Author: Art Bardige

I am a digital learning pioneer who believes that technology can play a great role in enabling every child to learn efficiently, effectively, and economically. What if Math is my latest work and the most exciting I have ever been involved with. I hope you will give it a try.

The Magic Wand

What if I could give you a magic wand to wave over our educational system and make it fulfill our dreams for our children? What would you have it do?

I find this question stumps most people.

We all know education in America is far from what we either want or need it to be. We all know it lacks the essential creativity our children will need for 21st century work and life. We all know it fails even the least stringent tests for those who need it most. We hear the same refrain again and again. More money — even though we have tripled our per pupil expenditures over the past half century without any significant improvement in performance. Better teachers and teacher training – even as we have taken away the opportunity to be imaginative and entrepreneurial which brings the best and brightest into a discipline. More demanding – even though we have not a shred of evidence that our children are responding by caring more and working harder. Science – even if what we are measuring will not be a useful life and work skill. To make matters even worse, education in America seems so resistant to change, so overwhelmingly complex, so replete with attempts to transform it, no wonder my question stumps most people.

No doubt great teachers are transformative but until we make their jobs transformative we will just have to hope research into cloning makes a huge breakthrough, because we will never get enough great teachers, never ever. No doubt more money is necessary in many places, but we have cloaked our schools in so many narrow demands that we starve the essential. No doubt we need to demand more of our children but more of what, for we have asked them to work harder and not work smarter even though school today should be about smarter and not harder. And no doubt we require more learning science and more learning research, but when we study the same old we get the same old, it does not take any scientific research to find out that barely 1/5th of our students really master the required content.

We know what we need. Sir Ken Robinson’s TED Talk has been watched more times than any other. Not just any other on education, but any other TED Talk, now approaching 30 million times. Ken talks about creativity in education. We are starving for it. So how do we get it to happen?

What could a magic wand do?

If I had such a magic wand I would use it to make a minor change in the instructions of our new Common Core Tests. The tests are designed to be given on internet-connected computers. I would change the instructions to enable every student full educational access to the Internet at any time during the tests. The Web is certainly full of strange beasts and of course we should protect our students from accessing those, but everything else, sites like YouTube that are today blocked by many school systems should be accessible, spreadsheets, Google searches, Wikipedia, sites designed to help students take tests, yes even help from a friend. Anything of educational value.

When our students leave our classrooms and go to work they will live in the real world where they will have such full Web access. Don’t we want them to learn those things that will enable them to use that access to solve problems and to learn to do things? Don’t we want them to use this incredible new tool that is defining 21st century work and life to its fullest advantage? Don’t they need their schools to prepare them for the kinds of tasks they will perform which almost certainly will involve the Web?

The Common Core tests are redefining education. If we give our students full educational Web access when they take these tests, they will be able to take charge of their learning, and they, not the tests, will redefine education. Oh, for sure the tests will have to change and our classrooms and teachers will most certainly change, because there will be no reason to teach our children the long division algorithm any more then we should go back to teaching them the square root algorithm. They will not get “What is ____?” questions whose answer could be easily found on the internet. They will have to get “What if…” questions that will challenge their creativity, demand knowledge, and engage their insight. The tests will have to be designed to represent the real world and not an artificial one that has produced profound and fatal flaws as described by Steve Rasmussen.

Such a minor change in the instructions will change our schools in dramatic ways and open a floodgate to creativity for both our teachers and our children. Magic wands are simple things, but they have the capability to make wonderful happenings. Opening the internet door to our tests and our schools would profoundly change education.

209 to 7

If a mathematician were asked what these two numbers had in common, she might wonder if they were both primes. They are not. A gambler might consider them lucky numbers because one of the prime factors of 209 is 11 (as you could find out by asking google) and 11 goes with 7. But that, like most gambling, is most likely just a random act. I got to thinking about these two numbers when I counted the appearance of two words in the Common Core Standards in Mathematics, fraction and spreadsheet.

Yes, fraction as you might guess appears 209 times and spreadsheet appears just 7 times in the K-12 math standards. Fraction appears very nearly 30 times as often in the Standards as spreadsheet does. And to make this ratio even worse, spreadsheet almost always appears in league with “calculators, spreadsheets, and computer algebra systems” or “other technology.” And in the Content Standards spreadsheet only appears in the high school portion.

