Daniel J. Brahier
Department of Educational Curriculum & Instruction
Bowling Green State University
Bowling Green, OH 43403

MAY 1998

MUSINGS ON MATERIALS THAT SUPPORT REFORM

In the last Musings column, I reflected on the recent backlash to reform in mathematics education and raised the question as to whether we are destined to repeat our mistakes of the past, only to see the vision of the Standards disappear much like previous efforts to reform have failed.  It seems that much of the national debate is focusing on whether or not the recent NSF-funded curricular materials, such as Connected Mathematics and the Core-Plus Mathematics programs are accomplishing what they set out to do.

This debate over the validity and effectiveness of curricular materials is interesting to watch since one has to wonder whether resource books can, in and of themselves, bring about the reform of mathematics education anyway.  How does the teacher factor in to this?  Just because I have an Interactive Mathematics Project textbook in my hands certainly does not guarantee that my course will have a significant impact on my students.  Likewise, the fact that I use a 1971 Dolciani Algebra One textbook does not necessarily mean that the class will not meet the needs of my students either.  The reality is that effectiveness in the classroom is more a function of the teacher than the texts or materials used in the course.  Therefore, any attack on reform in mathematics education that is based on whether or not a district or state is using a particular set of project materials is seriously flawed.  I have continually dazzled their students with outstanding mathematical tasks, and I've observed classes in which students were required to purchase graphing calculators, only to let the technology collect dust as students push pencils day after day.

As we think about meeting the needs of each child, I wonder if too much attention is placed on the texts and resource materials, while not enough time is spent thinking about how to change classroom instructional practices.  Recently, I have received a number of phone calls from neighboring school districts, asking me whether I think textbook series A or series B is the best.  And, I almost always respond, "It's not the book that makes the difference; it's the teacher."  Five years ago, I decided that it was more important to meet my eighth graders' needs than those of the textbook authors and stopped using a textbook with them, once-and-for-all.  That's not to say that textbooks, whether traditional or reformed, are unnecessary.  Particularly when a teacher is new to the profession, texts can serve as a very useful guide and resource.  But it is dangerous when the resource guide becomes the curriculum because it can have the effect of taking the focus off of the needs of students in the class and can cause a block in the learning process.

Not surprisingly, districts in my area that are piloting NSF materials are split on their reactions.  Some are thrilled with the notion that the texts bring together the best of hands-on activities and problems that they used to spend a great deal of time trying to assemble on their own.  Others are convinced that children are not getting enough practice and are insisting on supplementing the materials with their own drills and worksheets.  Again, I have to believe that we can neither attribute the success of our program nor the decline of math competency on the curriculum alone; we need to look at the teaching going on in the classroom.

If you are teaching in a K-12 classroom, are you using the NSF materials?  If so, what is your reaction to the controversy?  If you teach at the college level, how are you making use of project materials in content and methods courses?  What messages should we be sending out to inservice and preservice materials about the value of these materials?  How might we research the relative impact of teaching versus reform resource materials in the classroom?  If this research is successful, do you think we might find that the reason why the materials are working or not is due more to the amount and quality of teacher education than the value of the materials themselves?