[Congressional Record Volume 143, Number 79 (Monday, June 9, 1997)]
[Senate]
[Pages S5393-S5394]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                  A FAILURE TO PRODUCE BETTER STUDENTS

  Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, over the past decade, I have been 
continually puzzled by our Nation's failure to produce better students 
despite public concern and despite the billions of Federal dollars 
which annually are appropriated for various programs intended to aid 
and improve education. Not long ago, I asked a high ranking 
administration official during an Appropriations Committee hearing why, 
in his opinion, we were not doing a better job of educating our 
Nation's youth in light of the billions of dollars we have been 
spending over these past several years. The answer I got was not very 
illuminating.
  Mr. President, our children still rank behind those of many other 
nations of the world with which we will have to compete for the jobs of 
the future. Particularly in mathematics, where our kids will have to be 
especially skilled, the United States ranks 28th in average mathematics 
performance according to a study of 8th graders published in 1996. 
Japan ranked third.
  A closer look at the current approach to mathematics in our schools 
reveals something called the ``new-new math.'' Apparently the concept 
behind this new-new approach to mathematics is to get kids to enjoy 
mathematics and hope that that ``enjoyment'' will lead to a better 
understanding of basic math concepts. Nice thought, but nice thoughts 
do not always get the job done.
  Recently Marianne Jennings, a professor at Arizona State University 
found that her teenage daughter could not solve a mathematical 
equation. This was all the more puzzling because her daughter was 
getting an A in algebra. Curious about the disparity, Jennings took a 
look at her daughter's Algebra textbook, euphemistically titled, 
``Secondary Math: An Integrated Approach: Focus on Algebra.'' Here it 
is--quite a handsome cover on the book. After reviewing it, Jennings 
dubbed it ``Rain Forest Algebra.''
  I have recently obtained a copy of the same strange textbook--this is 
it, as I have already indicated--and I have to go a step further and 
call it whacko algebra.
  This textbook written by a conglomerate of authors lists 5 so-called 
``algebra authors,'' but it boasts 20 ``other series authors'' and 4 
``multicultural reviewers.'' We are talking about algebra now. Why we 
need multicultural review of an algebra textbook is a question which I 
would like to hear someone answer, and the fact that there are 4 times 
as many ``other series authors'' as ``algebra authors'' in this book 
made me suspect that this really was not an algebra textbook at all.
  A quick look at the page entitled, ``Getting Started'' with the sub 
heading, ``What Do You Think,'' quickly confirmed my suspicions about 
the quirky fuzziness of this new-new approach to mathematics.
  Let me quote from that opening page.

       In the twenty-first century, computers will do a lot of the 
     work that people used to do. Even in today's workplace, there 
     is little need for someone to add up daily invoices or 
     compute sales tax. Engineers and scientists already use 
     computer programs to do calculations and solve equations.

  What kind of a message is sent by that brilliant opening salvo?
  It hardly impresses upon the student the importance of mastering the 
basics of mathematics or encourages them to dig in and prepare for the 
difficult work it takes to be a first-rate student in math. Rather it 
seems to say, ``Don't worry about all of this math stuff too much. 
Computers will do all that work for us in a few years anyway.'' Can you 
imagine such a goofy passage in a Japanese math textbook? I ask what 
happens if the computer breaks down or if we forget and leave the 
pocket calculator at home? It appears that we may be on the verge of 
producing a generation of students who cannot do a simple mathematical 
equation in their heads, or with a pencil, or even balance a checkbook.
  The ``Getting Started'' portion of the text goes on to extol the 
virtues of teamwork, to explain how to get to know other students and 
to ask how teamwork plays a role in conserving natural resources. What, 
I ask--what in heaven's name does this have to do with algebra? I took 
algebra instead of Latin when I was in high school. I never had this 
razzle-dazzle confusing stuff.
  Page 5 of this same wondrous tome begins with a heading written in 
Spanish, English, and Portuguese, a map of South America and an 
indication of which language is spoken where. Pythagorus would have 
been scratching his head by this time, and I confess, so was I.
  This odd amalgam of math, geography and language masquerading as an 
algebra textbook goes on to intersperse each chapter with helpful 
comments and photos of children named Taktuk, Esteban, and Minh. 
Although I don't know what happened to Dick and Jane, I do understand 
now why there are four multicultural reviewers for this book. However, 
I still don't quite grasp the necessity for political correctness in an 
algebra textbook. Nor do I understand the inclusion of the United 
Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights in three languages, a 
section on the language of Algebra which defines such mathematically 
significant phrases as, ``the lion's share,'' the ``boondocks,'' and 
``not worth his salt.''
  By the time we get around to defining an algebraic expression we are 
on page 107. But it isn't long before we are off that boring topic to 
an illuminating testimony by Dave Sanfilippo, a driver with the United 
Parcel Service. Sanfilippo tells us that he ``didn't do well in high 
school mathematics * * *'' but that he is doing well at his job now 
because he enters ``* * * information on a pocket computer * * *''--
hardly inspirational stuff for a kid struggling with algebra.
  From there we hurry on to lectures on endangered species, a 
discussion of air pollution, facts about the Dogon people of 
West Africa, chili recipes and a discussion of varieties of hot 
peppers--no wonder our pages are having difficulty containing 
themselves. They are almost in stitches--what role zoos should play in 
today's society, and the dubious art of making shape images of animals 
on a bedroom wall, only reaching a discussion of the Pythagorean 
Theorem on page 502. By this time I was thoroughly dazed and unsure of 
whether I was looking at a science book, a language book, a sociology 
book or a geography book. In fact, of

