"This Panel, diverse in experience, expertise, and philosophy, agrees
broadly that the delivery system in mathematics education—the system that
translates mathematical knowledge into value and ability for the next
generation—is broken and must be fixed." (Foundations For Success)
Created by Executive Order,The National Mathematics Advisory Panel was asked to use the “best available scientific evidence” and recommend ways to improve the mathematics education of American students.
The National Mathematics Advisory Panel's Final Report: Foundations For Success , was published in March 2008 and is the product of over two years of hard work by a very diversified panel consisting of leaders in mathematics, mathematics education, and cognitive psychology.
A Few of the Final Report's 45 Key Findings and Recommendations:
The Panel cautions that to the degree that calculators impede the development of automaticity, fluency in computation will be adversely affected. Mathematicians should be included in greater numbers, along with mathematics educators, mathematics education researchers, curriculum specialists, classroom teachers, and the general public, in the standard-setting process and in the review and design of mathematical test items for state, NAEP, and commercial tests.
More from the Math Panel's "Report of the Task Group on Conceptual Knowledge and Skills": http://www.ed.gov/about/bdscomm/list/mathpanel/report/conceptual-knowledge.pdf
"Computational facility rests on the automatic recall of addition and related subtraction facts,
and of multiplication and related division facts. It requires fluency with the standard
algorithms for addition, subtraction, multiplication, and division. Fluent use of the algorithms
not only depends on the automatic recall of number facts but also reinforces it."
"Before they begin algebra course work, middle school students should have a
thorough understanding of positive as well as negative fractions."
"International studies show that high-achieving nations teach for mastery in a few
topics, in comparison with the U.S. mile-wide-inch-deep curriculum. A coherent
progression, with an emphasis on mastery of key topics, should become the norm in
elementary and middle school mathematics curricula. There should be a de-emphasis
on a spiral approach in mathematics that continually revisits topics year after year
without closure."
Newspaper Articles About the Final Report:
Focus on algebra, U.S. panel tells schools | csmonitor.com
A Must Read: AFT - Publications - American Educator - Spring 2008 - What's Missing from Math Standards? In this American Educator article written shortly after the release of the NMAP's Final Report, Michigan State University Professor William Schmidt discusses the meaning and importance of focus, rigor, and coherence in math standards and that most US state's math standards are lacking these elements. He comments on "why several states, instead of addressing the lack of coherence, focus, and rigor in their standards, have tried to raise math achievement by increasing Carnegie units required for high school graduation and specifying higher-level courses that must be completed (Dounay, 2006). Unfortunately, this strategy won't work. Neither seat time nor credentials are reasonable indicators of student learning."
He also writes, "I've been beating the drum for focus, rigor, and coherence for many years, and there has been some progress. Some of the more recent standards are more focused, but they're still not very coherent. Many states have reduced the number of topics per grade, but sometimes they have removed the wrong topics, making their standards even more incoherent. In order for U.S. math standards to improve, states and districts must bring mathematicians into the standards setting process—and push the politics out."