U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office

Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800

Fax: (202) 512–2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402–0001

42–335 PDF 2008

THE NATIONAL MATHEMATICS ADVISORY PANEL

REPORT: FOUNDATIONS FOR SUCCESS

HEARING

BEFORE THE

COMMITTEE ON 

EDUCATION AND LABOR

U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

ONE HUNDRED TENTH CONGRESS

SECOND SESSION

HEARING HELD IN WASHINGTON, DC, MAY 21, 2008

Serial No. 110–93

Printed for the use of the Committee on Education and Labor

(

Available on the Internet: 

http://www.gpoaccess.gov/congress/house/education/index.html 

(II)

COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION AND LABOR 

GEORGE MILLER, California, Chairman

Dale E. Kildee, Michigan, Vice Chairman 

Donald M. Payne, New Jersey 

Robert E. Andrews, New Jersey 

Robert C. ‘‘Bobby’’ Scott, Virginia 

Lynn C. Woolsey, California 

Rube ́n Hinojosa, Texas 

Carolyn McCarthy, New York 

John F. Tierney, Massachusetts 

Dennis J. Kucinich, Ohio 

David Wu, Oregon 

Rush D. Holt, New Jersey 

Susan A. Davis, California 

Danny K. Davis, Illinois 

Rau ́l M. Grijalva, Arizona 

Timothy H. Bishop, New York 

Linda T. Sa ́nchez, California 

John P. Sarbanes, Maryland 

Joe Sestak, Pennsylvania 

David Loebsack, Iowa 

Mazie Hirono, Hawaii 

Jason Altmire, Pennsylvania 

John A. Yarmuth, Kentucky 

Phil Hare, Illinois 

Yvette D. Clarke, New York 

Joe Courtney, Connecticut 

Carol Shea-Porter, New Hampshire 

Howard P. ‘‘Buck’’ McKeon, California, 

Senior Republican Member 

Thomas E. Petri, Wisconsin 

Peter Hoekstra, Michigan 

Michael N. Castle, Delaware 

Mark E. Souder, Indiana 

Vernon J. Ehlers, Michigan 

Judy Biggert, Illinois 

Todd Russell Platts, Pennsylvania 

Ric Keller, Florida 

Joe Wilson, South Carolina 

John Kline, Minnesota 

Cathy McMorris Rodgers, Washington 

Kenny Marchant, Texas 

Tom Price, Georgia 

Luis G. Fortun ̃ o, Puerto Rico 

Charles W. Boustany, Jr., Louisiana 

Virginia Foxx, North Carolina 

John R. ‘‘Randy’’ Kuhl, Jr., New York 

Rob Bishop, Utah 

David Davis, Tennessee 

Timothy Walberg, Michigan 

[Vacancy]

Mark Zuckerman, Staff Director 

Sally Stroup, Republican Staff Director 

(III)

C O N T E N T S 

Page

Hearing held on May 21, 2008 ............................................................................... 1

Statement of Members: 

Altmire, Hon. Jason, a Representative in Congress from the State of 

Pennsylvania, prepared statement of .......................................................... 81

McKeon, Hon. Howard P. ‘‘Buck,’’ Senior Republican Member, Committee 

on Education and Labor ............................................................................... 4

Prepared statement of ............................................................................... 5

McMorris Rodgers, Hon. Cathy, a Representative in Congress from the 

State of Washington, prepared statement of .............................................. 82

Miller, Hon. George, Chairman, Committee on Education and Labor ......... 1

Prepared statement of ............................................................................... 3

Statement of IBM Corp. ............................................................................ 79

Statement of Witnesses: 

Castellani, John, president, Business Roundtable ........................................ 42

Prepared statement of ............................................................................... 44

Fennell, Francis (Skip), McDaniel College, past president, National Council of Teachers of Mathematics .................................................................... 7

Prepared statement of ............................................................................... 10

Haver, Dr. William, professor of mathematics, Virginia Commonwealth 

University ...................................................................................................... 24

Prepared statement of ............................................................................... 26

Slover, Laura, vice president, Achieve, Inc. ................................................... 13

Prepared statement of ............................................................................... 16

Slide presentation ..................................................................................... 19

Staggers, Dr. Wanda Talley, dean of manufacturing and engineering, 

Anderson School District Five ..................................................................... 29

Prepared statement of ............................................................................... 31

Wolf, Mary Ann, Ph.D., executive director, State Educational Technology 

Directors Association (SETDA) .................................................................... 33

Prepared statement of ............................................................................... 35

(1)

THE NATIONAL MATHEMATICS ADVISORY 

PANEL REPORT: FOUNDATIONS FOR SUCCESS 

Wednesday, May 21, 2008

U.S. House of Representatives 

Committee on Education and Labor 

Washington, DC

The committee met, pursuant to call, at 10:01 a.m., in room 

2175, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. George Miller [chairman of the committee] presiding. 

Present: Representatives Miller, Kildee, Payne, Scott, Woolsey, 

Hinojosa, Tierney, Kucinich, Wu, Holt, Davis of California, Bishop 

of New York, Loebsack, Hare, Shea-Porter, McKeon, Petri, Keller, 

and Foxx. 

Staff present: Tylease Alli, Hearing Clerk; Alice Johnson Cain, 

Senior Education Policy Advisor (K-12); Lynne Campbell, Legislative Fellow for Education; Adrienne Dunbar, Education Policy Advisor; Lloyd Horwich, Policy Advisor for Subcommittee on Early 

Childhood, Elementary and Secondary Education; Jill Morningstar, 

Education Policy Advisor; Alex Nock, Deputy Staff Director; Joe 

Novotny, Chief Clerk; Rachel Racusen, Deputy Communications Director; Margaret Young, Staff Assistant, Education; Mark 

Zuckerman, Staff Director; Stephanie Arras, Minority Legislative 

Assistant; James Bergeron, Minority Deputy Director of Education 

and Human Services Policy; Robert Borden, Minority General 

Counsel; Cameron Coursen, Minority Assistant Communications 

Director; Alexa Marrero, Minority Communications Director; Chad 

Miller, Minority Professional Staff; and Linda Stevens, Minority 

Chief Clerk/Assistant to the General Counsel. 

Chairman MILLER [presiding]. The Committee on Education and 

Labor will come to order for the purposes of conducting a hearing 

on the National Mathematics Advisory Panel Report: Foundations 

for Success. 

Twenty-five years ago, the release of A Nation At Risk first 

opened our eyes to an education system that was threatening our 

country’s global leadership. Decades later, we continue to face serious challenges to our nation’s economic competitiveness and future. 

The Programme for International Student Assessment found that 

the U.S. lags far behind other developed nations in math and 

science education. 

The National Assessment of Educational Progress scores are also 

sobering. They show that while the achievement gap is narrowing 

and elementary students are making some gains in math in lower 

2

grades, only about one-third of our eighth-grade students are at or 

above proficiency in math. Less than one-quarter of our high school 

seniors are at or above proficiency in math. 

And just 2 months ago, the National Mathematics Advisory 

Panel released a report on the state of math education and instruction in our country. The panel concluded that our national system 

for teaching math is ‘‘broken and must be fixed’’ if we are to maintain our competitive edge. 

We know that workplaces increasingly require that workers be 

able to work in teams across communities and continents. The jobs 

of the future will demand innovators with strong critical thinking 

and analytical skills. Our students simply won’t be able to develop 

these skills without a solid foundation in math. 

Today, we are here to discuss the findings of the National Math 

Panel’s report and how we can improve U.S. math education in a 

meaningful way. We will closely examine two major shortcomings 

identified by this panel in how our children are learning and being 

taught math. 

First, we have to raise our standards and expectations for math 

education. The current structure of the U.S. math curriculum is not 

conducive to helping students build math skills over time. The curriculum in our nation’s schools generally attempts to cover many 

topics at each grade level, meaning that each topic receives limited 

instructional time and inadequate concept development. Topics are 

introduced and then built upon in later years. 

By comparison, top-performing nations tend to present fewer topics at each grade level, thus allowing teachers to explore topics in 

greater depth. This approach encourages students to develop full 

proficiency in one topic before moving on to more complex topics 

and allows students to better comprehend the subject at hand. 

Second, we are not giving our teachers the training and support 

needed to provide effective math instruction to students. Teachers 

cannot be expected to teach what they do not know themselves. We 

have to provide teachers with opportunities to learn math while 

they are still in school and to participate in professional development programs throughout their careers. 

The panel recommends improving pre-service teacher training, 

in-service professional development, training and ongoing support 

for teachers—something I have long believed is fundamental to 

strengthening the quality of education that students receive. 

The best thing we can do to help our kids succeed in math is to 

invest more in the success of their teachers. I am glad to say that 

this Congress has taken some important first steps in this direction. Last year, we enacted the America COMPETES Act, which 

improves teacher education in math, science and other high-need 

fields. 

We also provided up-front tuition assistance of $4,000 per year 

for outstanding undergraduate students who commit to teaching 

math or another high-need subject in a high-need school. But as 

this report reminds us, it will take comprehensive, systemic reforms to improve math education in this country. 

This administration deserves credit for convening this panel. 

However, at a time when we need strong leadership in bolstering 

the fields of math and science, I am extremely disappointed by reVerDate 0ct 09 2002 21:46 Dec 01, 2008 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 G:\DOCS\110TH\FC\110-93\42335.TXT HBUD1 PsN: DICK
3

ports that this administration may withdraw the U.S. from participation in the Trends in International Mathematics and Science 

Study, an international exam given to high school students who 

take advanced placement math and physics courses. 

We will not be able to make the well-informed policy decisions 

needed to keep our nation on the cutting edge of innovation and 

discovery if we can’t measure the performance of our students 

against the performance of students in other countries. I hope that 

the administration will reconsider this misguided decision. 

Nothing is more important for the future of our country than 

building a world-class education system that will give every child 

the opportunity to succeed. I hope that the National Math Panel’s 

report serves not just as a wake-up call, but also as a catalyst for 

the significant changes needed to help reach that goal. 

I want to thank our panel of expert witnesses—I will be introducing them in a moment—for joining us today. We appreciate 

your time, your effort, and your work with the committee, and we 

look forward to hearing your testimony. 

I would like now to recognize the senior Republican on the committee, Congressman McKeon from California, for his opening 

statement. The chair also recognizes the presence of a quorum. 

Mr. McKeon?

Prepared Statement of Hon. George Miller, Chairman, Committee on 

Education and Labor 

Good morning. 

Welcome to today’s hearing on ‘‘The National Mathematics Advisory Panel Report: 

Foundations for Success.’’

Twenty-five years ago, the release of A Nation at Risk first opened our eyes to 

an education system that was threatening our country’s global leadership. Decades 

later, we continue to face serious challenges to our nation’s economic competitiveness and future. 

The Programme for International Student Assessments found that the U.S. lags 

far behind other developed nations in math and science education. 

National Assessment of Education Progress scores are also sobering. They show 

that while the achievement gap is narrowing and elementary students are making 

some gains in math in lower grade levels, only about a third of our eighth-grade 

students are at or above proficiency in math. Less than a quarter of our high school 

seniors are at or above proficiency in math. 

And just two months ago, the National Mathematics Advisory Panel released a 

report on the state of math education and instruction in our country. The panel concluded that our national system for teaching math is ‘‘broken and must be fixed’’ 

if we are to maintain our competitive edge. 

We know that workplaces increasingly require that workers be able to work in 

teams across communities and continents. The jobs of the future will demand 

innovators with strong critical thinking and analytical skills. 

Our students simply won’t be able to develop these skills without a solid foundation in math. 

Today we are here to discuss the findings of the National Math Panel’s report and 

how we can improve U.S. math education in a meaningful way. We will closely examine two major shortcomings identified by this panel in how our children are 

learning and being taught math. 

First, we have to raise our standards and expectations for math education. The 

current structure of the U.S. math curriculum is not conducive to helping students 

build math skills over time. 

The curriculum in our nation’s schools generally attempts to cover many topics 

at each grade level, meaning that each topic receives limited instructional time and 

inadequate concept development. Topics are introduced and then built upon in later 

years. 

By comparison, top-performing nations tend to present fewer topics at each grade 

level, thus allowing teachers to explore topics in greater depth. This approach enVerDate 0ct 09 2002 21:46 Dec 01, 2008 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 G:\DOCS\110TH\FC\110-93\42335.TXT HBUD1 PsN: DICK
4

courages students to develop full proficiency in one topic before moving on to more 

complex topics and allows students to better comprehend the subject at hand. 

Second, we are not giving our teachers the training and support needed to provide 

effective math instruction to students. Teachers cannot be expected to teach what 

they do not know themselves. 

We have to provide teachers with opportunities to learn math while they are still 

in school and to participate in professional development programs throughout their 

careers. The panel recommends improving pre-service teacher training, in-service professional development, training and ongoing support for teachers—something I have 

long believed is fundamental to strengthening the quality of education that students 

receive. 

The best thing we can do to help our kids succeed in math is to invest more in 

the success of their teachers. I am glad to say that this Congress has taken some 

important first steps in this direction. Last year we enacted the America COMPETES Act, which improves teacher education in math, science, and other highneed fields. 

We also provided up-front tuition assistance of $4,000 per year for outstanding 

undergraduate students who commit to teaching in math or another high-need subject in a high-need school. 

But as this report reminds us, it will take comprehensive, systemic reforms to 

truly improve math education in this country. 

This administration deserves credit for convening this panel. However, at a time 

when we need strong leadership in bolstering the fields of math and science, it is 

extremely disappointing that this administration recently decided to withdraw the 

U.S. from participation in the Trends in International Mathematics and Science 

Study, an international exam given to high school students who take advanced 

placement math and physics courses. 

We will not be able to make the well-informed policy decisions needed to keep our 

nation on the cutting edge of innovation and discovery if we can’t measure the performance of our students against the performance of students in other countries. I 

hope that the administration will reconsider this misguided decision. 

Nothing is more important for the future of our country than building a worldclass education system that will give every child the opportunity to succeed. 

I hope that the National Math Panel’s report serves not just as a wake-up call, 

but as a catalyst for the significant changes needed to help reach that goal. 

I want to thank our panel of expert witnesses for joining us today. I look forward 

to hearing more about their experiences and recommendations for how we can 

strengthen math education. 

Thank you. 

Mr. MCKEON. Thank you, Chairman Miller, and good morning. 

I am pleased to be here to discuss the report and findings of the 

National Mathematics Advisory Panel. Created in April, 2006, the 

National Math Panel was charged with providing recommendations 

on the best use of scientifically based research to advance the 

teaching and learning of mathematics. We know how important it 

is for our young people to be proficient, indeed to excel, in core subjects, including mathematics. 

Like reading, mathematics is a foundational subject. It is one 

upon which nearly all other learning can be built. In this time of 

rapidly changing technology, our children must be able to perform 

well in the subjects that will allow them to succeed. Unfortunately 

in far too many cases, our children are being out-performed by 

their peers around the world. We know that educational excellence 

today means international competitiveness tomorrow. 

That is why it is so important that we take steps to improve educational opportunities for all students. I believe today’s hearing is 

an important opportunity to explore the research and findings of 

the National Math Panel. One of their goals was to provide guidance on how to improve mathematics achievement for all students 

in the United States. 

5

I would like to hear more about the recommendations they developed and about our ability to implement them in our nation’s 

schools. I would also like to hear directly from the stakeholders 

whose job it is to put effective mathematics instruction into practice. 

From business leaders to classroom teachers, there are millions 

of individuals who are embracing the cause of educational excellence. I look forward to hearing these perspectives on the importance of a quality math education and the steps that are being 

taken to ensure it is reflected in classrooms around the nation. 

Of course, we all know that one of the most basic goals of the 

No Child Left Behind Act was to ensure that all children can read 

and do math at grade level by 2014. More than 6 years after NCLB 

became law, I think we can see both success and opportunity. It is 

true that achievement gaps are narrowing and test scores are on 

the rise. At the same time, we are still far from our goal of universal proficiency. 

I think today’s hearing will be enlightening as we look to the future of NCLB. We have with us a distinguished panel of experts 

who can discuss the relevance of NCLB’s goals when considered 

through the lens of the National Math Panel’s report. 

I want to thank our witnesses for being here today, and again 

I want to thank Chairman Miller for convening this important 

hearing. 

I yield back.

Prepared Statement of Hon. Howard P. ‘‘Buck’’ McKeon, Senior Republican 

Member, Committee on Education and Labor 

Thank you Chairman Miller and good morning. I’m pleased to be here to discuss 

the report and findings of the National Mathematics Advisory Panel. 

Created in April 2006, the National Math Panel was charged with providing recommendations on the best use of scientifically based research to advance the teaching and learning of mathematics. 

We know how important it is for our young people to be proficient—indeed, to 

excel—in core subjects including mathematics. Like reading, mathematics is a 

foundational subject. It is one upon which nearly all other learning can be built. 

In this time of rapidly changing technology, our children must be able to perform 

well in the subjects that will allow them to succeed. 

Unfortunately, in far too many cases our children are being outperformed by their 

peers around the world. We know that educational excellence today means international competitiveness tomorrow, and that’s why it is so important that we take 

steps to improve educational opportunities for all students. 