[[Page S5394]]

course, that is the crux of the problem. I was looking at all of the 
above.

  This textbook tries to be all things to all students in all subjects 
and the result is a mush of multiculturalism, environmental and 
political correctness, and various disjointed discussions on a 
multitude of topics which certainly is bound to confuse the students 
trying to learn and the teachers trying to teach from such unfocused 
nonsense. It is not just nonsense, it is unfocused nonsense, which is 
even worse.
  Mathematics is about rules, memorized procedures and methodical 
thinking. We do memorize the multiplication tables, don't we? Else how 
will one know that nine 8s are 72 and that eight 9s are 72. This new-
new mush-mush math will never produce quality engineers or 
mathematicians who can compete for jobs in the global market place. In 
Palo Alto, CA, public school math students plummeted from the 86th 
percentile to the 56th in the first year of new-new math teaching. This 
awful textbook obviously fails to do in 812 pages what comparable 
Japanese textbooks do so well in 200. The average standardized math 
score in Japan is 80. In the United States it is 52.
  When my staff contacted Marianne Jennings to obtain a copy of this 
textbook, I did learn one good thing about it. She told my staff that 
because of public outcry the public schools in her area have 
discontinued its use and have gone back to traditional math textbooks. 
Another useful purpose has been served by my personal perusal of this 
textbook. I now have a partial answer to my question about why we don't 
produce better students despite all the money that Federal taxpayers 
shell out.
  The lesson here is for parents to follow Marianne Jennings' lead and 
take a close look at their children's textbooks to be sure that the 
new-new math and other similar nonsense has not crept into the local 
school system.
  All the Federal dollars we can channel for education cannot 
counteract the disastrous effect of textbooks like this one. They will 
produce dumb-dumb students and parents need to get heavily involved to 
reverse that trend now!
  Mr. President, I ask that an article from the May 26 edition of U.S. 
News and World Report on the same subject be printed in the Record at 
this point.
  The title of the article is, ``That so-called Pythagoras.''
  There being no objection, the article was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

           [From the U.S. News & World Report, May 26, 1997]

                       That So-Called Pythagoras

                             (By John Leo)

