Investigating Math Investigations

Charles Reichley
Published: November 20, 2008

A battle is raging in Prince William County over the new elementary math curriculum, “Investigations in Number, Data, and Space” — also known as “Math Investigations.” 

The school system and most members of the school board hold high hopes that Investigations will improve our children’s math proficiency. Against the program are a growing number of parents who insist
it is a failure, which threatens to leave students years behind in basic math capability. And I think most people don’t have an opinion yet.

Before speaking about the program, I think it is important to remember that in any controversy, the arguments are made by the minority who are passionate about the issue. In this case, opponents note
they have over 1,300 signatures opposing “Math Investigations.” That certainly is a large number of people upset enough to put their name to paper. 

But other parents may be happy with the program — people who are happy rarely take the time to express satisfaction. Others may have no opinion at all. If the county cancelled the program, there may
be 1,500 people who would sign a petition asking the county to reinstitute the program.  Petitions and advocacy groups are important indications that investigation is needed, but are less helpful in
determining what should be done.

My instinct is to side with those who oppose the Investigations program. My research is certainly not kind to the program. In some cases the program has failed, at least as it was implemented
elsewhere.  There is little evidence the program works, and at least as much evidence that it has hurt, rather than helped.

Further, I find the arguments against Investigation’s teaching methods more persuasive than the defense of the supporters. The program’s methods seem cumbersome and to only apply to a limited set of
problems. As a person with an extensive math background, the criticisms of Investigations make sense to me. I think kids need a traditional focus on basic facts and methods.  If the county dropped the
Investigations program it wouldn’t bother me.

However, I’m not ready to join those who are fighting the program. I wouldn’t choose this program, and I don’t think it will work, but I don’t know that it won’t work.  And while the test results so far have
been disappointing, I don’t have enough data to say the program has failed based on those numbers (although I’m hard-pressed to argue against those who feel otherwise).

My children are out of elementary school, so I’m not directly affected by the program. I’m glad my children learned with the more traditional methods. Both my kids are in advanced math programs so they
seem to have learned well enough with the old program. And it’s hard to argue against parents who are spending hours teaching their children or hiring tutors to “supplement” the program. 

But I don’t know enough about how the program is implemented here. I don’t know how we are adjusting the program to meet our state standards, or if possibly the program can be tailored with a more
traditional approach.

Monday, I attended one of the math workshops being offered by the county. It is clear the school system is doing everything it can to make this program work. The people in charge believe they can teach
children what is necessary using the Investigations program.  They could be wrong, but the intense focus on teaching math can’t be all bad. They’ve invested a lot of time and money, and will do their best
to make sure that investment pays off.

Of course, that means student scores should go up simply because everybody is trying to prove they made the right decision. And with parents more involved, that should also improve scores. This
means if the scores stay flat, something is wrong, and good scores next year won’t prove the program works.

So I’ve got more investigation to do before I am ready to pass judgment on “Math Investigations.”  I’m very skeptical, but curious.  I’ve used some of the program’s ideas, supplementing my own children’s
math training. I’m a fan of looking at “other ways” to solve problems and taking the time to show why the “standard” methods work. 

But that should be a minor part of math education, not the overwhelming focus. “Investigations” feels backwards to me. I will address specific issues I have in a future column, and I look forward to
feedback on this issue.

Charles Reichley has been a Prince William County resident since 1981. He can be reached at critically .