I believe today’s hearing is an important opportunity to explore the research and 

findings of the National Math Panel. One of their goals was to provide guidance on 

how to improve mathematics achievement for all students in the United States. I’d 

like to hear more about the recommendations they developed, and about our ability 

to implement them in our nation’s schools. 

I’d also like to hear directly from the stakeholders whose job it is to put effective 

mathematics instruction into practice. From business leaders to classroom teachers, 

there are millions of individuals who are embracing the cause of educational excellence. I look forward to hearing these perspectives on the importance of a quality 

math education and the steps that are being taken to ensure it is reflected in classrooms around the nation. 

Of course, we all know that one of the most basic goals of the No Child Left Behind Act was to ensure that all children can read and do math at grade level by 

2014. More than six years after NCLB became law, I think we can see both success 

and opportunity. It’s true that achievement gaps are narrowing and test scores are 

on the rise. At the same time, we are still far from our goal of universal proficiency. 

I think today’s hearing will be enlightening as we look to the future of NCLB. 

We have with us a distinguished panel of experts who can discuss the relevance of 

NCLB’s goals when considered through the lens of the National Math Panel’s reVerDate 0ct 09 2002 21:46 Dec 01, 2008 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 G:\DOCS\110TH\FC\110-93\42335.TXT HBUD1 PsN: DICK
6

port. I want to thank our witnesses for being here today, and again I want to thank 

Chairman Miller for convening this important hearing. I yield back. 

Chairman MILLER. Thank you very much. 

Other members of the committee are invited to submit written 

statements should they desire to. The rules allow for that. 

I would like now to introduce our distinguished panel, and again 

thank them so very much. I would also like to recognize Professor 

Bill Schmidt from Michigan for his help in assembling this panel. 

He gave the committee a lot of good advice about all your talents. 

So thank you for being here. 

Dr. Skip Fennell is a Math Panel member, and the past president of the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. He is a 

mathematics education professor at McDaniel College. He is the 

past president of the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. 

In 1990, he was honored as Maryland’s outstanding mathematics 

educator, and the Council for the Advancement and Support of 

Education and the Carnegie Foundation named Mr. Fennell professor of the year in Maryland in 1997. 

Laura Slover has been with Achieve since 1998, shortly after its 

creation by the governors and business leaders. As vice president 

of content and policy research, Ms. Slover leads Achieve’s work 

with the states in building mathematics capacity, oversees 

Achieve’s benchmarking initiatives, and directs the organization’s 

research agenda. She has extensive experience in reviewing academic standards in the U.S. and abroad and has written a number 

of reports and articles on this topic. 

Dr. William Haver is going to be introduced by Mr. Scott. 

Mr. SCOTT. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

I am pleased to introduce Dr. William Haver, the professor of 

mathematics at Virginia Commonwealth University in Richmond, 

Virginia. He has served as professor of mathematics at VCU since 

1992. He previously served as chair of the department for 13 years. 

He has been nationally recognized for his efforts to improve educational instruction and student learning in mathematics, and has 

received numerous rewards from state and local organizations. 

He is the author of dozens of research papers and articles about 

education policy, particularly in mathematics. He currently serves 

as principal investigator for two research studies: Preparing Virginia’s Mathematic Specialists and Mathematic Specialists in K-5 

Schools: Research and Policy Pilot Study. 

He received his B.S. with honors from Bates College, his M.S. 

from Rutgers University, and Ph.D. in mathematics from the State 

University of New York at Binghamton. He has previously taught 

and conducted research in mathematics at Bates College, Rutgers 

University, the University of Tennessee, and the Institute of Advanced Studies in Princeton, New Jersey. 

We appreciate Dr. Haver for being with us today. 

Chairman MILLER. Thank you. 

Dr. Wanda Staggers is an instructor at the Academy of Engineering and Biomedical Sciences and dean of manufacturing and engineering for Anderson School District Five in South Carolina. Dr. 

Staggers conducts teacher training at various colleges and universities across the nation and is a master teacher with Project Lead 

7

The Way in two subject areas: principles of engineering and computer integrated manufacturing. 

She assists with engineering camps for middle school girls 

through It’s A Girls Thing, a program in which she and a team of 

female college engineering students visit middle schools once a 

month to help girls become better informed about their career options. 

Dr. Mary Ann Wolf is executive director of the State Education 

Technology Directors Association, which provides national leadership in education technology, ensures members have meaningful 

professional development opportunities, and engages in partnerships with the public and private sector to collaborate on how educational technology supports teaching and learning. 

Dr. Wolf has led the national leadership summits in which her 

members and partners develop tools for the education community. 

She directs the technology assistance partnership program with 

nine federal evaluation grantees, and overseas, the national trends 

report focused on NCLB Title II, part (D), Enhancing Education 

Through Technology Program. Thank you for doing that. 

John Castellani, thank you so much for being here. We know you 

came on very short notice. Unfortunately, we had a cancellation of 

a representative of IBM, and we thank you so much for coming and 

representing the Business Roundtable. 

He is representing the Business Roundtable, an association of 

chief executive officers leading U.S. corporations with a combined 

workforce of more than 10 million employees, and $4.5 trillion in 

annual revenues. The Business Roundtable has been cited by the 

Financial Times as the most influential chief executive lobbying 

group in the United States, and is in the forefront of public policy 

debates advocating for a vigorous, dynamic global economy. 

Prior to becoming president of the Business Roundtable, 

Castellani was executive vice president of Tenneco Company and 

part of the senior management team that led the transformation of 

an ailing conglomerate into seven strong companies. So we expect 

miracles from you today. And thank you for the involvement of the 

Business Roundtable. We had a very good session yesterday on 

community colleges over on the Senate side, and again thank you 

for that participation. 

Dr. Fennell, we are going to begin with you. We have a light system here. When you begin speaking, a green light will go on. That 

tells you that you have 5 minutes. At some point, an orange light 

will go on, which means you have about 1 minute remaining. We 

would like you to think about wrapping up your remarks, but we 

want you to finish them in a coherent fashion. And then the red 

light will go on and we would appreciate you at that point stopping 

so that we can hear and allow for questions. 

Thank you so much for joining us. Tell us all you know in 5 minutes. [Laughter.] 

STATEMENT OF SKIP FENNELL, MEMBER, NATIONAL MATHEMATICS ADVISORY PANEL, PAST PRESIDENT, NATIONAL 

COUNCIL OF TEACHERS OF MATHEMATICS 

Mr. FENNELL. Good morning, Chairman Miller and Congressman 

McKeon. As noted, my name is Francis ‘‘Skip’’ Fennell. I am proVerDate 0ct 09 2002 21:46 Dec 01, 2008 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 G:\DOCS\110TH\FC\110-93\42335.TXT HBUD1 PsN: DICK
8

fessor of education at McDaniel College in Westminster, Maryland, 

and recent past president of the National Council of Teachers of 

Mathematics, and a recent member of the National Mathematics 

Advisory Panel. 

As you noted, the National Math Panel was appointed by the 

president to advise the secretary and the president on the best use 

of scientifically based research to advance the teaching and learning of mathematics. The panel was charged with making recommendations on improving mathematics achievement for all students, with a focus on preparing students for success in algebra. 

This report has 45 recommendations. To distill those 90 pages in 

5 minutes is somewhat of a challenge. So what I am going to do 

is, if you will, give you snapshots of particular issues that are critically important to all of this. 

You mentioned in your opening remarks the concern we have relative to curriculum structure around this country. In a nutshell, 

classroom teachers today are faced with far too many objectives 

and expectations. There are states in this country that have well 

over 100 expectations or objectives in a given instructional year. 

You cannot do that well. 

One of the things that the panel did was take a look at what 

does it take to get kids to be successful in algebra. Building off the 

work of the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics curriculum focal points, distilled, what we refer to as critical foundations for algebra. That is, when students get into that course called 

algebra, whether it is a course with algebra as its title or within 

an integrated mathematics curriculum, they really need to know 

and know well everything possible about working with whole numbers, everything possible about working with fractions—fractions 

being defined here as fractions, decimals, percent, ratio, leading on 

to work with proportion, and then also particular aspects of geometry and measurement. 

Not that that is all of what they would experience prior to algebra, but these are, if you will, the must-haves. So that is really important to us in our critical foundations and our benchmarks, 

which are suggestive of particular grade placement, go into that as 

well. 

We note that one of the reasons for the panel’s existence was to 

help define algebra and recognize the importance of algebra. Algebra is clearly a gateway or passport, if you will, to higher level 

mathematics. Students who complete algebra II are more than 

twice as likely to graduate from college compared to students with 

less mathematical preparation. This is particularly true among African American and Hispanic students. 

I am certain that you will hear more about the gateway nature 

of algebra in a few minutes from Laura Slover here, with her work 

relative to Achieve. 

We have known for some time that teachers make a difference. 

Well, of course. What we don’t know, and what we need to know, 

is what is it about effective classroom teachers that we can bottle? 

What is it about effective professional development that we can use 

in places around this country? The research needs in that particular area are critical, and it is a tremendous call, in my opinion, 

9

for teacher education around this country, both at the pre-service 

level and in-service as well. 

One aspect of our work with teachers is the recognition that we 

should consider, at the very least, elementary math specialists—

that is a person who has a specialist background in mathematics 

at the elementary level. You will soon hear comments from Bill 

Haver from Virginia Commonwealth regarding that state’s model 

program that is statewide and will engage all of us in an important 

initiative. 

But let me add the following: At a time of teacher surplus at the 

elementary school level, it is perhaps time to consider scrapping 

the model of the elementary teacher as generalist. Why not have 

specifically trained elementary math specialists starting from day 

one of their career? 

I would like to make a few statements about learning. One of the 

issues at the core of what has become known in education circles 

at the ‘‘math wars’’ has been a discussion, some would argue a debate, around conceptual understanding, skill development, and 

problem solving. What is important here? Well, all of it. This is not 

an either-or proposition. 

The National Math Panel has stated very clearly that understanding mathematics conceptually, becoming proficient in the use 

of procedures, and extending this to understanding and proficiency 

to solve problems must be developed simultaneously. Students, all 

students, need to make sense of the mathematics they are learning. 

How better to do that than to solve problems involving mathematics, whether that is deciding the impact of that 5 percent finance charge or that seemingly day-to-day increase at the gas 

pump. 

A very important message from the panel’s report addresses an 

issue that frankly drives me crazy. Mathematics is important for 

every student in every classroom in this country regardless of 

grade level, gender, race or ethnicity. This is not a ‘‘for nerds only’’ 

subject. It is a ‘‘for everyone’’ opportunity. There is no math gene. 

One of the most important findings in the Math Panel’s report 

is that effort matters. So once and for all, we need to stop the parent conference that begins with the phrase, ‘‘Well, you know, I was 

never good in math either.’’ Math is important for our culture, for 

our country and for our children. 

In addressing its charge from the president, the National Math 

Panel’s work was very much directed by research. However, the 

panel found that far more educational research is needed. Research 

of all kinds and types must drive what we do in this field of mathematics education. 

Importantly, in No Child Left Behind, with AYP looming every 

year, pre-K through 12 schools should be provided with incentives 

and resources to provide venues for and encourage collaboration in 

educational research. We need to find ways to make this happen. 

And finally, the America COMPETES legislation calls for funding a Math Now initiative for $95 million to improve mathematics 

instruction at the elementary and middle school levels. I encourage 

you to support this initiative and move it forward. 

Thanks for this opportunity. I look forward to your questions 

later. 

10

[The statement of Mr. Fennell follows:]

Prepared Statement of Francis (Skip) Fennell, McDaniel College, Past 

President, National Council of Teachers of Mathematics 

Good morning, Chairman Miller and Congressman McKeon. My name is Francis 

(Skip) Fennell. I am a professor of education at McDaniel College in Westminster, 

Maryland. I am also past president of the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (NCTM). From my appointment in April 2006 until last month, I also served 

as a member of the National Mathematics Advisory Panel. 

First, thank you for the opportunity to speak with you about the work of the National Mathematics Advisory Panel and its report, ‘‘Foundations for Success,’’ which 

was released on March 13. The National Math Panel was appointed in 2006 by 

President Bush to advise the President and the Secretary of Education on the best 

use of scientifically based research to advance the teaching and learning of mathematics. The Panel was charged with making recommendations on improving mathematics achievement for all students, with a focus on preparing students for success 

in algebra. 

I won’t belabor what you’ve already heard about the growing concern about our 

nation’s standing in a global marketplace and the importance of the education in 

the STEM fields—that’s science, technology, engineering and mathematics—to that 

standing. The concerns about how our students compare with those of other countries are well documented and one of the reasons the National Math Panel was 

formed. And the importance of mathematics, specifically algebra, as a foundation for 

success of all kinds is almost universally acknowledged. 

My comments will focus on a few major themes from the report. But I will state 

that there is a great deal more in the report’s 45 recommendations and related findings, which can guide mathematics education in the future. 

Curriculum Focus and Coherence 

One of the most significant challenges in mathematics education today is the need 

for curricular focus and coherence. Teachers today are guided by state curriculum 

standards that sometimes more than 100 learning expectations per grade level. Consequently, to get through all of these expectations, teachers address topics superficially rather than in depth, and learning suffers. The Math Panel’s report acknowledges the need for a more focused, coherent curriculum in grades pre-K—8 that is 

streamlined and emphasizes a well-defined set of the most critical topics in the early 

grades. 

By focused, the Panel means that curriculum must include (and engage with adequate depth) the most important topics prerequisite for success in school algebra. 

These are the Panel’s Critical Foundations for Algebra and accompanying benchmarks. By the term coherent, the Panel means that the curriculum is marked by 

effective, logical progressions from earlier, less sophisticated topics into later, more 

sophisticated ones. Improvements like those suggested in the report promise immediate positive results with minimal additional cost. 

The National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (NCTM) advocates for a broad 

vision of the mathematics for all students at these levels; it also recognizes the necessity for focus and coherence within a prekindergarten through grade 8 mathematics program. NCTM’s Curriculum Focal Points for Prekindergarten through 

Grade 8 Mathematics: A Quest for Coherence describes the need for a coherent set 

of mathematics topics that are important for all students to acquire at particular 

grade levels in order to prepare for the study of algebra as well as other important 

mathematics. It presents the most important mathematical topics for each grade 

level. The Panel’s Critical Foundations and accompanying benchmarks are consistent with NCTM’s Curriculum Focal Points and are connected as prerequisites for 

algebra. 

Fractions 

Some would argue that fractions may be the most critical of the Panel’s Critical 

Foundations for algebra. Fractions are defined here as fractions, decimals, and percent, leading to work with ratio and proportion. Several of the Panel’s task groups, 

as well as the Panel’s teacher survey, substantiated that difficulty with fractions is 

pervasive and an obstacle for far too many students to success in algebra. 

A nationally representative sample of over 700 teachers of Algebra I who were 

surveyed for the Panel rated students as having very poor preparation in ‘‘rational 

numbers and operations involving fractions and decimals.’’ As with learning whole 

numbers, a conceptual understanding of fractions, decimals, and percent, proficiency 

11

with their use, and the opportunity to solve problems with fractions is mutually reinforcing. 

Effort Matters 

Another important message from the Panel report addresses a cultural issue that 

seems to have gained more prominence in the United States, and that’s the fallacy 

that there is some ‘‘math gene’’ that endows some students with an affinity to learn 

mathematics. There is no such math gene. Rather, research shows that students in 

other countries devote more effort to mathematics learning, and learn more as a result. One of the most important findings in the Math Panel’s report is that effort 

matters. Grappling with challenging math problems, even if they are not ‘‘solved,’’ 

leads to greater understanding and more learning, on the part of all students. So, 

once and for all, we need to stop the parent conference that begins with the phrase, 

‘‘Well, you know I was never good in math either.’’ Math is important—for our children and for our country. 

Conceptual Understanding 

One of the issues at the core of what has become known in education circles as 

the ‘‘Math Wars’’ is the debate over conceptual understanding and basic skills. In 

the highly charged lexicon of the two sides on the math wars, it is not an either/

or proposition. The National Math Panel has stated very clearly that understanding 

mathematics conceptually, becoming proficient in the use of procedures, and extending this understanding and proficiency to solving problems must be developed simultaneously. In short, as students learn mathematics they need to have the mutually 

reinforcing benefits of conceptual understanding, procedural fluency, and the opportunity to solve problems applying and extending the mathematics learned. Students—all students—need need to make sense of the mathematics they are learning 

and become proficient in that mathematics, and how better to do that than solving 

problems that involve mathematics—whether that’s deciding the impact of that 5 

percent finance charge or the, seemingly daily increase in gasoline prices. 

Early Learning 

Another finding from the Panel’s work is that there are significant advantages for 

children to have a strong start in engaging with and learning mathematics very 

early. A high-quality, challenging, and accessible mathematics education provides 

early childhood learners with a critically important, vital foundation for future understanding of mathematics. Young children in every setting should experience effective, research-based curricula and teaching practices. Teachers should connect 

ideas within mathematics as well as with other subjects, and they should encourage 

children to communicate, explaining their thinking as they interact with important 

mathematics in deep and sustained ways. Early childhood educators should actively 

introduce mathematical concepts, methods, and language through a range of appropriate experiences and teaching strategies. 