       ``Deep Thoughts'' started as Jack Handy's running joke on 
     TV's Saturday Night Live--a series of mock-inspirational 
     messages about life that make no sense at all. Now ``Deep 
     Thoughts'' are available on greeting cards, including one 
     that pokes fun at the fuzzy new math in the schools. The card 
     says: ``Instead of having `answers' on a math test, they 
     should just call them `impressions,' and if you got a 
     different `impression,' so what, can't we all be brothers?''
       Pretty funny. But it's hard for satire to stay ahead of 
     actual events these days, particularly in education. The 
     ``New-New Math,'' as it is sometimes called, has a high-
     minded goal: Get beyond traditional math drills by helping 
     students understand and enjoy mathematical concepts. But in 
     practice, alas, the New-New Math is yet another educational 
     ``Deep Thought.''
       Basic skills are pushed to the margin by theory and the 
     idea that students should not be passive receivers of rules 
     but self-discoverers, gently guided by teachers, who are co-
     learners, not authority figures with lessons to impart. 
     Correct answers aren't terribly important. Detractors call it 
     ``whole math,'' because students frequently end up guessing 
     at answers, just as children exposed to the ``whole 
     language'' fad in English classes end up guessing at words 
     they can't pronounce. ``Although the Wicked Whole-Language 
     Witch is dying, the Whole-Math Witch isn't even ill,'' said 
     Wayne Bishop, professor of mathematics at California State 
     University-Los Angeles.
       Mathematically Correct, a San Diego-based group which 
     strongly opposes whole math, recently posted a list of 
     commandments on its Web site, including ``Honor the correct 
     answer more than the guess,'' ``Give good grades only for 
     good work,'' and ``Avoid vague objectives.''
       Bologna sandwich? Those vague objectives include meandering 
     exercises that have little to do with math, such as 
     illustrating data collection by having second-graders draw 
     pictures of their lunch, then cut the pictures out and put 
     them in paper bags. Worse, the New-New Math comes with the 
     usual stew of ed-school obsessions about feelings, self-
     esteem, dumbing down, and an all-around politically correct 
     agenda.
       Marianne Jennings, a professor at Arizona State University, 
     found that her teenage daughter was getting an A in algebra 
     but had no idea how to solve an equation. So Jennings 
     acquired a copy of her daughter's textbook. The real title is 
     Secondary Math: an ``Integrated Approach: Focus on Algebra,'' 
     but Jennings calls it ``Rain Forest Algebra.''
       It includes Maya Angelou's poetry, pictures of 
     President Clinton and Mali wood carvings, lectures on what 
     environmental sinners we all are and photos of students 
     with names such as Tatuk and Esteban ``who offer my 
     daughter thoughts on life.'' It also contains praise for 
     the wife of Pythagoras, father of the Pythagorean theorem, 
     and asks students such mathematical brain teasers as 
     ``What role should zoos play in our society?'' However, 
     equations don't show up until Page 165, and the first 
     solution of a linear equation, which comes on Page 218, is 
     reached by guessing and checking.
       Jennings points out that Focus on Algebra is 812 pages 
     long, compared with 200 for the average math textbook in 
     Japan. ``This would explain why the average standardized 
     score is 80 in Japan and 52 here,'' she says. Marks do seem 
     to head south when New-New Math appears. In well-off Palo 
     Alto, Calif., public-school math students dropped from the 
     86th percentile nationally to the 58th in the first year of 
     New-New teaching, then went back up the next year to the 77th 
     percentile when the schools moderated their approach.
       The New-New Math has become a carrier for the aggressive 
     multiculturalism spreading inexorably through the schools. 
     Literature from the National Council of Teachers of 
     Mathematics, which is promoting whole math, is filled with 
     suggestions on how to push multiculturalism in arithmetic and 
     math classes.
       New-New Math is also vaguely allied with an alleged new 
     field of study called ethnomathematics. Most of us may think 
     that math is an abstract and universal discipline that has 
     little to do with ethnicity. But a lot of 
     ethnomathematicians, who are busy holding conferences and 
     writing books, say that all peoples have a natural 
     culturebound mathematics. Western math, in this view, isn't 
     universal but an expression of white male culture imposed on 
     nonwhites. Much of this is the usual ranting about 
     ``Eurocentrism.'' Ethnomathematics, a book of collected 
     essays, starts by reminding us that ``Geographically, Europe 
     does not exist, since it is only a peninsula on the vast 
     Eurasian continent. . . .'' Before long, there is a reference 
     to ``the so-called Pythagorean theorem.'' Much of the 
     literature claims that nonliterate peoples indicated their 
     grasp of math in many ways, from quilt patterns to an ancient 
     African bone cut with marks that may have been used for 
     counting.
       It's all rather stunning nonsense, but this is where 
     multiculturalism is right now. Unless you are headed for an 
     engineering school working with Yoruba calculators, or unless 
     you wish to balance your checkbook the ancient Navajo way, 
     it's probably safe to ignore the whole thing.

  Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of 
a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Enzi). The clerk will call the roll.
  The bill clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. ABRAHAM. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

                          ____________________