It is the easiest thing in the world for jurisdictions to make school more rigorous. The question is how do you get ALL of the kids through the MORE rigorous system. The more rigorous the more systems are tempted to use streaming on the low end but streaming leads to lower results for bottom streams not higher.

George Radwanski “streaming is a theoretical error, a practical failure
and a social injustice”.

What does it matter if one nation teaches more difficult concepts one year earlier? It only matters where students end up not who is ahead half way through.

Two articles - The first one is the usual narrative praising the Japanese education system, stressing the negatives for comparison.  http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/oct/08/why-do-japanese-children-lead-world-numeracy-literacy

The second essay is found in a blog called Education in Japan Community. The essay is discussing the math curriculum of the USA and Japan. The former physics teacher has a simple explanation that explains and confirms Natsuko premise that it is the Japanese school teachers that should be given full credit.

” It has to do with the different roles of American teachers and Japanese teachers, which started developing as early as the turn of the last century. “
http://educationinjapan.wordpress.com/of-methods-philosophies/the-japanese-math-curriculum/

And another thoughtful paper of interest, a 1998 paper entitled - Teaching is a Cultural Activity.
http://www.aft.org/pdfs/americaneducator/winter1998/TeachingWinter98.pdf

I find it amusing that Doug has cited Radwanski to support the current status-quo of student-centered learning models. Below is the 1987 report that Doug has cited -  http://www.canadianeducationalpolicystudies.ca/CanEdPolDoc1987Ontario.html

“He issued a series of recommendations including the implementation of early childhood education, standardized testing, “destreaming” of high schools, an “outcome-based” education and the replacement of the credit system with a common core curriculum.”  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Radwanski

Radwanski, like Natsuko who stress that the education received at the elementary level is critical for success in high school math, Radwanski stresses the same thing from a different perspective. However, outcome-based education (OBE) is not what is being practiced in Japan’s education system. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Outcome-based_education

Isn’t the differences between Japan and Canada, really all about the Canadian K to 12 education system relying heavily on the experts from the top such as Radwanski or Fullan? Whereas in Japan it is the classroom educators who become the researchers and publishes most of the research. It could explain why the focus in the Japanese schools is to ensure Japanese elementary students are prepared for high school math.

There were a couple parts of this post which I found quite interesting.  The first point mirrors my own experience growing up and attending public school as a child:  ” It wasn’t, and I believe it still isn’t, common for parents to help their kids with homework either (my parents never even asked me about homework). So in terms of my math skills, I think I can give all the credit to the education I got at school. And I don’t think my school was any more special than others.” 

The only parents I knew which helped their kids with homework, back in the day, were teachers.  The rest of the parents I knew, mine included, left the teaching up to our teachers.  It’s only been a very recent phenomenon to ask parents to become a part of their child’s learning environment!  If kids learned effectively in the classroom, there would be no need for asking parents to give up even more of their valuable time helping “teach” their children in the evenings.

Second point seems to be a common theme everywhere:  “I really think that the education you receive at elementary school is so critical to building a solid foundation in math - it would have been way too late if I waited until 8th grade. I can say with confidence that at least in my case, my elementary school education helped me build the strong math foundation.” 

Bingo.  After all the research has been compiled and read, and numerous studies been gathered, by and large the biggest indicator on successful math skills is dependent on how and what is being taught to kids at the elementary level.  It seems very simple, yet it is the biggest problem surrounding poor math skills today.  Many parents are forced (yes, forced) to teach their own kids multiplication tables and the 4 standard algorithms at home, as it is being left out of elementary school curriculums.  And now there are these “experts” such as Lynda Colgan and Marian Small preaching to parents that they have to become part of the solution by attending math workshops and learn about inquiry based strategies!  What utter hogwash.  Let’s get back to what works, so our kids have a chance at having a strong foundation to build on.

So true Tara - “And now there are these “experts” such as Lynda Colgan and Marian Small preaching to parents that they have to become part of the solution by attending math workshops and learn about inquiry based strategies!  What utter hogwash.”

Utter hogwash. I wonder how successful the parent math workshops really are. Recently, two articles where the education experts are talking at parents, chastising them for their deficits, and then telling parents they have mental blocks that must be over come. In the Star - http://www.thestar.com/opinion/editorials/2014/09/02/tackle_ontarios_math_deficit_editorial.html

On CBC - http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/back-to-school-how-parents-can-fight-the-fear-of-math-1.2755795

In the CBC article - A parent referencing grade 2 math,  “The [number] groups and expanded notation were foreign to us.”  It is the confusing methods that are foreign to parents, and as well as using math terms such as expanded notation in a grade 2 math curriculum. However, I do remember it well in the grade 2 to grade 5 math class, but it was not called expanded notation. Here is a video from CommonCore Kids that is exactly how it was taught when I was in school in the 1960s. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4AF7xj7pmWc

Unfortunately, in reality the students are being bombarded with confusing math methods that does nothing to prepared the students for high school math. As I have discovered, parent workshops have become more of a busy activity for the experts to emphasize the deficits of parents, than a learning opportunity for parents. http://sudburybeststart.ca/professionals/professionalresources/frontier-college-a-sampling-of-our-northern-ontario-workshops-and-activities/

Is hockey competence more important than math competence?

Effective instruction - teaching, coaching, leading professional development seminars - can only happen if the students are all at roughhly the same skill level.

Anybody who has ever taught anything where the results matter knows that.

Why? To address the students’ needs; to tailor the content and delivery of instruction to the students’ in an effective way.

We have house league, A, AA, triple A in hockey and everybody agrees to this system because it works.

Parents would be up in arms screaming and we would have a revolution in our hands if everybody played hockey in the same league.

And Canada would cease to exist as a serious contender in hockey.

That’s exactly what we managed to do in math.
Everybody plays house league together up to grade 10 when they can stop playing.

Hey! I feel it is extremely inequitable to me that I’m not Wayne Gretzky.
It is wrong that I can’t triple AAA. After all I can skate and I enjoy hockey very much and I have a good attitude.

Read some interesting articles on Asians and math. Some interesting points.

Asians go to school 60 days per year more than North Americans.

Asians also have much longer school days plus supervised homework since majority attend boarding schools.

Asians believe math is 100% effort not genetic.

Asian Americans score in the middle of the Asian pack on international tests even though they attend American schools from K-12. Asian Americans are far ahead of other Americans so is it Asian schools or Asian culture?

Most Asians with the means aim at American universities even in STEM areas to finish their education.

Real food for thought.

Singapore math seems to be spreading in some western private schools. Seems like a huge compromise between algorithms and highly visual manipulative concrete curriculum.

Facinating stuff.