Algebra as Gateway 

One of the reasons for the focus on algebra in the Panel’s charge from the President is that Algebra is clearly a passport or a demonstrable gateway to higher level 

mathematics. Moreover, research shows that completion of Algebra II correlates significantly with success in college and future employment earnings. In fact, students 

who complete Algebra II are more than twice as likely to graduate from college compared to students with less mathematical preparation. Among African-American and 

Hispanic students with mathematics preparation at least through Algebra II, the 

differences in college graduation rates versus the student population in general are 

half as large as the differences for students who do not complete Algebra II. As one 

panelist suggested at the release of the Panel report, the content (the mathematics) 

is king here. We need a more focused, coherent curriculum for all students—with 

particular emphasis on points of focus that are foundational for success in algebra. 

Excellence in mathematics education rests on equity—high expectations, respect, 

understanding, and strong support for all students. Policies, practices, attitudes, and 

beliefs related to mathematics teaching and learning must be assessed continually 

to ensure that all students have equal access to the resources with the greatest potential to promote learning. A culture of equity maximizes the learning potential of 

all students. 

Teachers 

We have known for some time that the single most important factor in mathematics learning is teacher quality. Unfortunately, little is known from existing highquality research about what effective mathematics teachers do to generate greater 

gains in student achievement. This is one of several fields in which the Panel found 

12

that further research is needed. Regarding teaching, research is needed to identify 

and more clearly define the skills and practices underlying these differences in 

teachers’ effectiveness, and how to develop them in teacher preparation programs. 

We must be able to tell what works in teacher education and frankly what’s need 

to prepare and retain our best teachers. This, to me, represents a clarion call for 

teacher education—at every level. 

Math Specialists 

In an attempt to improve mathematics learning especially at the elementary level, 

a number of school districts around the country are using mathematics specialists. 

While the terms math specialist and math coach are not always clearly or consistently defined, there is potential in this movement. The Panel’s recommendation for 

mathematics specialist teachers is based on the success of this particular model. The 

Panel identified three different types—math coaches (lead teachers), full-time elementary mathematics teachers, and pull-out teachers. Some of these show promise 

and should be examined more closely to determine how they can be increased in 

scale. 

The Panel recommends that research be conducted on the use of full-time mathematics teachers in elementary schools. These would be teachers with strong knowledge of mathematics who would teach mathematics full-time to several classrooms 

of students, rather than teaching many subjects to one class, as is typical in most 

elementary classrooms. This recommendation for research is based on the Panel’s 

findings about the importance of teachers’ mathematical knowledge. The use of 

teachers who have specialized in elementary mathematics teaching could be a practical alternative to increasing all elementary teachers’ content knowledge (a problem 

of huge scale) by focusing the need for expertise on fewer teachers. However, I 

would add that at a time of teacher surplus at the elementary school level, it is perhaps time to scrap the model of elementary teacher as generalist. Why not have specifically trained elementary mathematics specialists starting from day one of their 

career? Our country can’t wait until such specialists are graduate students. 

Research 

In conformity with its charge from the President, the National Math Panel’s work 

was very directed by research. In short, it found that much more educational research of almost all kinds is needed. This includes research relative to the impact 

of technology on the teaching and learning of mathematics. This means all technology—software, the use of graphing calculators, and the role of the Web. Technology continues to expand and infiltrate our lives, often without any documentation 

of its impact. How do we both acknowledge and harness the promise of technology 

as a tool for teaching and learning? 

Support should be provided to encourage the creation of cross-disciplinary research teams, including expertise in educational psychology, sociology, economics, 

cognitive development, mathematics, and mathematics education. In short, we need 

more expertise at the table. 

Most important, in an NCLB world with AYP looming each year, Pre-K—12 

schools should be provided with incentives and resources to provide venues for, and 

encourage collaboration in, educational research. 

New funding should be provided to establish support mechanisms for career shifts 

(K, or career development, awards from the National Institutes of Health represent 

one example). Many accomplished researchers who study the basic components of 

mathematics learning are not directly engaged in relevant educational research. 

While this more basic kind of research is important both in its own right and as 

a crucial foundation for designing classroom-level learning projects, at least some of 

these investigators have the potential to make more directly relevant contributions 

to educational research. Consequently, providing incentives for them to change the 

emphasis of their research programs could enhance research capacity in the field. 

We strongly encourage capitalizing on the work that is currently being accomplished on learning and educational practices by the National Science Foundation. 

This work can augment and improve current instructional practice and student 

learning. 

As you know, Congress last year showed strong bipartisan support for increased 

investments in strengthening and improving STEM education programs through enactment of the America COMPETES Act. That bill authorized Math Now, which embodies a number of the Math Panel’s recommendations, and also recommends an increased investment in programs at the National Science Foundation. Programs 

under the Foundation’s Education and Human Resources Directorate—the division 

of the NSF that administers the Math and Science Partnerships program, the Noyce 

Scholarship Program and other important education initiatives—would receive $995 

13

million if appropriators followed the recommendations of the authors of that bill. I 

encourage Congress to do just that. 

There are programs at other federal agencies that also yield benefits for the field 

of mathematics education, math educators, and students. The Department of Energy 

is engaged in creating opportunities for students and educators to participate in the 

nation’s research enterprise as a means to improving the competitiveness of U.S. industry and overall scientific literacy through programs at the Office of Science’s 

Workforce Development for Teachers and Scientists. Those efforts, which include exciting opportunities for K—12 math and science teachers, warrant federal support 

and investment as well. 

Math Now 

The America COMPETES legislation calls for funding a Math Now initiative for $95 million to improve math instruction in the elementary and middle grades and 

to provide targeted help to struggling students so that all students can reach gradelevel mathematics standards. Math Now will give teachers research-based tools and 

professional development to improve elementary and middle school students’ 

achievement in mathematics and help mathematics teachers to teach students who 

are the hardest to reach. These innovations are sorely needed. The early years of 

mathematics education are foundational to success in algebra, that critical gateway 

not only to future learning and educational success in every STEM field, but for a 

better, stronger workforce, and a stable, well-informed citizenry. I strongly encourage Congress to fund this initiative, which would support the end result of much 

what we’re here to talk about today—student learning of mathematics. 

Thank you again for your invitation to address the committee and for this opportunity. I would be glad to answer any questions you might have relative to the work 

of the Panel, the work of the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics, or my 

own work as a mathematics educator with more than 40 years of experiences as a 

classroom teacher, principal, supervisor of instruction, and teacher educator. 

Chairman MILLER. Ms. Slover? 

STATEMENT OF LAURA SLOVER, VICE PRESIDENT,

ACHIEVE, INC. 

Ms. SLOVER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and members of the committee for the opportunity to Achieve to testify today at this hearing to discuss the importance of mathematics for all students, and 

to discuss the progress that has occurred in the states on this front. 

We also want to commend the National Mathematics Panel for 

its fine work in this area. 

So I am going to talk about what states are doing to move the 

needle on mathematics education. I want to tell you a little bit 

about Achieve. Achieve is a bipartisan nonprofit organization created by the nation’s governors and business leaders to help states 

raise academic standards, improve assessments, and strengthen accountability, and to prepare all students for post-secondary education careers and citizenship. 

I am actually talking a little bit off these slides, if you want to 

look at those. 

One of our primary goals is to address the expectations gap in 

which students are graduating from high school, and yet getting to 

college or getting to their first job without the requisite skills and 

knowledge necessary to succeed. Achieve has done research to identify what it does take to succeed in mathematics and in English to 

be prepared for life after high school, whether students attend college or go directly into a job. 

To do that, we ask college professors and employers what was 

most important for students to know. The result was a set of 

benchmarks in mathematics and English that contains the content 

knowledge that all students should know. 

14

In 2005, Achieve launched the American Diploma Project Network, then a group of 13 states dedicated to a college and careerready policy agenda. The take-up rate for this agenda has been remarkable. Today, the network includes 33 states, reaching 80 percent of the nation’s public school students. 

Those 33 states are committed to an agenda that includes aligning high school standards with what it takes to succeed in college 

and careers, requiring all students to take that rigorous set of 

courses aligned with those standards, incorporating college-ready 

tests into their state testing systems, and holding high schools accountable for graduating students who are ready for college and careers, and then also really pushing on the higher ed community to 

hold their institutions accountable for the success of incoming students. 

So what should students learn in high school to be successful in 

college and careers? Our research found that students should master 4 years of grade-level English and 4 years of mathematics with 

content equivalent to a sequence that includes algebra I, geometry, 

algebra II, data analysis, and statistics. This level of content is reflected in Achieve’s American Diploma Project benchmarks, and Dr. 

Fennell alluded to that just a moment ago. 

So why is higher level mathematics important for all students? 

Algebra II or its equivalent is a gateway course for higher education and it teaches quantitative reasoning skills important for 

the workplace. Achieve’s research shows that higher level math 

courses such as algebra II improves access to post-secondary education, are critical for college success, and are important to many 

careers including those that don’t actually require a 4-year college 

degree. 

Students who complete such course work are not only better prepared for work, they earn higher salaries. It really is true that the 

more math you learn, the more money you earn. Unfortunately, 

there is still a large achievement and opportunity gap in math. Disadvantaged and minority students, for whom rigorous math courses 

can really make the most difference, earn fewer math credits and 

are less likely than their peers to enroll in higher level math 

courses. 

The good news in the states is that when ADP first was formed, 

we didn’t see a lot of states who were moving forward on this agenda. At that time, only two states had set their high school graduation requirements at a career and college-ready level. Today, 19 

states and the District of Columbia have set their graduation requirements to the college and career-ready level, which will help 

ensure that students are prepared for the challenges they meet 

when they graduate from high school. Eleven additional states are 

reporting that they plan to do so in the coming years. 

There has also been a trend across the country for states to become more specific about the math content in courses they require 

all students to complete. In the past, states tended just to require 

a number of years of math without specifying what math students 

were to take. In 2005, for example, 30 states did not even require 

students to complete algebra I, let alone higher level courses like 

algebra II. 

15

Now, 30 states and the District of Columbia have specific coursetaking requirements in mathematics. Nineteen of those states and 

D.C. require students to complete algebra I, geometry, and algebra 

II or an equivalent sequence, and two states—Arkansas and Alabama—require students to take a fourth math course beyond algebra II. Most of those states have also put in place strong content 

standards to guide their work. 

As states make strides in improving the rigor of their standards 

and graduation requirements, a number of challenges emerge, particularly in the development of college-ready assessments and supporting materials for educators. Achieve is engaged in a number of 

efforts to help states in their work, most notably a common algebra 

II end-of-course exam. This is the largest-ever multi-state assessment with 14 participating states and over 110,000 students who 

took the first exam this spring and are currently taking it right 

now. 

This exam provides states with the ability to measure collegeready mathematics content, ensuring the consistency of content 

and rigor in algebra II courses within and among states so algebra 

II is the same regardless of where a student happens to go to 

school. It will enable comparisons of performance across states and 

hopefully over time provide colleges with a measure of readiness 

for placement into post-secondary credit-bearing courses. 

In addition to the algebra II exam, Achieve has a number of 

other efforts underway to help states, including an algebra I exam, 

a number of math tools including mathematics benchmarks for K 

through 12, model course sequences, sample classroom problems, 

examples of fourth-year courses, and workplace tasks that are actually tied to the application of mathematics. 

Achieve also provides advocacy tools for states such as mathematics-at-work brochures, white papers and other tools to help 

states make the case that advanced mathematics is very important, 

as Dr. Fennell stated earlier, and as I have just testified to. 

In closing, I would like to leave you with a few thoughts about 

major trends in math education that Achieve has encountered as 

we work across the states. First of all, algebra II is the new algebra 

I. Every student needs to have it. But it is not your grandfather’s 

algebra II that I am talking about. We need to find new and innovative ways to teach it so that we can reach more students, ways 

that emphasize conceptual understanding and not just straight procedures. 

Finding new ways to present and make mathematics more relevant to students without diluting its rigor will enable more students to be prepared for college and good careers. Along those lines, 

more states and districts are contemplating organizing high school 

mathematics into integrated course sequences and they are really 

putting in energy and thinking carefully about how to revamp the 

career and technical programs so that mathematics is a major part 

of it. 

Another thing we have learned is that employers and post-secondary faculty place a high value on the nontraditional mathematics, like statistics, probability and data analysis. States are increasingly interested in ensuring that their mathematics standards 

are internationally benchmarked, as Chairman Miller mentioned in 

16

his own remarks. Achieve is currently working in that regard to 

look at the standards in the world’s highest performing countries. 

Finally, I will just close by saying if we think about how we are 

going to really raise the bar on mathematics education, it is going 

to come down to teacher quality and teacher capacity. It is one of 

the greatest challenges we have in making more advanced math 

classes available to more students at the secondary level, and it is 

an area in which we have a lot of work ahead of us. 

Thank you for the opportunity to testify today, and I look forward to answering your questions. 

[The statement of Ms. Slover follows:]

Prepared Statement of Laura Slover, Vice President, Achieve, Inc. 

Thank you Chairman Miller and members of the Committee for the opportunity 

for Achieve to testify today at this hearing to discuss the importance of mathematics 

for all students and the significant progress that has occurred in the states on this 

front. We also want to commend the work of the National Mathematics Panel for 

their excellent work. 

Created by the nation’s governors and business leaders, Achieve is a bipartisan 

non-profit organization that helps states raise academic standards, improve assessments and strengthen accountability to prepare all young people for postsecondary 

education, careers, and citizenship. Achieve was created to address the expectations 

gap: the alarming trend that allows students to graduate from high school without 

the requisite skills and knowledge necessary for success in college and the workplace. 

From 2001 to 2004, Achieve undertook a major research endeavor to identify the 

must-have skills and knowledge all students need in the core subjects of mathematics and English to be prepared for life after high school. The result of this 

project—known as the American Diploma Project (ADP)—was an agreed upon set 

of benchmarks in mathematics and English that all students should know by the 

time they graduate high school, as defined by the postsecondary and business communities. To cover the content in the ADP benchmarks, high school students need 

to take four years of grade level English and four years of mathematics with content 

equivalent to a sequence that includes Algebra I, Geometry, Algebra II, Data Analysis, and Statistics. In 2005, Achieve launched the American Diploma Project Network, then a group of 13 states dedicated to a college- and career-ready policy agenda. Today, the Network includes 33 states, reaching 80% of our public school students. 

Why higher-level math for all students? 

As revealed by Achieve’s research, there are many specific skills and competencies 

that young people will need to succeed, but more than particular skills, students 

need the cognitive capacity to educate themselves throughout their entire lives. 

Young people need the ability for complex reasoning and the self-confidence to apply 

it in any and all situations. These are precisely the skills that are developed in higher-level mathematics courses, beginning with the foundational Algebra I and extending beyond Algebra II, in which students begin to use abstract reasoning to solve 

complex problems. 

Beyond the unmistakable intellectual benefits of students taking higher-level 

math courses, there are a number of practical benefits of engaging in rigorous math 

coursework. Achieve and others have found that Algebra II (or an integrated course 

that covers the same content) is a gateway course for higher education and teaches 

quantitative reasoning skills important for the workplace. Achieve’s research shows 

that higher level mathematics courses such as Algebra II improve access to postsecondary education, are critical for college success, and are important to many careers—including those that don’t require a four-year college degree. Students that 

complete such coursework are not only better prepared for work, they earn higher 

salaries. Achieve’s conclusions, as reflected in its mathematics benchmarks (Ready 

or Not: Creating a High School Diploma That Counts)), have been reinforced by 

other research, such as ACT. 

Unfortunately, there is still a large achievement and opportunity gap in mathematics. Disadvantaged and minority high school students earn fewer mathematics 

credits than their socio-economically advantaged peers, and are less likely than 

those peers to enroll in higher-level math courses, such as trigonometry and calculus. The gaps in course-taking by population subgroup mirror those seen in test 

17

scores and other measures of educational outcomes. Black and Hispanic students 

are twice as likely as their White and Asian peers to take no math beyond the basic 

level, for example. Additionally, many minority students and girls, of all races and 

ethnicities, lack access to advanced math classes or are discouraged form enrolling 

in them. Under these circumstances, higher-level math courses function not as the 

intellectual and practical boost they should be, but as a filter that screens students 

out of the pathway to success. 

Progress in the states 

Since 2005, when the ADP Network was first formed, we have seen significant 

progress from the states in moving forward a rigorous college- and career-ready policy agenda, particularly in the areas of academic standards and graduation requirements. 

High School Mathematics Standards 

Rigorous college- and career-ready academic standards are critical as they provide 

a foundation for decisions on curriculum, instruction and assessments, and they 

community core learning goals to teachers, parents and students. Although the 

standards-based reform movement has been going strong since A Nation at Risk 

was published, the concept of anchoring end-of-high school academic standards to 

the expectations of the postsecondary and business communities is a relatively new 

one, yet it has a lot of momentum across the country. 

Nineteen states have aligned their high school math standards with the expectations of college and industry and another 25 states and the District of Columbia are 

in the process of, or plan to, align their standards in coming years, including 13 

states that anticipate adopting new math standards by the end of 2008. Put another 

way, all but six states are looking to improve the transition from high school into 

postsecondary and workplace settings through the adoption of college- and careerready standards. An interesting byproduct of aligning to college and career ready 

mathematics expectations is that the states also share a common core. 