Now I ask you which of these terms represent what our 21st century students will be working with as adults? Today our business and STEM workforces use spreadsheets as their primary quantitative tool and few people in business or in STEM professions manipulate fractions in either their workplace or home. Oh sure, we use ratio and proportion which produces rational numbers, and we use fractions in some of our recipes and in the headmath we do. But we no longer calculate in fractions on paper or on computers, and fractional values are today almost always dealt with as decimals and not common fractions. By the way the word decimal appears in the Standards only 48 times.

A 21st century curriculum would certainly seem to focus on those tools, skills, and concepts that would be of most use to our students when they enter the workforce. Now I grant you that fractions do have some uses, and manipulating fractions would help a student handle rational algebraic equations in case you feel strongly about that. But does it make any sense in this internet/spreadsheet age to spend the one to two years of every student’s math education focused on fractions? Does it make any sense that fractions should be a stumbling block that we require of every student? Does it make any sense to think of spreadsheets are only faster calculators relegated as an afterthought in the Standards or in our math curriculum? Should functions which are the heart of scientific thinking, spreadsheets, and programming appear less often (172 times in the Standards) than fractions and only then starting in 8th grade.

The fundamental question we teachers must always ask is: “Are we educating our students for the past or for the future? If we are educating our children for the future as, of course, we must, then what should the spreadsheet to fraction ratio be in those 21st century standards?

Headmath vs. Handmath

There are really two kinds of mathematics we do every day. I like to call one headmath and the other handmath, one is the mental arithmetic and problem solving we all have to do and the other is the math on paper or more likely today, if you are not a student, on computers. Though we generally think of them as being the same, they are, in fact, very different beasts and this confusion is the source of great misunderstandings in our nation.

Many people today complain that students are not learning math because they cannot make change in stores, not estimate financial transactions, not understand a business proposal. They think that our students are not being taught math well and are too wedded to technology and fail to learn the basics. It has become an all too common refrain that our students need to return to the paper and pencil and practice their skills. As I talk to both the business and STEM communities I hear their pain but I do not agree with their cause. For I believe that while this problem is quite real, its cause is not a lack of paper practice but our failure to differentiate between headmath and handmath.

For the real problem is not in handmath, but rather in headmath, in solving math problems mentally, in guessing an answer, estimating a number, finding tricks and shortcuts to approximating it, and to mentally modeling problems so that you can decide if an opportunity is worth pursuing. The clerk who cannot make change is not writing the problem down on paper and solving it, he or she is trying to figure it out in his or her head. The worker who is asked in a meeting, “What do you think?” is tasked to come up with a headmath best guess. The buyer in the store trying to figure out the best deal is rarely using paper or calculator but trying to compute in her head.

Head math is stuff we have to do all the time, whether it is figuring a tip or planning a trip; yet today with our near total focus on standardized tests, most of what we do in school is handmath because we do not test headmath. Oh sure, we ask students on tests to do estimation problems, but they are just handmath in disguise. How many teachers ask students to guess an answer or start their class with oral drills? How many parents play mental math games with their kids? We don’t do these things anymore because all math has become handmath. And you get good at what you practice!

Recognizing the importance of headmath means making sure kids know their multiplication facts, that they learn the tricks of doing mental arithmetic and practice them, like using approximations. 95 * 63 is about 100 * 60 or 6,000. It means focusing on order of magnitude. In the days of slide rules, learning order of magnitude was crucial, today with calculators we rarely attend to it. So what is 20% of 10,000? Recognizing the significance of headmath also means that we need a lot less of some of the handmath things we are led to believe are basic. For while knowing the multiplication facts for headmath is critical, knowing how to rapidly and accurately perform the multiplication algorithm on paper is obsolete. Fractions are very useful for headmath but we hardly ever use them for handmath in business. So why do we waste time teaching student to solve hairy fraction problems on paper. In the 21st century spreadsheet world we need students who can use spreadsheets and headmath to judge results!

