in recent years to reading and writing,
has been declared a top priority by the state superintendent of public instruction.
Scores of elementary teachers are
heading into state-sponsored math academies. Parents are joining children for "math nights" at schools throughout the Valley.
Amid the activity, a decade-old national debate still simmers over the best way to teach math: the traditional way
of memorizing and worksheets or the new constructivist way of hands-on and exploration. Arizona teachers say their No. 1 priority
is preparing students for high school algebra and geometry. And instead of digging in on dogma, they are finding ways to use
both approaches.
"If we don't give our kids careful, structured education in math, they don't get into advanced math
in high school and they don't get into college," Joraanstad said. "That preparation starts in kindergarten."
New attention
Too many Arizona students are arriving
in high school not ready for algebra and geometry, the state's education chief, Tom Horne, said. It puts unfair pressure on
high school instructors to catch students up in the two years they have to prepare before their first try at the AIMS, a three-part
test students must pass to graduate. In August, the latest results showed that six out of 10 high school sophomores failed
the math portion of AIMS.
Last summer, Horne created math academies, daylong training seminars for math teachers to
learn the best ways to teach mathematics, to motivate middle school students and pique the interest of elementary students.
It's about a $248,000-a-year venture, using state and federal money.
"There are elementary teachers for whom math is
not their thing," Horne said. "We are learning that teachers' attitudes influence the kids. If a teacher is not happy teaching
math, the kids will pick that up."
Glendale Union High School District math coordinator Cory Shinkle is pleased that
math is at the top of the priority list. For years, the district has invited future freshmen to summer math camp, because
eighth-grade math scores showed students were not ready for algebra. In Glendale's nine high schools, there are no remedial
math classes; students go right into algebra. Last summer, 600 students signed up for the summer math camp.
"With AIMS
standards, they have to get through algebra and geometry by the end of their sophomore year to pass AIMS," Shinkle said.
Math wars
School officials in every district want to
use the best math books and methods. That means, whether they like it or not, they have to wade into the math curriculum wars
when they choose textbooks.
"There is a long history of trying alternative ways of teaching math," said Alfinio Flores,
professor of mathematics education at Arizona State University.
In the mid-1990s, the release of the Trends in International
Mathematics and Science Study that showed U.S. eighth-graders falling far behind eighth-graders from other countries triggered
new math standards by the National Council of Teaching Mathematics. It was the start of the "math wars," an argument over
the best way to teach math. Traditionalists believe in memorizing algorithms, practicing and sequential text with extensive
practice. Constructivists emphasize the process, discovery learning, the use of manipulatives and asking students to explain
their reasoning. In some states, like California, the debate is likened in vehemence to the phonics vs. whole language debate
of the 1990s.
Madison Elementary School District in north-central Phoenix uses the constructivist approach. Teachers
let children explore a variety of ways to solve problems, said Debbie Gordon, math specialist and third-grade teacher at Richard
Simis Elementary School.The approach is different from her school days, she said, when there was only one way to solve a problem.
In her class there are giant flip charts, fraction cutout pieces, magnets and any other thing kids can cut up, hold or divide
as they work through math problems.
In a lesson on fractions, Gordon posed this question to students: "Which is greater
7/8 or 2/3? Explain using words and anything else that will prove your answer."
Kids drew out their answers,
some using "fraction cards" to help visualize the answer. Each child came up with a different way to solve the problem and
documented their work in their "math journal." Gordon gives half credit for a correct answer and half credit for explaining
how a student arrived at the answer.
In Alhambra Elementary School District, teachers use a traditional "focused, guided
approach." It means teachers target skills and carefully guide children through the learning process to mastery. There is
less time spent on exploring the process and more time getting the answer.
"The approach we take, we feel is better;
it helps the learners organize so they don't have to do that on their own, it helps them move through material easier," said
Michael Rivera, Alhambra director of curriculum and instruction.
Structure ensures teachers are completely conveying
the Arizona State Standards, Rivera said.
"We almost have a fail-safe system," he said. "Nothing is left to chance."
ASU
Professor Flores said there is no silver bullet approach. In Arizona, some of the heated debate over math instruction was
cooled by creation of state standards for math, which tell teachers exactly what they should be teaching at each grade level.
"Memory is still very important," Flores said. "The difference is they will memorize with understanding. When you
ask a third-grader, what is "5 times 3," they need to retrieve that from memory, but explain how they got the answer."
Middle ground
Mathematics textbooks are million-dollar
ventures for Valley school districts. The Glendale Elementary district will spend $1.2 million on math books and supporting
materials this school year.
In the Phoenix Elementary District, school officials, who expect to pay $800,000 for math
books, have spent months choosing new textbooks. A committee of 25 started with the research, developed a list of characteristics
of the student population and Arizona state standards in math, and matched the lists against textbooks.
"The research
showed us that kids working hands-on, in a collaborative way, have greater learning," said Vicente Ontiveros, Phoenix Elementary
curriculum director. "But you cannot win the academic game just with manipulatives. You have to memorize the addition, those
are basic facts."
The committee chose a short list of textbooks, which are on display in the district office for teachers
and parents to view. The school board is expected to make a selection in March.
"I was expecting the math wars fight,"
Ontiveros said. "What happened is, we began with research. We found there is a happy medium between the two."
In the
Glendale Elementary District there are math coaches in every school, and teachers are learning new ways to teach math, Joraanstad
said. This school year, there is one class of eighth-graders taking high school algebra at each school. Joraanstad's goal
is for all eighth-graders to take algebra. This, he said, would give Glendale students an edge when they arrive in high school.