High School Graduation Requirements 

In 2005, just two states had set their high school graduation requirements at a 

college and career—ready level, which includes four years of grade level English and 

four years of rigorous math, including content typically found in Algebra II. Today, 

19 states and the District of Columbia have set their graduation requirements to 

the college- and career-ready level, ensuring students will be prepared for whatever 

challenges they face upon graduation. 11 more states report plans to move in this 

direction in coming years. 

Even more broadly, there has been a trend across the nation for states to become 

more specific about the math content and courses they require all students to complete before graduating. In 2005, 30 states did not require students to complete even 

Algebra I, let along higher-level courses such as Algebra II. Now, 30 states and the 

District of Columbia have specific course-taking requirements in mathematics. Nineteen of those states, and the District of Columbia, require students to complete Algebra I, Algebra II, and Geometry, or an equivalent sequence, and two of those states 

(Arkansas and Alabama) require students to take a fourth math course beyond Algebra II. 

Achieve: Supporting states to close the math expectations gaplc 

However, as more states make strides in improving the rigor of their academic 

standards and their graduation requirements, a number of challenges emerge, particularly in the development of college-ready assessments and supporting materials 

for educators and students to ensure all students are prepared for higher-level math 

course-taking. Achieve is engaged in a number of efforts to help states address these 

challenges, more notably the common Algebra II end-of-course exam. 

ADP Algebra II End-of-Course Exam 

In 2005, a number of states in the ADP Network began exploring the possibility 

of collaborating on a common Algebra II assessment to: 

• Measure ‘‘college-ready’’ content; 

• Ensure consistent content and rigor in Algebra II courses within and among 

states; 

• Enable comparisons in performance among the states; 

• Reduce test development costs; and 

• Develop a possible instrument for placement into postsecondary courses. 

By 2006, nine states joined the common Algebra II end-of-course consortium, representing an unprecedented multi-state effort. Since then, five additional states 

have joined this group. These 14 states have worked together—with high school and 

18

higher education mathematics faculty—to agree on the content and design of the assessment, as well as common performance levels to be used across the states. The 

assessment includes multiple choice, short answer and extended response items and 

is aligned with the ADP mathematics benchmarks. This represents a significant 

change for some states as many existing high school exit exams only cover math 

content taught at the 8th-, 9th- or 10th-grade level. 

Beyond the core Algebra II assessment, the group of states also created items for 

modules that would extend the rigor and scope of the exam. The modules cover topics such as Data & Statistics, Logarithmic Function, and Matrices. 

The first administration of this exam occurs this spring, from May 1-June 13, 

2008. Over 110,000 students across the participating states will take the exam. 

States are still crafting policies around which students will be required to take the 

exam, what stakes they will attach to it, and how the assessment may be used to 

place students into credit-bearing postsecondary courses. Achieve expects there to 

be a range of policies adopted throughout the 14 states. 

All participating states hope to use the common Algebra II exam to improve curriculum and instruction in high schools. They are also interested—and working with 

postsecondary leaders—to determine whether the exam can serve as a measure of 

readiness and placement in credit- bearing college courses. 

Moving forward, a subset of the Algebra II end-of-course consortium are now 

working to develop an Algebra I end-of-course exam to improve curriculum and instruction, help schools determine if students are ready for Algebra II and other 

higher-level math courses, and compare performance and progress among the participating states. This assessment will be field tested in fall of 2008 and first administered in spring 2009. 

Mathematics Benchmarking and Additional Tools 

As the ADP benchmarks are intended to cover the four years of high school, over 

the years, states requested more detail about the progression of content and skills 

students would need to master through the grades in order to meet the end-of-high 

school ADP benchmarks. To address this, Achieve has ‘‘backmapped’’ the ADP Mathematics benchmarks from grade 12 down through Kindergarten. 

Achieve also has partnered with the Charles T. Dana Center at the University 

of Texas, Austin to develop accompanying tools and resources to support these 

backmapped benchmarks. The joint Achieve/Dana Center website includes: 

• The ADP benchmarks and back mapping; 

• Model math course sequences and grade level standards; 

• A supply of sample instructional tasks; 

• Criteria and models for fourth-year capstone math courses for students who 

have completed Algebra II or its equivalent; 

• Workplace tasks tied to the application of mathematics; and 

• Practices Worthy of Attention that highlight promising programs and instructional models. 

Math Works: Advocacy Kit 

In addition to the technical assistance Achieve provides to states, Achieve also offers advocacy tools to promote higher-level math course-taking. Most recently, 

Achieve developed a series of Mathematics at Work brochures to examine how higher-level mathematics is used in today’s workplaces. The brochures present case studies drawn from leading industries nationwide to illustrate the advanced mathematics knowledge and skills embedded in jobs that offer opportunities for advancement and are accessible to high school graduates. 

Achieve has also recently published a new policy paper—The Building Block of 

Success: Higher-Level Math for All Students—to synthesize the current research 

base on why math is so important to all students in regards to college access and 

success, workplace- and career-readiness, and personal and U.S. competitiveness. 

Both the brochures and policy paper, along with to-be-developed one-pagers, 

PowerPoint slides, and a resource bank, will be included in Achieve’s Math Works 

advocacy kit, which will be rolled out in the summer of 2008. The goal of Math 

Works is to provide states with the resources they need to ensure all students have 

the opportunity to engage in rigorous math course-taking throughout their high 

school experiences. 

Emerging themes in mathematics education 

I’d like to leave you with a few major trends in mathematics education that 

Achieve has encountered as we work with states to reform their mathematics requirements so that more high school graduates are prepared for college and career: 

• Algebra II is the new Algebra I, but not your grandpa’s Algebra II. 

19

• More states and districts are contemplating organizing high school mathematics 

in integrated courses rather than the traditional sequence. 

• Finding new ways to present and make mathematics relevant to students (integrated courses, career and technical education) without diluting rigor will enable 

more students to be prepared for college and good careers. 

• Employers and postsecondary faculty place a high value on statistics, probability and data analysis. 

• States are increasingly interested in ensuring that their mathematics standards 

are internationally benchmarked to the highest performing countries in the world. 

Achieve is currently conducting a study to benchmark our mathematics standards 

and NAEP against the highest performing countries. 

• Teacher capacity is one of the greatest challenges in making more advanced 

mathematics classes available to more students at the secondary level. 

[Additional material submitted by Ms. Slover follows:]


slov-1.eps slov-2.eps
20


slov-3.eps slov-4.eps
21


slov-5.eps slov-6.eps
22


slov-7.eps slov-8.eps
23


slov-9.eps slov-10.eps
24

Chairman MILLER. Thank you. 

Dr. Haver? 

STATEMENT OF WILLIAM HAVER, PROFESSOR OF 

MATHEMATICS, VIRGINIA COMMONWEALTH UNIVERSITY 

Mr. HAVER. We really can increase the number of students that 

are successful in mathematics. It can happen. A growing number 

of elementary schools in Virginia are using mathematics specialists 

as a powerful tool to enable more students to be successful. 

As defined in Virginia, mathematics specialists are responsible 

for strengthening teachers’ understanding of mathematics and 

helping teachers develop more effective teaching practices through 

co-planning, co-teaching, and coaching. Specialists are helping 


slov-11.eps slov-12.eps
25

teachers and schools develop strong programs consistent with the 

findings of the National Math Panel. 

They help implement a school-wide curriculum. They assure that 

students develop conceptual understanding, computational skills, 

and problem-solving. It is not either-or. It is all three. They provide 

professional development to increase the teacher’s knowledge of 

mathematics and of effective research-based teaching strategies. 

The first full-time coaches were placed in Virginia about 10 years 

ago. The mathematics supervisors, principals and teachers reported 

on the major differences that the specialists made in the schools. 

There were major improvements reported in student performance 

on standardized tests. 

In about 2003, there was a consensus around the state in the 

mathematics community that, one, we should develop the capacity 

to have mathematics specialists prepared and put in place statewide in Virginia, and secondly, that we should concurrently conduct high-quality research of the type called for by the National 

Math Panel to measure the impact of specialists. 

Many organizations have worked together in the state to do this. 

The Virginia Mathematics and Science Coalition, with critical support from ExxonMobil; the Virginia Council of Teachers of Mathematics and the Council of Mathematics Supervisors; six universities that worked together collaboratively to develop and offer 

master’s degree programs designed for math specialists; the Virginia Board of Education that approved a math specialists endorsement; the state legislature that has appropriated funds to partially 

support the research program I will describe in a minute; the Virginia Department of Education, which has strongly supported math 

specialists, including directing funds from the United States Department of Education’s Mathematics and Science Partnership Program to help prepare mathematics specialists in Virginia. 

So as a result of this capacity building, there are currently approximately 300 school-based mathematic specialist coaches in Virginia. So concurrent to this decision that we made in 2003 to work 

on the preparation programs for the math specialists and the support provided for them, we made a decision to undertake detailed 

scientific research on math specialists. We are in the middle of that 

research program. 

Even today, as pointed out by the National Math Panel, there is 

no public research with treatment and control groups that say anything about the impact of math specialists. The research that is 

known is knowing what good practices are and that math specialists do this, but as far as research directly demonstrating the impact of math specialists, that doesn’t exist. 

So we were awarded two grants from the National Science Foundation to help us put these programs in place that I described, and 

to determine the impact of mathematics specialists. The one key 

component of the research, and I will just stick to this one component, centers on 12 triples of schools. So each set of three schools 

was identified by a school system as being comparable to each 

other. One school from each triple was randomly chosen by the researcher to have a math specialist, and a second school was randomly chosen from each set of three schools to have a math specialist 2 years later. 

26

So therefore, with this treatment control basis, we are beginning 

to obtain preliminary results on the mathematics specialists on 

mathematics achievement scores. When compared with students in 

the control schools, students in schools with mathematics specialists performed better on our statewide high-test stakes in each of 

the grades where the tests are given, in grades three, four and five. 

Indeed, in each grade, their performance was better in each subcategory—numbers, computation and estimation, patterns, functions in algebra. The greatest difference was observed in grade 

four, where the positive effect of having a coach in the school was 

approximately 80 percent of the magnitude of the negative effect of 

poverty. We know that students in poverty score lower on the tests 

like this, and the impact of having a math specialist in the school 

was 80 percent of the magnitude of that. It was 52 percent in grade 

three and 47 percent in grade five. 

The school superintendents of the systems that are participating 

in this study were interviewed last summer by our policy research 

team. According to the report, they were unanimous in their confidence about the effectiveness of in-school coaching models and 

their desire to implement it in all elementary and middle schools. 

We believe that this is a real opportunity, a real tool to bring about 

significant change across the board. 

[The statement of Mr. Haver follows:]

Prepared Statement of Dr. William Haver, Professor of Mathematics, 

Virginia Commonwealth University 

A growing number of elementary schools in Virginia have been making extensive 

use of Mathematics Specialists as a tool to enable many more students to be successful in learning mathematics. 

As we use the term in Virginia, a Mathematics Specialist is based in an elementary school in order to support the professional growth of teachers and promote excellent mathematics instruction and student learning. Mathematics Specialists are 

responsible for strengthening classroom teachers’ understanding of mathematics 

content and helping teachers develop more effective mathematics teaching practices. 

Typically they collaborate with individual teachers through co-planning, co-teaching, 

and coaching. The duties of these Mathematics Specialists are described in more detail in the appendix to the materials submitted to the committee entitled Who are 

Mathematics Specialists? 

Working in a school building the Mathematics Specialists are helping teachers 

and schools develop strong programs consistent with the findings and recommendations of the National Math Panel. They 

• Implement a school-wide curriculum that is focused and provides coherent progression from year to year. 

• Assure that students develop both conceptual understanding and computational 

fluency. 

• Provide professional development so that: 

• Teachers know in detail and from a more advanced perspective the mathematics content they are responsible for teaching and the connections of that content 

to other important mathematics, both prior to and beyond the level they are assigned to teach. 

• Teachers are aware of and can implement effective research-based teaching 

strategies. 

Virginia first began utilizing Lead Mathematics Teachers in the early 1990s. 

Based on what was learned about the accomplishments and limitations of classroom 

teachers serving as lead mathematics teachers, the mathematics community studied 

the use of Mathematics Specialists in other states. 

The first full-time, school-based coaches were placed in Virginia schools about ten 

years ago. The impact of these Specialists on instructional practice and student 

achievement was marked. Mathematics supervisors, principals and teachers reported on the major difference that the Specialists made in teachers’ attitudes and 

approaches to teaching mathematics. Major improvements in student performance 

27

on standardized tests were reported. For example, in one school system with three 

elementary schools a full-time coach was employed in one school; a year later, that 

school became fully accredited for the first time. This process was repeated each 

year for the next two years in the division’s other two elementary schools. In a larger inner city system that made use of Mathematics Specialists, student achievement 

increased so that no elementary schools were ‘‘unaccredited’’ or ‘‘accredited with 

warning in mathematics.’’ As a result of these gains the district decided in 2004 to 

employ coaches in all 35 elementary schools. A special issue, volume 8, of the Journal of Mathematics and Science: Collaborative Explorations was published, with 

support from ExxonMobil, detailing these and other (admittedly anecdotal) experiences. The issue is available on-line on the Virginia Mathematics and Science Coalition home page http://www.vamsc.org/. 

As this strong and striking evidence became available in 2002-03 consensus developed in all components of the mathematics/mathematics education community that 

I. The capacity should be developed statewide to appropriately prepare teachers 

to serve as Mathematics Specialists as resources become available and as school systems make the decision to deploy Specialists. 

II. Concurrently conduct high-quality research of the type called for by the National Mathematics Advisory Panel to measure the impact of the preparation program on prospective Mathematics Specialists and the impact of Specialists on teachers they support and on student achievement. 

I. Building Capacity 

The Virginia Mathematics and Science Coalition identified Mathematics Specialists as the most promising means to improve student achievement in grades k-12. 

The Coalition appointed a statewide Task Force to develop a consensus on the role 

of Specialists, the recommended competencies and the preparation program. Critical 

financial and advisory support has been provided by ExxonMobil. 

The Virginia Council of Teachers of Mathematics and the Virginia Council of 

Mathematics Supervisors both developed and implemented programs to support 

Mathematics Specialists. 

Six universities collaboratively developed and are offering especially designed 

masters degree programs for Mathematics Specialists. The partners include: Virginia Commonwealth University (VCU), Norfolk State University (NSU), University 

of Virginia (UVA), Longwood University (LU), George Mason University (GMU), and 

Virginia Tech (VT). To date approximately 95 degrees have been awarded and 150 

teachers are enrolled in degree programs. 

The Virginia Board of Education with the concurrence of the governor has approved a Mathematics Specialist endorsement. The Board has also recommended to 

the State legislature that school systems be required to deploy a Mathematics Specialist for each 1,000 students in grades k-8. 

The State legislature has supported the concept of Mathematics Specialists. While 

not acting on the recommendation to require systems to deploy Specialists, the legislature has appropriated funds to partially support the research program described 

below. 

The Virginia Department of Education has strongly supported Mathematics Specialists at all stages, including using funds from the United States Department of 

Education Mathematics and Science Partnership program to prepare Mathematics 

Specialists. The department also provided access to student scores on standardized 

tests in support of the research described below. 

As a result of this capacity building there are approximately 300 school-based 

Mathematics Specialists in Virginia. 

II. Research 

Concurrently, in 2003, the decision was made to seek support to undertake detailed scientific research on Mathematics Specialists. At this time there was interesting, high quality research demonstrating the effectiveness of teachers having the 

knowledge and skills that Mathematics Specialist programs are designed to develop, 

but no research with treatment and control groups directly demonstrating the impact of Mathematics Specialists on student learning. As pointed out in the National 

Mathematics Advisory Panel reports no such results are published to date. 

In order to conduct this research and to develop the preparation programs described earlier we submitted competitive proposals to the National Science Foundation. We were successful in this competition and were awarded grants to determine 

the impact of preparation programs on Mathematics Specialists and the impact of 

Mathematics Specialists on the teachers they support and on student learning. The 

awards were made in the summer of 2004. Since then we have developed and reVerDate 0ct 09 2002 21:46 Dec 01, 2008 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00031 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 G:\DOCS\110TH\FC\110-93\42335.TXT HBUD1 PsN: DICK
28

fined the preparation programs, offered the programs to prospective Mathematics 

Specialists, placed Specialists in schools, and conducted the planned research. 

One key component of the research centers on 12 triples of schools. Each set of 

three schools were identified by a participating school system as being comparable 

demographically and having similar test scores. One school from each triple was 

randomly chosen and a Mathematics Specialist who had completed the preparation 

program was placed in each of these Cohort I schools beginning in August 2005; a 

second school (Cohort II) was randomly selected from each triple and a specialist 

was placed in each of these schools beginning in August 2007. No Specialists will 

be assigned to the third school in each triple throughout the duration of the research project. Detailed information is being analyzed concerning the beliefs of 

teachers and the academic achievement of students in the treatment and control 

schools. As a part of the research program, each research subject records what she 

or he is doing during each period of time by entering data in a PDA. For example, 

the researcher knows how much time each teacher in the building is being supported by the Specialist. 