Welcome to What if Math

Three years ago I read a wonderful book by Keith Devlin called The Man of Numbers. It told the story of Leonardo of Pisa who was the first to convert Arabic arithmetic and algebra for European use. Devlin told Leonardo’s story and he described the process by which Leonardo’s book Liber abbaci (The Book of Calculation) became the basis for both the teaching of students and the development of European mathematics. Leonardo viewed his book and his task as providing a new means for merchants and businessmen to do the calculation they needed, replacing the slow, cumbersome, and error prone Roman Numerals they were then using. Devlin included the table of contents of Liber abbaci.

When I took a close look at that TOC, I saw the K-12 math curriculum we require every student today to master. I was awestruck. The math we teach our students today is the math Leonardo defined to meet the needs of medieval traders and bankers. It was not “basic.” It was not fundamental. It was the math needed and designed for 13th century business. It is obsolete! Business today does not use most of it and has no need for most of it. Do our children need to learn “long division”?

Since the invention of the personal computer spreadsheet in 1979, business has focused on the math of functions and not of solving equations with machines calculating we no longer require pencil and paper algorithms to do arithmetic. I have been a math educator for over 40 years and not only did it finally dawn on me that much of the math we teach is no longer necessary, but that the math we should be teaching, the math our students will need to learn and use, is the math of spreadsheets and not the math of Leonardo.

I started working with some wonderful friends to think about what this reinvention of mathematics education would look like. Peter Mili a truly great math teacher, Larry Reeves my longtime collaborator, George Blakeslee my educational mentor, Steve Bayle my technology mentor and one of the spreadsheet pioneers, my sons Brenan and Arran, and wonderful other friends who helped us think through and grow these ideas.

We developed our first version of What if Math two years ago as case studies for problem-based-learning. They were difficult to develop and difficult to use. Last fall I started making some spreadsheets for my friend Megan Peterson to try in her 2nd grade classrooms, and in January my friend, Craig Kelley, after seeing those primitive lessons, challenged me during one of our many breakfasts and lunches talking about the future of education. “I get the need, but if you want me to believe in a spreadsheet-based curriculum you need to show me what a 2nd grade curriculum would look like.”

I took up Craig’s challenge and over the past year months we have been developing these lessons for, by, and on spreadsheets. We have more than 60, spread across the curriculum to serve as models for many more. We have another 40 in our pipeline and more in our imaginations. This summer and winter break, Ryan McQuade, still an art student at Lesley University, has made them beautiful and developed a great website to make them accessible. We give them to you at no cost to begin to build the math curriculum of the future. Our dream is to make learning mathematics a creative, challenging, and collaborative experience for every student.

I look forward to your experiences and your thoughts and hope your students get the same thrill in learning that we have experienced.

Art

 

Learning as a Creative Experience

Sir Ken Robinson
Sir Ken Robinson

We are in a time of dramatic, some would say, revolutionary change in education, “challenging” as Sir Ken Robinson says, “what we take for granted.” His How Schools Kill Creativity, the most watched Ted Talk of all time, shows we hunger for learning as a creative experience. Yet we continue to treat learning math as a mechanical process focused on fluency in paper-based algorithms that demands monotonous practice. This curriculum with its ladder of “basic” skills from place value through solving quadratic equations was defined by Leonardo of Pisa in the year 1202 for traders, merchants, and lenders. It is obsolete! Machines run our algorithms and solve our equations. 

Function MachineThe math of business today is spreadsheet math based on functions and functional thinking building models, collecting and organizing data, to ask, “What if…” Today, spreadsheets have become the ubiquitous transformative tool, the mathematics technology tool used in science, technology, engineering, mathematics, and even the arts both at work and at home. What if Math brings spreadsheets, functions, and functional thinking to math education enabling students to learn math as a creative experience. Students work on Labs, not problems or exercises, using spreadsheets as laboratories to see patterns, build models, collect data, visualize, and ask What if…. What if Math has more than 100 Labs as models for a reinvention of the math curriculum. And we are adding new ones all the time. Labs range from foundational concepts like place value through algebraic functions. Labs include case studies for practicing problem solving on topics from sports to financial reasoning emphasizing out-of-the-box thinking and intuitive reasoning. Labs are experiments that students at all levels can use to learn math, to gain spreadsheet skills, to gain programming skills, and to develop out-of-the-box problem solving 21st century thinking. We seek to make learning a creative experience.