A Defense of Everyday Mathematics

NYC uses Everyday Math, so I inquired about this and Andres Alonso, Deputy Chancellor for Teaching and Learning, sent me the following:

New York City takes a balanced approach to teaching mathematics: we want students to have knowledge of and facility with basic algorithms and skills, and we develop students’ conceptual understanding and problem solving abilities. We focus on children learning mathematics.

Everyday Mathematics, a research-based program funded in part by the National Science Foundation, is our k-5 mathematics curriculum. New York City Public Schools follow the standards set by the New York State Education Department, which provide the kind of grade-by-grade guidance that many other states are beginning to develop.

We have extensive evidence that Everyday Mathematics works. Recently the What Works Clearinghouse rolled out long-awaited ratings on the effectiveness of math programs for the elementary grades. This study showed that Everyday Mathematics has "potentially positive effects" on achievement compared with more traditional math programs (i.e. Houghton Mifflin Mathematics, Saxon Elementary School Math, and Scott Foresman-Addison Wesley Elementary Mathematics) which were found to have "no discernible effects" on learning.

A large study of students using Everyday Mathematics in Washington State found that they outscored a matched comparison sample of non-Everyday Mathematics-using students on the computation section of the Iowa Test of Basic Skills. Using the Washington Assessment of Student Learning (WASL) as a means of measuring student achievement of the State’s rigorous academic standards, it was found that the percentage of Grade 4 students in a sample Washington State district passing math standards before Everyday Mathematics was fully implemented was 38%. After six years, in 2005, that percentage has moved to 68%, a 30 percentage point increase within the district and a seven percentage point higher score than the state average score.

A study of students in Philadelphia found that in 2001, prior to adoption of Everyday Mathematics, the majority of Philadelphia fifth graders (59%) were at the lowest level, Below Basic on the PSSA, compared to 22% of all fifth graders in Pennsylvania. At the same time, only 19% of fifth graders passed (Proficient or higher), compared to 53% of fifth graders in the state. Since the adoption of Everyday Mathematics, the achievement gap has been considerably narrowed with those students who attain a passing score nearly tripling between 2002 and 2005. In 2002, nearly 60% of fifth graders scored Below Basic and only 6% scored at Advanced. By 2005, only 28% scored Below Basic, a decrease by more than half, while 20% scored at the advanced level, an increase of more than 300%

Most importantly, we now have several years’ worth of state test data documenting the gains that our own elementary school students have made using Everyday Mathematics. For example, the percentage of City 4th graders meeting or exceeding grade standards has increased by 18.9 percentage points, from 52% to 70.9%, since 2002.

In the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP 2005) survey data on mathematics in urban school districts released earlier this year, New York City fourth graders who use Everyday Mathematics scored among the top urban school districts in the country. We continue to study developments in math education, both in this country and internationally. We are convinced that we are on the right track.