We are beginning to obtain preliminary results on the Mathematics Specialists’ 

impact on student mathematics achievement scores as measured by SOL tests in 

Virginia. To assess this, the analysis has accessed data on approximately 6,400 student test scores in each of Grades 3, 4, and 5 from 36 schools over 2 years. Thus, 

the analysis of 19,407 students SOL scores was done. When compared with students 

in the control schools, students in schools with Mathematics Specialists performed 

better on the SOL Mathematics test in each of grades 3, 4 and 5. Indeed, in each 

grade their performance was better in each subcategory: Number, Number Sense, 

Computation, Estimation, Measurement, Geometry, Probability and Statistics, and 

Patterns, Functions, and Algebra. 

The greatest difference was observed in grade 4 where the differences were statistically significant and where SOL tests have been most recently introduced. The 

positive effect of having a coach in the school is approximately 

• 87% of the magnitude of the negative effect of limited English proficiency, 

• 80% of the magnitude of the negative effect of poverty, 

• 43% of the magnitude of the negative effect associated with minority student 

status on fourth-grade SOL performance. 

In grade 3 the results were not statistically significant, but the positive effect was 

• 85% of the magnitude of the negative effect of limited English proficiency, 

• 52% of the magnitude of the negative effect of poverty, 

• 27% of the magnitude of the negative effect associated with minority student 

status on third-grade SOL performance. 

In grade 5 the results were not statistically significant, but the positive effect was 

• 42% of the magnitude of the negative effect of limited English proficiency, 

• 47% of the magnitude of the negative effect of poverty, 

• 31% of the magnitude of the negative effect associated with minority student 

status on fifth-grade SOL performance. 

This analysis has not yet investigated what kinds of activities the Specialists engaged in with particular teachers, nor has it investigated the expected variability 

in degree and time of support afforded by the Specialists to differing teachers. Inclusion of these data will better specify not only the level of involvement and therefore 

potential impact of Specialists with individual teachers, but will also characterize 

more accurately the degree of treatment afforded to teachers associated with the 

nested student SOL data. 

Because this preliminary analysis of student SOL data has not accessed teacher—

specialist data as collected through the PDAs, the current analysis presumes that 

the impact of a specialist is identical for all teachers and all students in each given 

grade within a school. This is not the case. From day to day the Specialists vary 

in terms of the professional development services and instructional support that 

they engage in and in terms of the teachers with whom they work. It is anticipated 

that future analysis accessing teacher-level data will be more precise, as this preliminary analysis of the school-level effect of Specialists on student achievement has 

averaged the teacher effect across all teachers in the schools. 

School superintendents of the school systems that are participating in the research were interviewed at the conclusion of the 2006-07 school year. At this point 

one school in each triple had been assigned a Mathematics Specialist and two had 

not. According to the report, ‘‘they were unanimous in their confidence about the 

effectiveness of the grant’s in-school coaching model and their desire to implement 

it in all elementary and middle schools.’’

29

APPENDIX

Who Are Mathematics Specialists? 

Mathematics Specialists are teacher leaders with strong preparation and background in mathematics content, instructional strategies, and school leadership. 

Based in elementary and middle schools, mathematics specialists are former classroom teachers who are responsible for supporting the professional growth of their 

colleagues and promoting enhanced mathematics instruction and student learning 

throughout their schools. They are responsible for strengthening classroom teachers’ 

understanding of mathematics content, and helping teachers develop more effective 

mathematics teaching practices that allow all students to reach high standards as 

well as sharing research addressing how students learn mathematics. 

The overarching purpose for Mathematics Specialists is to increase the mathematics achievement of all the students in their schools. To do so, they 

• Collaborate with individual teachers through co-planning, co-teaching, and 

coaching; 

• Assist administrative and instructional staff in interpreting data and designing 

approaches to improve student achievement and instruction; 

• Ensure that the school curriculum is aligned with state and national standards 

and their school division’s mathematics curriculum; 

• Promote teachers’ delivery and understanding of the school curriculum through 

collaborative long-range and short-range planning; 

• Facilitate teachers’ use of successful, research-based instructional strategies, including differentiated instruction for diverse learners such as those with limited 

English proficiency or disabilities; 

• Work with parent/guardians and community leaders to foster continuing home/

school/community partnerships focused on students’ learning of mathematics; and 

• Collaborate with administrators to provide leadership and vision for a schoolwide mathematics program. 

Chairman MILLER. Thank you. 

Dr. Staggers? 

STATEMENT OF WANDA T. STAGGERS, MASTER TEACHER AND 

DEAN OF MANUFACTURING AND ENGINEERING, ACADEMY 

OF ENGINEERING AND BIOMEDICAL SCIENCES 

Ms. STAGGERS. Chairman Miller, Ranking Member McKeon, and 

members of the committee, thank you for the opportunity to 

present before the House of Representatives’ Committee on Education and Labor. 

During my professional career, I have taught in the fields of 

mathematics, computer science, and engineering both on the secondary and post-secondary levels. Mathematics came alive for me 

when I began teaching applied courses in computer science and engineering. Mathematics education then surpassed the normal tasks 

of completing textbook problems and I was presented with realworld applications—applications with results both predictable and 

unpredictable. 

In 2002, I became a Project Lead the Way master teacher in the 

course Principles of Engineering. The following year, I became a 

master teacher in a second course, Computer Integrated Manufacturing. Project Lead The Way helps give middle and high school 

students the rigorous coursework they need to develop strong backgrounds in science and engineering. 

The National Mathematics Advisory Panel’s report and recommendations relative to professional development are congruent 

with the Project Lead The Way model in a number of ways. Project 

Lead The Way rejects what has become commonplace in the teaching profession—cursory weekend workshops that get educators exVerDate 0ct 09 2002 21:46 Dec 01, 2008 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00033 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 G:\DOCS\110TH\FC\110-93\42335.TXT HBUD1 PsN: DICK
30

cited temporarily, but do not actually change what goes on in the 

classroom. 

This model embodies the panel’s emphasis on content and relevance and includes ongoing support for school counselors, administrators, and their technical support staff—no more ‘‘drive by’’ professional development that leaves the teachers and the students 

short-changed and frustrated. 

An essential criterion for achieving effective professional development is the appropriate alignment of the teacher’s skills with the 

professional development training objectives. The National Mathematics Advisory Panel suggests, ‘‘Schools and teacher education 

programs should develop or draw on a variety of carefully evaluated methods to attract and prepare teacher candidates who are 

mathematically knowledgeable and to equip them with the skills to 

help students learn mathematics.’’

To determine the teacher’s ability to meet the objectives of the 

training experience and to assist teachers in academic preparation 

prior to the training experience, a pre-assessment measure should 

be used. As a result, teachers know more about what they are 

teaching and how to teach it. 

A second criterion for effective professional development is active 

participation. This model provides teachers with 2 weeks of intense 

hands-on training. Teachers experience the curriculum and instruction in the same way their students will in the classroom. The lessons allow opportunities for cross-discipline instruction with both 

technology and other academic subject areas. The curriculum requires the application of science, technology, engineering, and 

mathematics. Cross-discipline instruction increases student comprehension and retention, and answers the question so often asked 

by students: Why do I need to know this? 

I would like to share one example of the impact that cross-discipline instruction has had on my classroom. After a challenging 

lesson in truss calculations, Dhaval told one of his classmates that 

he planned to hug his math teacher when he saw her the next 

time. I asked him why. He said had it not been for the effective 

instruction in his algebra II course, he would have been lost in the 

lesson that I had just delivered. 

He went on to say that when he was involved in the math 

course, he had no understanding of why he was doing what he was 

doing. It wasn’t until he enrolled in the Project Lead The Way 

classes that he knew how to apply what he had learned. 

A third criterion for effective professional development is a modern, flexible support system that is readily accessible and accommodates different learning styles. The Project Lead The Way model 

provides an online Virtual Academy that is available to teachers 

upon demand and offers numerous lessons in middle school and 

high school curricula. 

The Project Lead The Way ListServ is available to teachers as 

a resource for technical assistance and as a forum to share ideas 

for advanced applications and tap into the expertise from their 

peers. Teachers can post questions on the ListServ and will most 

likely receive a solution within 15 minutes from another teacher 

anywhere in the country. This system encourages camaraderie and 

31

fosters a professional environment that is often lacking in other 

professional development models. 

After 6 years of training high school teachers during Project Lead 

The Way summer training institutes, I have heard overwhelmingly 

from teachers that they come away from the experience with a rejuvenated interest in teaching. After returning to the classroom, 

teachers report that they felt more confident in the use of technology and better informed on current issues in science, engineering, and mathematics. 

Many school districts decline to offer technology programs due to 

the high cost of equipment, but in reality technology programs provide real applications for mathematics and science, while preparing 

the student for the workforce or post-secondary education. 

As you and your colleagues consider education policy, I hope you 

consider the recommendations of the Math Panel with regard to 

professional development. As my experience with Project Lead The 

Way shows, the ideas and concepts are sound and should be elements of any professional development effort, federal or otherwise. 

I would just like to add one last thing. I have a student who built 

a model of an airplane in the classroom. He used algebra, geometry, trigonometry, auto-desk inventor software, education software, and the CNC mill to build that airplane out of 18 individual 

parts. That was an application of everything he learned in his 11 

years of school. 

Thank you for the opportunity to present, and I look forward to 

answering any questions you may have. 

[The statement of Ms. Staggers follows:]

Prepared Statement of Dr. Wanda Talley Staggers, Dean of Manufacturing 

and Engineering, Anderson School District Five 

Chairman Miller, Ranking Member McKeon and Members of the Committee, 

thank you for the opportunity to present before the House of Representatives Committee on Education and Labor. 

During my professional career, I have taught in the fields of mathematics, computer science, and engineering both on the secondary and post-secondary levels. 

Mathematics came alive for me when I began teaching applied courses in computer 

science and engineering. Mathematics education then surpassed the normal tasks 

of completing textbook problems and I was presented with real-world applications—

applications with results both predictable and unpredictable. I am currently I enrolled in the General Engineering Technology Associate degree program at TriCounty Technical College in Pendleton, South Carolina so that I can be better prepared in the field of engineering. I want to create an environment that emphasizes 

critical thinking skills, helps students make logical connections, and instills the desire and excitement to learn more about science, technology, engineering, and mathematics and how it affects our world. 

The History of Project Lead The WayTM

In 2002, I became a Project Lead The WayTM master teacher in the course Principles of Engineering. The following year, I became a master teacher in a second 

course, Computer Integrated Manufacturing. Project Lead The WayTM helps give 

middle and high school students the rigorous coursework they need to develop 

strong backgrounds in science and engineering. 

The National Mathematics Advisory Panel’s report and recommendations relative 

to professional development are congruent with the Project Lead The Way model in 

a number of ways. Project Lead The WayTM rejects what has become commonplace 

in the teaching profession—cursory weekend workshops that get educators excited 

temporarily, do not actually change what happens in the classroom. This model embodies the panel’s emphasis on content and relevance and includes ongoing support 

for school counselors, administrators, and their technical support staff. No more 

‘‘drive by’’ professional development that leaves the teacher, the school and the students short-changed and frustrated. 

32

Project Lead The WayTM Three Phase Professional Development 

An essential criterion in achieving effective professional development is the appropriate alignment of the teacher’s skills with the professional development training 

objectives. The National Mathematics Advisory Panel suggests, ‘‘Schools and teacher 

education programs should develop or draw on a variety of carefully evaluated 

methods to attract and prepare teacher candidates who are mathematically knowledgeable and to equip them with the skills to help students learn mathematics.’’ To 

determine the teacher’s ability to meet the objectives of the training experience and 

to assist teachers in academic preparation prior to the training experience, a preassessment measure is used. As a result, teachers know more about what they are 

teaching and how to teach it. 

A second criterion for effective professional development is active participation. 

This model provides teachers with two weeks of intense hands-on training. Teachers 

experience the curriculum and instruction in the same way their students will in 

the classroom. The lessons allow opportunities for cross-discipline instruction with 

both technology and other academic subject areas. The curriculum requires the application of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. Cross-discipline instruction increases student comprehension and retention, and answers the question 

so often asked by students, ‘‘Why do I need to know this?’’

I would like to share one example of the impact that cross-discipline instruction 

has had on my classroom. After a challenging lesson in truss calculations, Dhaval 

told his classmates he planned to hug his math teacher the next time they crossed 

paths. Slightly confused, I asked him why. He replied that had it not been for his 

math teacher’s effective instruction in his Algebra 2 course, he would have been lost 

in the truss calculation lesson that I had given. Dhaval went on to say that while 

he was in the math course, he failed to see relevance for the material learned but 

since enrolling in the Project Lead The WayTM courses, he has applied the mathematical procedures to solve many problems. 

A third criterion for effective professional development is a modern, flexible support system that is readily accessible and accommodates different learning styles. 

The Project Lead The WayTM model provides an online Virtual Academy that is 

available to teachers upon demand and offers numerous lessons in middle school 

and high school curricula. The Project Lead The WayTM ListServ is available to 

teachers as a resource for technical assistance and as a forum to share ideas for 

advanced applications and tap into the expertise from their peers. Teachers can post 

questions on the listserv and will most likely receive a solution from another teacher, who could be from any where in the country, within 15 minutes. This system 

encourages camaraderie and fosters a professional environment that is often lacking 

in other professional development models. 

South Carolina and other states offer Project Lead The WayTM ongoing professional development during the fall and spring of the academic year. Through partnership agreements with Piedmont Technical College and Orangeburg-Calhoun 

Technical College, teachers receive additional professional training from statewide 

master teachers. The college partners provide equipment and materials. Teachers 

work together in small groups, assist one another in weak areas, and share best 

practices. Once again, the professional development is specifically aligned with the 

needs and interests of the teachers and the curriculum they teach. Technical support is also available for hardware and software challenges. These ongoing training 

and partnership agreements are organized through the South Carolina State Department of Education. 

Finally, the certified Project Lead The WayTM schools are subject to a certification 

process that involves the state university partner and the State Department of Education. This certification process occurs every five years and ensures that the schools 

deliver the curriculum to the standards established by Project Lead the Way. One 

of the criteria for Master Teacher status is that the teacher must teach at a Project 

Lead The WayTM certified school. Only Project Lead The WayTM certified schools 

may administer the college credit portion of the end-of-course assessments to qualified students. Students scoring successfully on the national Project Lead The WayTM

end-of-course college examination may apply for college credit at more than 30 fouryear institutions across the nation and at an even larger number of two-year institutions. 

In Closing 

After six years of training high school teachers during the Project Lead The 

WayTM Summer Training Institutes across the nation, I have heard overwhelmingly 

from teachers that they come away from the experience with a rejuvenated interest 

in teaching. After returning to the classroom, teachers reported that they felt more 

33

confident in the use of technology and better informed on current issues in science, 

technology, engineering, and mathematics. 

The National Mathematics Advisory Panel recommends, ‘‘* * * teachers must be 

given ample opportunities to learn mathematics for teaching.’’ I couldn’t agree more. 

A well-prepared teacher must be given the tools, technology, and time to advance 

in their field. That is, teachers must understand in detail and from a more advanced 

perspective the mathematical content they are responsible for teaching and the connections of that content to other relevant disciplines. But it is important to note that 

even the best teacher preparation cannot overcome poor leadership and inadequate 

administrative support. 

Many school districts decline to offer technology programs due to the high cost 

of equipment but in reality, technology programs provide real applications for mathematics and science while preparing the student for the workforce or post-secondary 

education. Because of funding issues, inequities in school programs exist across the 

nation, across the state, and even within the same city. Graduates from these 

schools compete in the same classroom at local colleges and state universities. I am 

fortunate to be employed by a district that recognizes the importance of professional 

development, the impact that technology has on education, and the impact of both 

on student achievement. 

As you and your colleagues consider education policy, I hope you consider the recommendations of the Math Panel with regard to Professional Development. As my 

experience with Project Lead They Way shows, the ideas and concepts are sound 

and should be elements of any professional development effort, federal or otherwise. 

Thank you again for this opportunity, and I look forward to answering any questions you might have. 

Chairman MILLER. Thank you very much, Dr. Staggers. 

Dr. Wolf, I think she set you up for your testimony here. 

Ms. WOLF. I know. Isn’t that nice? Thank you. [Laughter.] 

Chairman MILLER. You guys worked out this segue here. 

STATEMENT OF MARY ANN WOLF, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, 

STATE EDUCATION TECHNOLOGY DIRECTORS ASSOCIATION 

Ms. WOLF. Good morning. Thank you, Chairman Miller, Representative McKeon and the committee for inviting me to testify 

today. 

I would like to also especially thank Representative Hinojosa and 

Representative Biggert for being the lead cosponsors on the 

Achievement Through Technology and Innovation, or the ATTAIN 

Act. 

I am Mary Ann Wolf with SETDA, which represents the education technology leaders and the SEAs in all 50 states. Our members agree wholeheartedly with the National Math Panel report on 

the need and the potential to improve math education. 

I would now like to take you to a small school district in 

Floydada, Texas, where the median household income is $27,000 

and only about 57 percent of the population has a high school degree. You can imagine that with these demographics, many students have very limited experience and a narrow vision for their 

education. 

This school district made strategic decisions to change learning 

for kids forever by providing access to technology tools and resources, through relevant instruction being taught by teachers who 

had ongoing and sustainable professional development. I will tell 

you, it transformed Floydada. 

