Mathematics Education: A Predictor of Scientific Competitiveness

Abstract

AS WALL STREET TRACKS THE HEALTH OF AMERICAN BUSIness by monitoring indicators of economic productivity, so must scientists, parents, and taxpayers heed leading indicators of scientific productivity. Since mathematics is the foundation discipline for science, the state of mathematics education is a crucial predictor of future national strength in science and technology. Evidence suggests that our mathematics classrooms, like our smokestack industries, no longer provide adequate support for modern society. They deliver neither the mathematical foundation required for scientific research nor the quantitative literacy necessary for a democratic society. International Comparisons Because of its widespread utility in industrial, military, and scientific applications, mathematics is a crucial indicator of future economic competitiveness. The evidence is overwhelming, however, that the mathematics yield of U.S. schools-the sum total of mathematics learned by all students-is substantially less than that of other industrialized nations. Current levels of achievement in the United States are unacceptably low. Our mathematics curriculum is not what it ought to be, nor is it even close to what it could be. By looking downward through the grades, we can foresee the poor quality of mathematical understanding of future generations of scientists: a Non-U.S. citizens who take the Graduate Record Examination in mathematics average 100 points higher than U.S. students. The performance gap is twice as high in mathematics as in any other field-the next highest being in physics, the most mathematical of the sciences (1). a The mathematics achievement of the top 5% of twelfth grade students is lower in the United States than in other industrialized nations. The average twelfth grade mathematics student in Japan outperforms 95% of comparable U.S. twelfth graders (2). * U.S. eighth graders, who are about average in rote computation, are well below international norms in solving problems that require higher order thinking skills (2). Indeed, as the back-tobasics movement has flourished in the last 15 years, the ability of U.S. students to think (rather than just to memorize) has declined accordingly. * For fifth graders, the highest average mathematics achievement in typical U.S. schools (in Chicago and Minneapolis) is below the lowest average scores from similar schools in China (Beijing) and Japan (Sendai). Only one of the top 100 students in the fifth grade in these recent international studies was an American (3). * Even in kindergarten and first grade, differences emerge. Japanese children enter school ahead of U.S. children in mathematical skills. Only 15 of the top 100 first graders in a U.S.-China-Japan study were American. The unanimity of these studies, from different countries and different investigators, underscores their significance. Contrary to popular myth, the United States is not among the world leaders in the percentage of its youth who receive advanced education in mathematics. In the eighth grade, virtually all students take mathematics in all industrialized countries. At the twelfth grade level, most countries (including the United States) enroll about 12 to 15% of 18-year-olds in advanced mathematics courses, although in some countries (such as Hungary) the number is as high as 50%. These studies also show that there is no consistent correlation internationally between student achievement and time spent in mathematics instruction. Except in elementary school, where U.S. emphasis on mathematics is unusually light, many countries devote less classroom time to mathematics than we do. Similarly, average class size from country to country seems to be quite unrelated to achievement. Since the cultural diversity of American society is so much greater than that of most other countries, many believe that lower U.S. scores are due to the greater challenge of achieving excellence in a diverse society. Yet even in culturally homogeneous Minneapolisarea schools, average performance is well below comparable schools in China and Japan. Analysis of the data involved in these studies dispels many simplistic explanations for poor U.S. performance. Lower U.S. scores are not due simply to averages taken over a higher percentage of our population, nor are they due to less contact time in schools, or to the broadening effects of a heterogeneous population. As there are no simple causes, there are no simple solutions to the problem of poor performance.