However, strangely, the math computation score is 20

percentile points lower. This child began sixth grade here

in transition math and ended the year with an A-minus.

We then moved to New Hampshire for a year, where

he was not allowed to take Algebra I. They maintained his

computational skills, while above those of the average seventh

grader, were not strong enough to take Algebra I (although he

was recommended for this class in Fayette County).

12-year-old as part of a Johns Hopkins program and scored

higher overall than the average college-bound high school senior.

What could this school be saying, then? I was so angry

at their gall, until I actually sat down with my son and

discovered that the school in New Hampshire was right.

Fifth grade skills including basic work with fractions were

very weak, although he had received As at the time. The truth

about UCSMP began to dawn on me.

Last year we returned to Fayette County. Algebra I

was begun easily enough, but the results were inconsistent.

At times, the entire class was clueless. An intelligent

boy began to lose his confidence in his ability to do math.

In spite of ending the year with above average results,

I decided to do a little experiment myself. Using the Saxon

Algebra I course, which utilizes an incremental approach,

comprehensive coverage, above-average depth and, most

important, practice, practice, practice, I decided to find the weak

spots in the UCSMP program and spend a little time filling

them in.

What we found overwhelmed both my son and me. The

sheer volume of information that had been missing in the

UCSMP program or was never taught nor learned to the point of

competence was astounding.

In addition, I had to literally take my son's calculator

from him. He had been taught to rely on the calculator to solve

the most basic of multiplication and division problems, and felt,

for example, that he never had to actually multiply the

numeric equivalent of pi by the squared radius of a circle nor did

he have to "work" a problem with exponents or square roots if

a button on a calculator could do it faster.

The results I had matched those cited in reviews of

the UCSMP Algebra I text, which incidentally received only a

C rating overall from Mathematically Correct, a lobby group

for common sense in math (www.mathematicallycorrect.com).

The criticisms include inadequate depth, superficial

treatment of factoring, inadequate attention to radicals and

radical expressions, too few word problems and not

enough practice problems.

The review also maintained that a student who might do

well in the UCSMP course would still have a

less-than-comprehensive grasp of Algebra I concepts due to the

inadequate coverage.

I further found that the spiraling approach of

UCSMP along with lack of practice is an obstacle to the internalization

of math concepts, a fact supported in a 1997 review of

selected mathematics textbooks for the Core Knowledge Foundation

State University, L.A. (This is also available through the

aforementioned web site).

The incremental approach and breadth and depth of the

Saxon program we used this summer didn't just fill in the gaps;

it provided the understanding that UCSMP algebra failed

to impart.

It isn't right that a much brighter than average student,

or any student, should have had to devote an entire summer

to learning things he should have learned during the school

year. However, he must learn these fundamentals in order to do

well on the SAT again in two years.

My son is a little discouraged at our findings, as am I. He

feels cheated, and rightly so. The generation of children

who began the University of Chicago program in elementary school

is yet to take the SAT.

Up to this point, the SAT scores in this county have

been proof of very little as there are too many mitigating factors.

The future SAT scores may provide the "proof" that the

UCSMP instruction is inadequate, yet that will be too late for

our children, the victims of this experiment with "new

math." I'm convinced time will tell us what we suspected all along.

Well, I for one refuse to let this boy be a victim any

more than he already has. I will continue to teach him

outside school hours, at home, with a curriculum that will give

him the comprehensive coverage that our children will need to

be successful in the outside world.

Frankly, the need for supplementation stinks. As far as

I'm concerned, the Board of Education and anyone else

responsible for this curriculum should be down on their knees,

begging the forgiveness of the children and their parents for wasting

our children's time, their future and our money and depriving

our children of the quality foundation in mathematics that

they deserve.

Meg Harris

[email protected]

<!--##############