Imagine the student who never understood why algebra 

mattered, and introduce a lesson that asked him to figure out how 

much the rising gas prices affected his family. Technology, including collaboration on the interactive white boards, graphing and 

34

modeling formulas to learn algorithms, and visually mapping out 

the problem contributes to a deeper learning in these math skills 

and connects to 21st century learning. 

Suddenly, Algebra I, often cited as the gateway to graduation, is 

relevant. Tenth grade math scores in Floydada on the state exam 

went up by 36 percent, and sixth grade math scores went up by 

29 percent. This took a comprehensive approach that affected all 

stakeholders, but it is possible. It was part of a bigger state initiative called the Technology Immersion Pilot, which focuses on using 

technology for systemic reform. This is critical as we consider what 

we can do to address the teaching and learning of math. 

The students in kindergarten this year will graduate in 2020. At 

some point, all kids come to us wanting to learn, even math, and 

we just lose them sometime along the way. I think this is our responsibility and our opportunity. 

SEDTA worked with the Partnership for 21st Century Skills, 

ISTE, and many stakeholders to address what America needs to be 

competitive. In the maximizing-the-impact book, the pivotal role of 

technology in a 21st century education, we concluded that in a digital world, no organization can achieve results without incorporating technology into every aspect of its everyday practices. It 

is time for schools to maximize that impactive technology as well. 

This is especially true for mathematics. 

In Vallejo, California, the sixth-and seventh-grade math teachers 

received ongoing sustainable professional development to integrate 

technology into the classroom. Teachers learned to use new models 

for teaching the content in a more effective way. Vallejo focused on 

the lowest-performing students. In one lesson, students were involved in a game show class quiz format for content review, but 

teachers received immediate feedback to individualize instruction 

to reach those students previously unsuccessful. The district has 

seen large gains on state math test scores and approximately 40 

percent of those students moved up an entire performance band in 

the first year. 

Similar to the Texas TIP program in Floydada, Utah, Missouri 

and Maine have implemented the eMINTS program, which provides classrooms and schools with technology tools, curriculum and 

over 200 hours of professional development. These students are 

able to reach the NCLB goals and 21st century skills. 

In Utah, where eMINTS and control classrooms existed in the 

same school, eMINTS students repeatedly achieved over 10 percent 

higher on state exams. In Missouri, after 6 years of looking at 

fourth grade math data, eMINTS students in special education, 

low-income, entitlement sub-groups have reduced the achievement 

gap in test scores between the performance of their peers by onehalf. The achievement gap is closing. 

As has been mentioned very effectively, there is a tremendous 

opportunity with technology to make professional development ongoing and systemic. Programs like ACCESS in Alabama, IDEA in 

Arizona, and eLearning Delaware lead to changes in teaching and 

learning. Virginia has also implemented instructional technology 

coaches. 

Technology is also very important for formative assessment. The 

Philadelphia public schools implemented an instructional manageVerDate 0ct 09 2002 21:46 Dec 01, 2008 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00038 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 G:\DOCS\110TH\FC\110-93\42335.TXT HBUD1 PsN: DICK
35

ment system to frequently assess individual student achievement, 

which has contributed to the increase in AYP schools from 58 to 

132 schools over 2 years, and math achievement went up by 14 percent. Again, knowing what kids know and what they need to know 

makes a big difference. 

The good news is that we have many strong examples in written 

testimony. The bad news is that a Department of Commerce study 

determined that out of 55 industries, education was dead last in 

the use of technology. Now is the time to maximize technology for 

all kids. 

We appreciate the committee’s support through the EETT Program, NCLB, and the ATTAIN Act and the draft reauthorization 

of ESEA. The ATTAIN Act builds upon the data that is shared 

today, and focuses on systemic and strategic approaches to technology. ATTAIN will serve as a catalyst for more students to have 

a 21st century education system. 

To conclude, federal leadership must be bold to help transform 

how we teach, learn and apply math for our competitiveness and 

innovation. This is possible even for high-need kids like in 

Floydada, but it will take a concerted effort by you, by the states, 

by district, and by all stakeholders and educators. 

We ask that you specifically recognize the important role of technology in all education legislation. We can’t afford to miss this opportunity that technology provides to engage students, to improve 

instruction and teacher quality, and to ultimately raise student 

achievement in math so that our students are prepared for the 21st 

century. 

Thank you. 

[The statement of Ms. Wolf follows:]

Prepared Statement of Mary Ann Wolf, Ph.D., Executive Director, State 

Educational Technology Directors Association (SETDA) 

Good Morning. Thank you to Chairman Miller, Representative McKeon, and the 

Committee for inviting me to testify today. I would like to especially thank Representative Hinojosa and Representative Biggert for sponsoring the Achievement 

through Technology and Innovation (ATTAIN) Act. I am Mary Ann Wolf with 

SETDA, the State Educational Technology Directors Association. Our organization 

represents the educational technology leaders in the SEAs in all 50 states, Washington, DC, and American Samoa. Our members tackle issues ranging from using 

data to inform and individualize instruction for each child, providing the technology 

tools necessary to modernize our schools and engage the 21st Century learner, as 

well as providing innovative approaches to envision a ‘‘new norm’’ for America’s students. Our members agree wholeheartedly with the National Mathematics Advisory 

Panel Report on the need to improve math education in this country. 

As we consider America’s and our students’ competitiveness and the continued 

discouraging graduation rates, we are encouraged by the evidence we have about 

programs that make a difference for our students. The examples and data below address the following areas: 

• Maximizing the Impact: The Pivotal Role of Technology in a 21st Century Education System 

• Teaching and Learning Math: Improving Student Achievement and Increasing 

Student Engagement 

• Professional Development: Training That Changes Practice and Instruction 

• Formative Assessment: Using Real Time, On-going Data to Individualize Instruction 

Maximizing the Impact: The Pivotal Role of Technology in a 21st Century Education 

System 

As we look to America’s future, we must also reflect on the present. Only 7% of 

U.S. college students currently major in math or science fields, and this number deVerDate 0ct 09 2002 21:46 Dec 01, 2008 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00039 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 G:\DOCS\110TH\FC\110-93\42335.TXT HBUD1 PsN: DICK
36

creases to 3% by the end of the first year of college. More than 57% of our postdoctoral engineering students are from outside of the U.S., and U.S. Patent applications from the Asian countries grew by 759 % from 1989 to 2001. Patent applications from the U.S. during the same period grew at 116 %. High-speed global networks enable nearly instantaneous communication, collaboration and knowledge 

sharing which gives our competitors more advantages than they had in the past. 

Any approach to our challenge of educating America’s youth must rely on technology 

solutions that are scalable, flexible, reliable, and have the ability to cost-effectively 

individualize education for all students. The opportunity cost for not addressing this 

challenge and improving math learning is too high, and education stakeholders 

must be bold and specific in efforts to improve math achievement. 

As identified in the SETDA Math Toolkit, the use of technology can support the 

teaching and learning of mathematics by bringing a multitude of learning experiences to captivate student interest and build mathematics understanding, proficiency, application and confidence. Mathematical understanding is increased when 

students and teachers use and apply technology to investigate mathematical concepts; including visualization, modeling, representation, simulation and communication. Students learn mathematics in different ways, and we need to provide technology, resources, varied instructional strategies and skills that allow them to excel, 

deepen their understanding and maximize their potential. Students build mathematical knowledge and understanding of mathematical concepts through problem 

solving. Educational technology strengthens the connection of mathematical topics 

in different contexts. (2007, www.setda.org) 

The students in Kindergarten this year will graduate in 2020. In some schools, 

in some districts, in some states, students are receiving an education that can be 

identified as meeting the needs of the 21st Century students. It is our responsibility 

to ensure America is maximizing its potential, both in closing the achievement gap 

and addressing the needs of high achieving students who will be our nation’s next 

innovators. NCLB provides us with accountability goals for our students, districts, 

and states; but as we look at the big picture around America’s and our students’ 

competitiveness, it often seems that how the majority of schools have responded to 

NCLB directly contradicts what we know about ensuring that our students are prepared for the 21st Century global economy. I would argue that this does not need 

to be the case. Technology can help address core content achievement and 21st Century Skills for children of all abilities and achievement levels. 

When we talk about technology, we are not talking about putting some computers 

in the back of a classroom—we are talking about utilizing the power of technology 

to change the way teachers teach and children learn. While many of you cannot 

imagine your workday without technology to access resources or communicate, this 

is still not the case for many students and teachers on a typical school day. 

Unfortunately, we cannot assume that technology has been maximized in most 

schools—a Department of Commerce study shared that education was actually 55th 

out of 55 industries studied in use of technology. The education community needs 

to invest in technology and embrace its uses just as the business community transformed its practices throughout the last 20 years. Again, technology will only be 

maximized when it is used for practical and contextual solutions such as individualizing instruction, engaging students, and providing access to rigorous and dynamic content for teachers, students and parents. When technology is used only for 

supplemental instruction, it cannot act as the transformational force helping us 

ready our children for the 21st century workforce. 

SETDA recently worked with the Partnership for 21st Century Skills, the International Society for Technology in Education (ISTE), and a broad cross-section of 

business and philanthropic stakeholders in education, including Apple, Cisco, ENA, 

the Oracle Foundation, and the Pearson Foundation, to address the important question: ‘‘How will we create the schools America needs to remain competitive?’’ Maximizing the Impact: the Pivotal Role of Technology in a 21st Century Education System provides a blueprint and examples on how technology makes a difference in 

teaching and learning. 

For more than a generation, the nation has engaged in a monumental effort to 

improve student achievement. We’ve made progress, but we’re not even close to 

where we need to be. It’s time to focus on what students need to learn—and on how 

to create a 21st century education system that delivers results. In a digital world, 

no organization can achieve results without incorporating technology into every aspect of its everyday practices. It’s time for schools to maximize the impact of technology as well. (Maximizing the Impact, 2007 found at http://www.setda.org/web/

guest/maximizingimpactreport.) 

This is especially true for mathematics. Students should have a strong understanding of mathematical knowledge and skills, and the ability to apply it in relVerDate 0ct 09 2002 21:46 Dec 01, 2008 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00040 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 G:\DOCS\110TH\FC\110-93\42335.TXT HBUD1 PsN: DICK
37

evant problem solving situations using inquiry and investigation, collaboration, and 

critical thinking skills. STEM education should be for ALL students—not just the 

cream of the crop who has access to the magnet option. STEM education is interdisciplinary providing context around math, science and engineering to engage students who will thrive and become competitive leaders in the global economy. 

Educators should have a deep understanding of mathematical concepts and their 

applications to relevant problem solving situations, and should continue to gain insight and understanding of strategies and methods to encourage their students to 

learn, use and be intrigued by mathematics. Math teachers should work in cadres 

inside the school or utilize technology to collaborate with like-subject teachers in 

other schools for peer-to-peer professional development and collaboration to hone 

pedagogical approaches as well as specific content knowledge in the subject. STEM 

teams can also collaborate using this method to provide powerful learning opportunities for teachers and students. Technology helps accomplish these goals. 

It is our responsibility to ensure that our children are prepared to lead our country in the 21st century, which includes a deep understanding and usage of math 

and its core concepts. The role of technology to transform education into a system 

that can achieve this goal must be at the forefront. We must rely on technology solutions that are scalable, flexible, reliable, and have the ability to cost-effectively individualize education for ALL students. 

Teaching and Learning Math: Improving Student Achievement and Increasing Student Engagement 

We are beginning to know what makes a difference in teaching and learning 

math. The same practices and instructional methods that affect student engagement 

and achievement in math increase student achievement in other areas as well. The 

development of programs that include key tools, rigorous and dynamic resources, 

leadership, and professional development are proving to have real, significant impact as evidenced through research funded by the US Department of Education. The 

systemic reform models shared below lead to increases in mathematics achievement 

and have many commonalities. In all cases teachers had the technology tools and 

resources to utilize in planning and in instruction, and teachers received extensive 

on-going and sustainable professional development. In math instruction, these strategies included collaborative learning, relevant projects and content, using tools and 

resources to address various learning styles, and problem solving, in addition to 

learning facts. Professional development to change instructional strategies was critical to the transformation of teaching and learning. 

• California: In the 6th and 7th grades in Franklin Middle, Solano Middle, 

Springstowne Middle, and Vallejo Middle Schools, math teachers are trained to integrate technology into the classroom, they saw how the technology could be used to 

hit key points, engage students, use modern tools in ways they had never tried. 

When teachers learned new strategies, it strengthened their teaching with technology, but it also energized their overall teaching as they applied the strategies to 

other areas. Teachers, who have taught math for many years, learned and used new 

models for teaching the content in a more effective way. These teachers would not 

have shifted without the impetus of this program. Results include: 

• Formative Assessment, Gaming & Accountability: Vallejo focused on the lowest 

performing students in 6th and 7th grade. Typically, these students don’t engage 

in the learning environment. Since the program uses different types of technology 

in the classroom, there are multiple opportunities to engage the students. Students 

loved using technology in a game show/class quiz format for content review. What 

they didn’t realize was that the instant feedback strengthened the teaching and provided data to individualize instruction. 

• Differentiated Instruction & Just in Timing Learning: PowerPoint presentations 

were used in many classes. Because of the high absentee rate at the schools, students could review the presentations that they missed to get caught up with the 

class. The math program uses technology to explore and develop concepts and then 

reinforce skills. Most importantly, this transition from concepts to skills was on pace 

with the learners abilities. By differentiating the instruction with technology, teachers are able to reach previously unsuccessful students. 

• Increased Student Achievement: The district saw large gains on CST scores for 

the target students, the 50 lowest-performing students in each middle school. Approximately 40% moved up one performance band in the first year. The two-year 

objective was met in the first year. 

• North Carolina: In North Carolina, several high poverty elementary and middle 

schools implemented the IMPACT systemic reform program. The model involves 

using technology in the teaching of core curricular areas to improve student achievement, utilizing technology coaches and school library media specialists for on-going 

38

professional development, as well as learning 21st Century Skills. In these schools, 

teachers use technology to differentiate instruction based on formative assessment, 

utilize technology to engage students with various learning styles, and provide curricular options for students based on achievement. Students collaborate, apply 

knowledge to real-world problems, and receive repetition and enrichment as needed. 

For more information, go to: http://www.ncwiseowl.org/Impact/. Findings include: • In a four year study, students in the high need schools with the IMPACT program have demonstrated that they are 33% more likely to improve one full grade 

level each year than the control/comparison schools. • Teacher retention is 65% higher with this program. • In Math specifically, the odds that IMPACT students would go from non-passing to passing status over the three years were 42% higher than that for comparison 

students. • In the fourth year, the odds of IMPACT students passing the Math end of grade 

tests were 24% higher than that of comparison students. This effect was stronger 

in earlier grades. • Texas: In Texas, the Technology Immersion Pilot (TIP) provides a school with 

the technology resources it needs to change teaching and learning (for teachers and 

students), on-going and sustainable professional development for teachers and leaders, the ability to utilize data in an on-going and sustainable manner, and the involvement of parents, leaders, and other stakeholders. This program focuses primarily on middle schools, and provides the environment and support to maximize 

the potential of technology to transform teaching and learning. A recent article succinctly highlights the results in two districts: http://www.thejournal.com/articles/

20931—1. The program site can be found at: http://www.txtip.info/. Findings include: • Overall, discipline referrals went down dramatically with the changes in instruction and engagement, which provided additional opportunities for teaching and 

learning. • In one school, 6th grade standardized math scores increased by 5%, 7th grade 

by 42%, and 8th grade by 24%. • In Brady ISD, 7th grade math scores increased by 13 points. • In Floydada ISD, 6th grade standardized math scores increased by 29 points, 

and 10th grade standardized math scores increased by 36 points. • Utah, Missouri, and Maine: In Utah, Missouri, and Maine, the eMINTS program provides schools and teachers with educational technology tools, curriculum, 

and over 200 hours of professional development to change how teachers teach and 

students learn. Utilizing 21st Century skills, relevant content, and collaboration are 

all key to the instructional strategies used in eMINTS classrooms. eMINTS changes 

how teachers teach and how students learn. Students in eMINTS classrooms no 

longer have to ‘‘power down,’’ disconnect or disengage from the excitement and motivation the technology brings to their world. Teachers in eMINTS classrooms at all 

grade levels (3-12) report significant increases in student attendance and significant 

decreases in student behavior disruptions. Students in eMINTS classrooms are fully 

engaged in authentic projects that utilize technology and provide opportunities for 

students to hone the skills they will need to compete in the 21st Century, Missouri 

has evaluated this program for 8 years, and other states are conducting evaluations, 

as well. The following link provides a strong overview of the program: http://

www.emints.org/ and findings are found at http://www.emints.org/evaluation/reports/. Findings include: 

• In Utah, classrooms in the same school (one with eMINTS and one without), 

the student achievement of students in the eMINTS classroom was repeatedly over 

10% higher than the control classroom. In Title I buildings participating in the 

eMINTS-4-Utah initiative, a greater percentage of 4th—6th grade students enrolled 

in eMINTS classrooms scored at proficient levels on the UPASS CRT tests for language arts, mathematics, and science than did 4th-6th grade students in noneMINTS classrooms. 

