A quarter century of US ‘math wars’ and political partisanship

BSHM Bulletin

Volumn 22, Issue 1, 2007, Pages 22-33

  Klein, David ^a  

^a CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 34548572241     PISSN: 17498430     EISSN: 17498341     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/17498430601148762     Document Type: Article

References (19)

1. 1996. Addison-Wesley secondary math:an integrated approach:focus on algebra, Menlo Park CA:Addison-Wesley.
2. Colvin, Richard. 2000. ‘Debate over how to teach math takes cultural turn’. Los Angeles Times, 17 March
3. Congressional Record of the US Senate. 9 June 1997. “ Robert Byrd ”. In ‘A Failure to Produce Better Students’, 9 June, S5393Senate.
4. Gutstein, Eric, and Peterson, Bob, eds. Rethinking mathematics:teaching social justice by the numbers, Rethinking Schools Ltd. copyright 2005
5. Hirsch, ED. 1996. The Schools We Need:Why We Don't Have Them, New York:Double Day.
6. Hirsch, ED. 2001. ‘Romancing the child’. Education Next,:34–39. www.educationnext.org/2001sp/34.html. Accessed on 22 August 2006
7. Jackson, A. 1997. ‘The math wars:California battles it out over mathematics education (Part II)’. Notices of the American Mathematical Society, 44:817–823.
8. Klein, D. 1999. “ ‘Big business, race, and gender in mathematics reform’, (appendix) in Steven Krantz ”. In How to Teach Mathematics, 221–232. Providence:American Mathematical Society.
9. Klein, D. 2000. ‘Math problems:why the US Department of Education's recommended math programs don't add up’. American School Board Journal, 187:52–57. www.mathematicallycorrect.com/usnoadd.htm. Accessed on 22 August 2006
10. Klein, D. 2003. “ ‘A brief history of American K–12 mathematics education in the 20th century’ ”. In Mathematical cognition:a volume in current perspectives on cognition, learning, and instruction, Edited by:James, Royer. 175–225. Greenwich, Connecticut:Information Age Publishing. www.csun.edu/ vcmth00m/AHistory.html. Accessed on 22 August 2006
11. Klein, D. 2005. The state of the state math standards 2005, Washington, DC:Thomas B Fordham Foundation. www.edexcellence.net/foundation/publication/publication.cfm?id=338. Accessed on 22 August 2006
12. McKeown, M, Klein, D, and Patterson, C. 2000. “ ‘National science foundation systemic initiatives:how a small amount of federal money promotes ill-designed mathematics and science programs in k-12 and undermines local control of education’ ”. In What's at stake in the K–12 standards wars:a primer for educational policy makers, Edited by:Sandra, Stotsky. 313–369. New York:Peter Lang Publishing, Inc.
13. National Commission on Excellence in Education. 1983. A nation at risk:the imperative for educational reform, Washington, DC:US Government Printing Office. http://www.ed.gov/pubs/NatAtRisk/index.html
14. National Research Council. 1989. Everybody counts:a report to the nation on the future of mathematics education, Washington, DC:National Academy Press.
15. Raimi, R. 2004. Uncivil war, in Education next, Stanford, CA:Hoover Institution. This is a review of California dreaming:reforming mathematics education by Suzanne M Wilson (Yale University Press, 2003), and may be found in expanded form at http://www.educationnext.org/unabridges/20042/raimi.pdf. The review as printed is at http://www.educationnext.org/20042/81.html. Accessed on 22 August 2006
16. Scharlemann, Martin. 11 October 1996. Open letter on MathLand 11 October, http://mathematicallycorrect.com/ml1.htm. Accessed on 22 August 2006
17. Schoenfeld, A. 2004. ‘The math wars’. Educational Policy, 18:253–286.
18. Wu, H. 1997. ‘The mathematics education reform:why you should be concerned and what you can do’. American Mathematical Monthly, 104:946–954.
19. Wu, H. 1999. ‘Basic skills versus conceptual understanding:a bogus dichotomy in mathematics education’. American Educator, American Federation of Teachers