• After 6 years of data in Grade 4 Mathematics, eMINTS students in subgroups 

(special education, low income, and Title I) have reduced the gap in test scores between their performance and their peers by up to 1⁄2 of the difference attributable 

to subgroup classification. 

• In another district that had not met AYP goals, teachers began implementing 

the eMINTS program. After using the eMINTS approach with extensive professional 

development, the 3rd grade math scores increased by more than the 15% goal and 

made AYP in every subgroup. 

In addition to the systemic reform approaches mentioned above, states and districts are experiencing success in key areas for improving math achievement for 

more students, including: 

39

• Access to Rigor and Remediation (Alabama):Alabama’s ACCESS (Alabama Connecting Classrooms, Educators, and Students Statewide) has redesigned the model 

for distance learning, by tailoring rigorous online courses and interactive 

videoconferencing services to the needs of individual students. The program is currently offering 10 AP courses—many of the enrollments are from rural schools that 

had never offered an AP course before. Dr. Major-McKenzie, superintendent of the 

rural Dallas County School System, states that, ‘‘ACCESS has helped the Dallas 

County School System maintain and expand course offerings when we were either 

unable to recruit or fund a highly qualified teacher. Without ACCESS, students at 

my high schools would not have been able to participate in courses such as Advanced Placement Calculus, Latin, or Shakespeare. Additionally, almost 5,000 students have received remediation and supplemental resources and more than 14,000 

half-credits have been awarded. With high-quality courses that are engaging students through the utilization of 21st Century skills, Alabama is addressing its immediate need to decrease school dropout rates, increase high school graduation 

rates, and prepare its students to be competitive on a global scale.’’

• Student Engagement: Building Conceptual Understanding, Collaborating with 

Others, and Motivating Students (Oregon): In Oregon, students built collaboration 

skills, confidence, and critical thinking. Teachers shared that there is nothing more 

amazing than watching a young, shy child stride up to the front of the classroom, 

place their math work under the document camera and confidently explain to their 

classmates the way and the why of how they solved the problem. Technology offers 

this student the opportunity to share his/her work in this way, gives student opportunities to share their learning, speak publicly and to defend their thought processes. Oregon Department of Education has realized how interactive whiteboards 

and tablets in their classrooms enhance student learning. One of the teachers using 

these tools in her classroom is a middle school math teacher. She enthusiastically 

reports that the level of engagement amongst her students has risen dramatically 

and that she has the ability to move around her room for better classroom management. 

• Building 21st Century Skills & International Awareness in Math (Illinois): A 

small school in Villa Park, Illinois participates in World Math Day. This amazing 

event allows the whole school, including teachers to participate in around the world 

math competition. This child-centered educational website selects 4 users out of 160 

participating countries to compete in simple addition, subtraction, multiplication, 

and division facts in 60 seconds. During the game users can see the flag and map 

of the countries they are competing against, as well as the progress of the other 

users in the game. At the end of the 60 seconds, the user is given a progress summary with correct answers to missed problems. Upon breaking record scores, users 

achieve credit. The Villa Park school had a record of approximately 70,000 correct 

questions answered on March 7, 2008. A new world record was set, with over 

182,450,000 math problems solved in one day. 

• Student Engagement: Building Conceptual Understanding, Collaborating with 

Others, and Motivating Students (New Jersey): Wharton Borough Public School District in New Jersey developed a program focused on integrating technology into the 

math curriculum in grades 6-8. In the Bridge Project, students plan for the construction of a new bridge over the Hudson River to meet the needs of the expected 

increase in future traffic. Teachers report that students are highly engaged, spend 

more time on task, and are reluctant to leave/miss Math class for other activities. 

Overall, last year the percentage of students scoring in the GEPA Mathematics 

(state standardized test) proficient ranges increased to the highest percentage in the 

district’s history (69.8%). The bridge project was one part of New Jersey’s Math 

Achievement to Realize Individual eXcellence (MATRIX) grant program (2004-2007) 

designed to increase student achievement in mathematics in grades 6 through 8 by 

providing classroom teachers with ongoing professional development and in-class 

support that focuses on integrating technology into the curriculum and instruction. 

In Gloucester City Public Schools, a low-socioeconomic area ‘‘in need of improvement’’ interactive white boards were introduced into middle school math classrooms. 

Multimodal lessons addressing visual learners were posted to the district’s servers 

making them available to all teachers. Math scores in this middle school have increased by 16 percentage points since the program was implemented. 

• Blended Approaches to Address Varied Learning Styles (Texas): Brownsville in 

Cameron County, La Joya ISD, and Pharr San Juan Alamo ISD in Texas utilize 

enVisionMath which utilizes a blend of print, digital and active paths to engage and 

challenge students and support teachers as they address different learning styles 

and differentiate instruction. 

40

Professional Development: Training That Changes Practice and Instruction 

Professional development must change teacher practice and instruction to effectively increase math achievement. Joyce and Showers (2002, 1995) found that the 

isolated, workshop approach has less than a 5% chance of influencing instruction, 

but on-going and sustainable professional development involving modeling, mentoring, and/or coaching increases the likelihood for teachers to change instructional 

practices to almost 90%. States, districts, and schools can utilize technology to get 

beyond the traditional two hour workshop and provide meaningful professional development and resources to teachers. Teachers can engage in on-going and job embedded professional development through access to on-line courses, professional 

learning communities, and education portals with resources and lesson plans. This 

is particularly critical in rural and inner-city areas where these opportunities are 

often limited. Instructional technology coaches or mentors in schools provide opportunities for collaboration on planning and co-teaching to help teachers utilize new 

practices and resources. The systemic reform approaches identified above in the 

Texas TIP, Missouri eMINTS, and North Carolina IMPACT programs each utilize 

high quality professional development with these important qualities. • Instructional Coaches or Mentors (North Carolina): IMPACT schools is largely 

a result of the role the school library media coordinator or technology learning 

facilitator plays in working with small groups and individual teachers to provide 

professional development and modeling as more and more technology is used to engage students in instructional units. Teachers work together to develop new lesson 

plans, consider how to facilitate learning, and utilize data to individualize instruction. As ideas are shared, new technology tools are incorporated to enhance the unit. 

Often the new tool is demonstrated or even taught during the meeting, or a special 

training date is determined for additional professional development. This type of 

planning and collaboration among teachers results in a transformation of learning, 

and the results are significant. • Improving Content and Pedagogy (Louisiana): Louisiana is offering online professional development courses to help teachers engage students in Math. They are 

providing online courses so that they have the capacity to reach more teachers, in 

more districts and schools, and better prepare them for their roles in the everchanging classroom setting. 12 modules were developed covering topics from Concept of a Variable to Measures of Central Tendency. Each module focuses on a specific algebraic content topic and includes elements of instructional strategies and 

lesson planning. Furthermore, modules include online readings and resources, interactive activities, online discussion prompts and optional enrichment activities. • Online Courseware & Use of Data (Delaware): Delaware provides access to online courses through eLearning Delaware. Teachers have access to several clusters 

of courses, including the Secondary Math cluster focused on the skills and knowledge necessary to use virtual manipulatives with algebra lessons; applying meaningful data to apply in the math classroom; and developing strategies to encourage and 

promote the formation of algebraic thought processes in students. Teachers take 

three online courses developed by EDC (Education Resource Center): (1) Getting 

Ready for Algebra with Virtual Manipulatives; (2) Using Real Data in the Math 

Classroom; and (3) Using Patterns to Develop Algebraic Thinking. Each course 

takes place entirely online over a six-week period, and the culminating activity is 

the piloting of three lessons developed throughout the three courses. Teachers connect with other teachers in the on-line environment to ensure on-going and sustainable professional development. • Professional Learning Communities and Education Portals: As our education 

system strives to ensure that our students are competitive in a 21st Century global 

economy, it is critical that educators have access to high quality resources, data, and 

tools to guide teaching and learning. An Education Portal is a one-stop resource for 

educators to support teaching, learning, and leading. Portals include access to resources and an entry point to other information or services, including subscriptions 

or data systems, content standards, lesson plans, courses of study, Web resources, 

listservs, and other educational resources. This includes technology-based curriculum resources and tools that promote 21st Century teaching and learning. A 

portal allows educators to quickly search for lesson plans or other resources by content standard, grade level, and/or topic. Ideally, a portal also provides an on-line 

community for educators to collaborate and discuss teaching and learning and experiences as an educator. State-wide portals provide equity of access to teachers regardless of district, high quality resources that address teaching and learning needs 

to ensure students are prepared for the 21st Century global economy, on-line communities of learning to support the improvement of teaching and learning, and access to formative assessments and other resources to address various learning 

styles, needs, and achievement levels. Alabama, Arizona, Massachusetts, and other 

41

states have implemented portals as an essential part of professional development 

and resources for teaching math. The Ohio example from Garfield Heights includes 

achievement data: 

• Ohio: eTech Ohio and the Ohio Department of Education (ODE) helped schools 

develop and implement lessons aligned to the academic content standards for math 

and English/language arts. This set of web-based curriculum management and instructional design tools allow for online content/course development and management, or an ‘‘off-the-shelf’’ course/learning management system. Maple Leaf Intermediate School in Garfield Heights, Ohio serves approximately 600 students. Maple 

Leaf is considered a Title I school and 50% of the students are eligible for free or 

reduced lunch. Maple Leaf has a very diverse ethnic population: 33% of the students 

are African American, 63% are Caucasian, 2% are Asian, 2% are Hispanic, and less 

than 1% are Filipino. Student achievement in mathematics dramatically increased 

as the school increased the use of technology in daily classroom instruction. Of two 

classes taught by the same teacher, the class that utilized the CompassLearning online tool has a 14% higher passage rate on the Ohio Math Proficiency Test than that 

of the class that did not use this technology tool. 

Formative Assessment: Using Real Time, On-going Data to Individualize Instruction 

Timely information about individual students is a critical component in changing 

the way that teachers teach and students learn math. Statewide longitudinal data 

systems are very important for accountability and reviewing overall curriculum and 

instruction. Additionally, teachers need access to data to assess the progress of their 

students on a regular basis in order to individualize instruction, allowing for the remediation or enrichment as needed, for each and every student. Many districts and 

states are utilizing programs and systems that provide teachers with formal and informal assessments to track student progress weekly or even daily. This keeps students on-track with achievement, but also provides opportunities for students to 

participate in engaging activities based upon abilities and needs. The examples 

below provide two approaches to tying formative assessment to the curriculum to 

individualize instruction: 

• Michigan: Several districts in Michigan utilize Carnegie Learning’s Cognitive 

Tutor for Algebra I, a software program that assesses students’ individual needs, 

creates an easy-to-follow regimen, allows students to work at their own pace, provides instant feedback, and can be used on any computer in any location. Wayne 

Regional Education Service Area is just completing its first year of a partnership 

with Carnegie Learning originally designed to address mathematics deficiencies in 

High Priority schools, and was ultimately expanded to allow all districts in the 

county to participate. In the first year they’ve provided math curriculum to 10,000+ 

students in 16 districts, and have provided professional development to upwards of 

500 teachers on how to positively impact mathematics student achievement using 

the Cognitive Tutor. Taylor Public Schools has effectively implemented the Carnegie 

pedagogy, and as a result, student achievement in mathematics has dramatically increased. Further, and perhaps more telling, is the dramatic decrease in failure rates 

the district saw compared to previous years. In years past, Taylor has selected those 

higher achieving students out of 8th grade to take Algebra 1 in 9th grade. Historically the failure rate for those ‘‘high achieving’’ students came in around 45%. This 

school year, ALL 9th graders were required to take Algebra 1, including Special 

Education students, and the failure rate has decreased to 15%-20%. 

• Virginia: Virginia’s Algebra Readiness Initiative (ARI) assists in preparing students for success in algebra through a computer-adaptive test (CAT). School divisions are eligible for incentive payments to provide mathematics intervention services to students in grades 6-9 who are at-risk of failing the Algebra I end-of-course 

test as demonstrated by their individual performance on diagnostic tests that have 

been approved by the Department of Education (DOE). The diagnostic test results 

allow teachers to individualize the content for intervention. A pilot study conducted 

during the 2005-2006 school year to explore the efficacy of this approach in grade 

5 showed that students improved over 80 scale score points between the pre and 

post Algebra Diagnostic Test during the school year. Teachers reported that the ARI 

helped determine the learning styles of the students and ultimately modified the 

teaching accordingly. Some students like formulas, while others relate to examples, 

scenarios, and hands-on activities. The professional development associated with the 

ARI requires a lot of one-on-one follow-up with teachers. It was also reported that 

providing students with a variety of software choices helped students that needed 

different ways of learning. 

42

Conclusion 

The good news is that we have identified strategies and programs that make a 

difference for math achievement. These strategies and programs also happen to 

make a difference across the core subject areas, as well as 21st Century skills and 

other education indicators. Specifically: 

• The use of technology can support the teaching and learning of mathematics by 

bringing a multitude of learning experiences to captivate student interest and build 

mathematics understanding, proficiency, application and confidence. 

• Mathematical understanding is increased when students and teachers use and 

apply technology to investigate mathematical concepts; including visualization, modeling, representation, simulation and communication. 

• All educators and students should have access to the resources and technology 

to support teaching and learning of mathematics at school and home. 

• Students learn mathematics in different ways, and we need to provide technology, resources, varied instructional strategies and skills that allow them to excel, 

deepen their understanding and maximize their potential. 

• Students build mathematical knowledge and understanding of mathematical 

concepts through problem solving. 

• Educational technology strengthens the connection of mathematical topics in 

different contexts. 

• Using formative assessment in mathematics provides on-going data for teachers 

to individualize instruction based on needs. This leads to increased achievement in 

math. 

The Committee has demonstrated its focus on the critical role that technology 

plays in our education system by the inclusion of the EETT Program in NCLB and 

the ATTAIN Act in the draft reauthorization bill of ESEA. The ATTAIN Act focuses 

on the need for systemic approaches to technology implementation and recognizes 

the critical role technology plays in the use of data systems to individualize instruction, on-line assessments, virtual AP Courses, and on-going and sustainable professional development. Many states currently use educational technology to reach these 

goals which have shown to improve student achievement, certify highly qualified 

teachers and help close the achievement gap—particularly in regard to math. 

The ATTAIN Act provides an important role in helping more states, districts, and 

schools implement systemic reform models and on-going and sustainable professional development that have been proven to improve student achievement in core 

subject areas and ensure that students are competitive in the 21st Century global 

workforce. 

Federal leadership must be bold and act as a catalyst to change how we teach, 

learn, and apply math for America’s and our students’ competitiveness and innovation. Maximizing the impact of technology’s role in our education system is possible, 

but it will take a concerted effort by you, the states, districts, educators, and all 

stakeholders. We can achieve a 21st Century Education system for all students. We 

ask that you specifically recognize and support the role of technology in all education legislation, including throughout the Reauthorization of ESEA and the America COMPETES Act. We cannot afford to miss the opportunity that technology provides to engage students, to improve instruction and teacher quality, and to ultimately raise student achievement in math so that our students are prepared for the 

21st Century. 

Chairman MILLER. Thank you. 

John? 

STATEMENT OF JOHN J. CASTELLANI, PRESIDENT,

BUSINESS ROUNDTABLE 

Mr. CASTELLANI. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member 

McKeon, members of the committee. Particularly Mr. Miller and 

Mr. McKeon, thank you for participating with us yesterday on another very important part of the education issue, the role of community colleges. 

Across every sector, our CEOs are united in their concern about 

the continuing reality that far too many students are not graduating from high school with the knowledge and skills they need 

to succeed in either higher education or at the workplace. 

43

The No Child Left Behind Act is beginning to make a difference, 

but troubling achievement gaps remain between groups of students 

in the United States, and between U.S. students and their international counterparts, particularly in math and science education. 

We believe that expanding the talent pool of Americans with a firm 

grounding in math and science is a critical element of the innovation agenda that the United States must pursue to remain competitive in the 21st century. 

That is why the Business Roundtable through its Tapping America’s Potential coalition of 16 national business organizations established the goal of increasing the number of Americans graduating 

with an undergraduate degree in science, technology, engineering 

or math to 400,000 per year by 2015. The current figure is 225,000. 

Business Roundtable CEOs believe that graduating more students in these key majors is a necessary step toward ensuring continued U.S. technological and economic leadership. Just as important, grounding in these subjects is increasingly necessary for individual success in the modern economy. 

The Bureau of Labor Statistics projects that science and engineering employment in the United States will increase 70 percent 

faster than the rate for all occupations during the next decade. 

America will create more and more high-wage jobs for technical 

professionals. The question we face is whether or not our children 

will be qualified to fill them. 

It is clear that the United States cannot achieve the TAP goal 

of 400,000 math, science, and engineering graduates annually without first raising U.S. student achievement in mathematics. Math is 

the gateway that frequently is the reason why students are unprepared to pursue careers in these fields. By the time a student is 

in the eighth grade, if he or she is not on a path to succeed in algebra, high-wage job opportunities diminish. 

There is widespread understanding about the importance of 

learning to read as the foundation for further learning. There is an 

equally compelling case for the importance of a strong foundation 

in mathematics. Many companies have programs that introduce elementary and middle school students to exciting careers in science 

and engineering and give them hands-on experience with interesting science experiments. 

However, the companies recognize that it is not enough to get 

students excited about the future in these fields. They also need a 

foundation of math skills that can turn that excitement into a real 

possibility. What I would like to do is just talk about two of many 

examples. 

Texas Instruments has partnered with the CBS television show 

NUMB3RS, which features a mathematician working with his FBI 

agent brother to solve crime. TI has also developed a math scholars 

program at the University of North Texas-Dallas Campus that ensures full scholarships with book stipend to students pursuing their 

bachelor of arts degrees in mathematics with a secondary certification. The students teach in Dallas for a minimum of 2 years in 

return for this scholarship opportunity. 

Another example is ExxonMobil, which has partnered with professional golfer Phil Mickelson and his wife Amy to launch the 

Mickelson ExxonMobil Teachers Academy, and provides thirdVerDate 0ct 09 2002 21:46 Dec 01, 2008 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00047 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 G:\DOCS\110TH\FC\110-93\42335.TXT HBUD1 PsN: DICK
44

through fifth-grade teachers with the knowledge and skills necessary to motivate students to pursue careers in science and math. In addition, ExxonMobil Corporation has committed $125 million 

to the National Math and Science Initiative, which is working with 

states and universities to scale-up two proven programs: first, the 

training and incentive programs to increase the number of students 

taking and passing advanced placement math and science courses; 

and second, Uteach, a program that encourages math and science 

majors to enter the teaching profession by offering an integrated 

degree plan, financial assistance, and an opportunity for early 

teaching experience for undergraduates. 

These and other corporate initiatives are making an important 

contribution, but policies also need to change. As the National 

Mathematics Advisory Panel recommendations point out, a critical 

bottleneck in U.S. math education is the inadequate supply of wellqualified and highly prepared math teachers. 

That is why our member chief executive officers were so enthusiastic about the math and science education legislation enacted last 

year as part of the America COMPETES Act was included, but 

time and again, we learn that well-intentioned math education initiatives fail because of inadequate attention to high-quality teacher 

preparation and professional development. 

Mr. Chairman, this committee focuses on education and workforce issues, and those issues will determine whether our students 

and workers can compete and succeed in our rapidly changing 

world economy. The education and workforce policies and programs 

of the last century are not designed to meet the challenges that we 

are facing today. 

We stand ready to work with the committee on new approaches 

for the 21st century. I thank you for your leadership and for the 

opportunity to testify today. I would be happy to answer questions. 

Thank you. 

[The statement of Mr. Castellani follows:]

Prepared Statement of John Castellani, President, Business Roundtable 

Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member McKeon, Members of the Committee. Good 

morning. I am John Castellani, President of Business Roundtable. 

Thank you for inviting me to testify before you today on math education and the 

recent report issued by the National Mathematics Advisory Panel. 

I want to thank the members of the Advisory Panel for their important work on 

behalf of education in the United States. 

Business Roundtable is an association of chief executive officers of leading corporations with a combined workforce of more than 10 million employees and $4.5 

trillion in annual revenues. Across every sector our CEOs are united in their concern about the continuing reality that far too many students are not graduating 

from high school with the knowledge and skills they need to succeed in either higher 

education or work. The No Child Left Behind Act is beginning to make a difference, 

but troubling achievement gaps remain between groups of students in the United 

States, and between U.S. students and their international peers, particularly in 

math and science education. 

CEOs believe that expanding the talent pool of Americans with a firm grounding 

in math and science is a critical element of the innovation agenda that the United 

States must pursue in order to remain competitive in the 21st century. That is why 

Business Roundtable through its Tapping America’s Potential coalition of 16 national business organizations established the goal of increasing the number of Americans graduating with an undergraduate degree in science, technology, engineering 

or math to 400,000 per year by 2015. The current figure is about 225,000. 

Business Roundtable CEOs believe that graduating more students in these key 

majors is a necessary step toward ensuring continued U.S. technological and ecoVerDate 0ct 09 2002 21:46 Dec 01, 2008 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00048 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 G:\DOCS\110TH\FC\110-93\42335.TXT HBUD1 PsN: DICK
45

nomic leadership. Just as important, grounding in these subjects is increasingly necessary for individual success in the modern economy. The Bureau of Labor Statistics 

projects that science and engineering employment in the United States will increase 

70 percent faster than the rate for all occupations during the next decade. America 

will create more and more high-wage jobs for technical professionals. The question 

is whether our children will be qualified to fill them. 

It is clear that the United States cannot achieve the TAP goal of 400,000 math, 

science and engineering graduates annually without first raising U.S. student 

achievement in mathematics. Math is the gateway that frequently is the reason why 

students are unprepared to pursue careers in these fields. By the time a student 

is in 8th grade, if he or she is not on a path to succeed in Algebra, high-wage job 

opportunities diminish. 

There is widespread understanding about the importance of learning to read as 

the foundation for further learning. There is an equally compelling case for the importance of a strong foundation in mathematics. Many companies have programs 

that introduce elementary and middle school students to exciting careers in science 

and engineering and give them hands-on experience with interesting science experiments. However, the companies recognize that it is not enough to get students excited about futures in these fields. They also need to get the foundation of math 

skills that can turn that excitement into a real possibility. 

For example, Texas Instruments has partnered with the CBS television show 

NUMB3RS, which features a mathematician working with his FBI agent brother to 

solve crime; TI also has developed a Math Scholars program at the University of 

North Texas Dallas Campus that offers full scholarships with book stipend, to students pursuing their Bachelor of Arts degree in Mathematics with Secondary Certification. The students teach in Dallas for a minimum of two years in return for 

this scholarship opportunity. 

ExxonMobil has partnered with professional golfer Phil Mickelson and his wife 

Amy to launch the Mickelson ExxonMobil Teachers Academy which provides thirdthrough fifth-grade teachers with the knowledge and skills necessary to motivate 

students to pursue careers in science and math. In addition, Exxon Mobil Corporation committed $125 million to the National Math and Science Initiative, which is 

working with states and universities to scale-up two proven programs: 

• training and incentive programs to increase the number of students taking and 

passing Advanced Placement math and science courses, and 

• Uteach, a program that encourages math and science majors to enter the teaching profession by offering an integrated degree plan, financial assistance, and early 

teaching experiences for undergraduates. 

These and other corporate initiatives are making an important contribution. But 

policies also need to change. As the National Mathematics Advisory panel recommendations point out, a critical bottleneck in U.S. math education is an inadequate supply of well-qualified and highly prepared math teachers. That is why our 

member CEOs were so enthusiastic about the math and science education legislation enacted as part of the America COMPETES Act last year. Time and again, we 

learn that well-intentioned math education initiatives fail because of inadequate attention to high-quality teacher preparation and professional development. 

Mr. Chairman, this Committee focuses on the education and workforce issues that 

will determine whether our students and workers can compete and succeed in our 

changing world economy. The education and workforce policies and programs of the 

last century were not designed to meet the challenges we are facing today. Business 

Roundtable stands ready to work with you on new approaches for the 21st century. 

I thank you for your leadership and for the opportunity to testify today. I would be 

pleased to answer any questions you may have. 

Chairman MILLER. Thank you very much, and thank you to all 

of the members of the panel. 

Dr. Fennell, somewhere I saw a graph, or competing graphs, or 

PowerPoint slides or something, and one was supposedly a representation of how we present math in grades one through twelve. 

The other was how other countries present math. One was very 

scattered, very psychedelic, unconnected. 

Mr. FENNELL. I know the graph you are referring to. 

Chairman MILLER. Oh, you know the graph. Okay. Maybe you 

can give it a better description, and if you could explain it and 

46

what the implications that the Math Panel thinks of those terms. 

I am sorry we don’t have it. I don’t think we have the graph here 

for the members. 

Mr. FENNELL. No, you wouldn’t want to have that graph. It 

would probably confuse most people in the audience. But it comes 

from the work of Bill Schmidt. It comes from the work of Trends 

in Mathematics and Science. What he did was he looked at highachieving countries and their mathematics curriculum, and then he 

put a scattershot of a number of the states in this country. 

The reason I say you probably don’t want to show the graph, it 

would probably burn the eyes of the viewers because in this country, we introduce and frankly do a scattershot of a myriad of mathematics objectives and outcomes and expectations. In those other 

high-achieving countries, the number of expectations are far fewer 

so that in fact the teachers can reach the level of depth that children need as they move on to other mathematics. 

I can and should say it is stronger than that, the work of both 

NCTM and in particular the National Math Panel’s critical foundations and benchmarks really looked at that work very, very carefully, and hence critical foundations—absolute must-haves that 

every state ought to attend to. 

Chairman MILLER. So when you were talking in your testimony 

about being focused here——

Mr. FENNELL. You know, I can’t expect the fourth-grade teacher 

who frankly has a limited background in mathematics to think that 

among even 60-some objectives, which are the most important. So 

it is our job, through this report and the initiatives of groups like 

NCTM, to make sure that teachers know that. I know that there 

are people in this room from Florida and other states where they 

have actually done this, where they have taken 80-some objectives 

in a given year and condensed that down to 30-some. So some 

states are getting this message. 

Chairman MILLER. Okay. I want to hold that thought for a second because that is a recommendation about the direction that the 

Math Panel believes school districts should go in terms of developing——

Mr. FENNELL. Your remarks earlier about streamlining are right 

at the heart of that. 

Chairman MILLER. So, Ms. Slover, you work with governors and 

states, and you mentioned in your testimony that a number of 

them are making these kinds of improvements. But I have a question for you. If that is a recommendation, some states are doing it, 

and there is an agreement that we have to have a more coherent 

way of presenting and building early strengths so that you can 

build on those, what is the role of the federal government there? 

Ms. SLOVER. One role for the federal government is to empower 

states to do that, and to encourage them in providing incentives for 

them to do that. As Dr. Fennell alluded to, states are moving in 

the right direction. They are taking a look at their standards and 

making tough choices about what everybody would like to have students know versus what is most important for students to know, 

because it prepares them for what comes next in life, whether they 

are going to college or whether they are going into careers. 

47

To have that conversation, you need the right people in the room. 

You need K-12 educators, obviously. You also need the business 

folk and you need the college professors to help inform the conversation about what is most important. States are moving in the 

right direction and cutting down and focusing their curricula. 

Chairman MILLER. In your testimony, in your presentation, you 

have 33 states that you indicate Achieve has worked with, and you 

think they are moving in the right direction. They are not all at 

the same place, but they are moving in the right direction. You 

mentioned that you have 13 states that now at some point, or this 

spring, are taking a common exam in math. 

So then, again, the federal government should do what? Allow 

flexibility in funding to support that? 

Ms. SLOVER. Absolutely. We have 14——

Chairman MILLER. We have killed more initiatives than we have 

created, so I just want you to think about it while you are roaming 

around out there. [Laughter.] 

Ms. SLOVER. We would love the federal government to provide 

space and flexibility for states. Many more states are looking to 

end-of-course exams to directly measure the content in the courses 

that students take, which enables a little bit more fidelity to the 

curriculum than some of the more comprehensive exams that 

states are giving. So we would encourage the federal government 

to encourage states to move in that direction. 

Chairman MILLER. And Achieve is comfortable with the rigor of 

the exam in the 13 states in terms of your goals and your mission? 

Ms. SLOVER. Yes. The 14 states have worked together over the 

last 2 years to develop the content expectations, the items, and now 

to pilot and to offer the test. We have taken a look at the test. This 

particular test is very rigorous. Not all exit exams are necessarily 

so, but they do offer the opportunity to be more closely aligned and 

more tightly connected to the curriculum, which provides teachers 

and students with a lot of benefit. 

Chairman MILLER. What is the reason you don’t have 20 states 

taking the exam? 

Ms. SLOVER. I can’t answer that. More states are certainly invited to join this group. 

Chairman MILLER. They don’t have the capacity? I mean, they 

wouldn’t be comfortable submitting their students to that? Do you 

know? 

Ms. SLOVER. We started out with nine states, and we have grown 

significantly over the last year, so I think there is momentum. Additional states are joining as we speak. But this is a rigorous exam. 

It is at the algebra II level. Most states are currently testing their 

students at the algebra I or below level. So it is a significant shift 

for states. It will take some time to phase in as they grow their 

expectations for their students. 

Chairman MILLER. It is very encouraging. One of the things that 

Congressman McKeon and I tried to do in the discussion draft on 

No Child Left Behind was look at what the governors and states 

are doing and try to encourage those who are stepping out in that 

vein. I don’t know if the Math Panel looked specifically at that, just 

to finish off this discussion, but in terms of whether there is 

enough infrastructure being built so that the federal government 

48

would be more comfortable in allowing the flexibility of funding to 

be directed if you are confident that you are gaining rigor and improvements. 

Mr. FENNELL. I would think that the benchmarks that come out 

of the critical foundations that lead to algebra are certainly guideposts for states as they think about the must-haves as they move 

into high school. And then, as you know, with No Child Left Behind, there has to be a high school assessment. It is the courageous 

state that might at some point say, well, our high school assessment might even be the ADP examination in algebra II. 

So the notion that 14 states have already—and I think the word 

is ‘‘already’’—thrown into this I think is significant. 

Chairman MILLER. Thank you. We will have a second round of 

questions. 

Mr. McKeon? 

Mr. MCKEON. Thank you, Chairman Miller. 

Dr. Fennell, you talked about countries that are high achievers. 

What would be some of those countries? 

Mr. FENNELL. Well, most frequently people refer to Singapore. It 

is easy to refer to many of the Asian culture countries. It is also 

probably worthwhile to look at Flemish Belgium. It is also worthwhile to look at other European countries. But coming to us as we 

did our work, we were tying pretty carefully to what is going on 

in Korea, what is going on in Singapore, Japan, as specifics. 

Mr. MCKEON. The European countries that I am familiar with all 

have a centralized——

Mr. FENNELL. Yes, as do the Asian culture countries that I just 

referenced. 

Mr. MCKEON. Okay. So if we were one of those countries, we 

could listen to this panel. All are very distinguished and presented 

very good cases of things that should be done. And then we would 

just inculcate that and send out the message and it would all of 

a sudden happen in all 50 states. 

We have a different system. So we have to grapple with the 

states. 

Ms. Slover, you were asked what could the federal government 

do. I think your response was ‘‘empower.’’ The states are already 

empowered. They have the responsibility. We see the problem as 

a national problem that needs to be solved at 50 different areas, 

and within those areas, at the local school board level. 

At times, it causes I think a lot of frustration. I served on a local 

school board, and I saw the needs there. I remember during that 

period of time we lost two of our best math teachers to industry 

because, as much as they wanted to be math teachers, finally the 

offers got too good for them to stay teaching. 

One of the things that you did talk about, though, was the specialist teachers, and if we could encourage that at all elementary 

schools. How would you envision that? The school would hire a specialist? 

Mr. FENNELL. The panel’s work looked at it—and by the way, 

Bill Haver is a noted authority on this. The work in Virginia is 

stellar, and it is coming, and there is going to be research that will 

drive a particular direction to the model of elementary math teacher specialists. But the model that we found right now that does 

49

work is if I anoint somebody and say, all right, you are in charge 

of all the fourth-grade mathematics, and somebody else is doing all 

the fifth-grade mathematics, and your teaching load, if you will, is 

primarily mathematics, we do see achievement gains in that model 

right this minute. So that is something that could happen. 

Mr. MCKEON. That is what Dr. Haver was talking about in the 

areas that they are working in. 

Mr. FENNELL. Yes. And his model is a little different because 

they are looking at elementary specialists at the building level and 

so forth. But I also think that one of the challenges we have is generalist teachers at the elementary school level at a time when we 

are looking for developing specific background in mathematics and 

science. So why not begin pre-service teacher preparation with opportunities for people to move in and teach a lot more mathematics 

than typically? 

Mr. MCKEON. What incentives would we give to those teachers 

to get the adequate education, and then the motivation to do that, 

and to stay in the teaching field? 

Mr. FENNELL. I think you hit on it, in your local example and 

in your last statement, one of the biggest challenges. Teachers of 

particularly high school mathematics are very, very hard to find. 

The majority of people teaching middle school mathematics in this 

country at this moment have neither a degree nor a minor in mathematics, at a time when more and more students are taking algebra at the middle school level. It is a tremendous problem for us. 

Of course, we know that foundationally this has to happen at the 

elementary school level. So not only do we need teachers, but probably more importantly, we need to find a way to keep them, because in fact if you have that background that I just alluded to, you 

have options. That is why you lost those two teachers you referred 

to in your own example. 

Mr. MCKEON. Some of us went to China a couple of years ago. 

We visited with government leaders, industry leaders, education 

leaders. We visited a lot of schools and talked to students. The 

thing I noticed was a sharp contrast between China and our country: all of the university presidents were engineers over there. That 

is their background. Ours seem to be fundraisers. They come from 

a broad liberal arts or an education degree, and then move through 

the system that way. 

Well, I guess we have more problems, more answers, than we are 

able to implement. 

Mr. FENNELL. Well, that is part of that value thing, don’t you 

think? 

Mr. MCKEON. Pardon? 

Mr. FENNELL. I said that is part of that value thing, don’t you 

think? 

Mr. MCKEON. Oh, yes, yes. 

Mr. FENNELL. This culture of ours needs to get over this math 

gene business, this business that only certain people ought to do 

this subject, or science or engineering. We heard the numbers earlier. It is time to step up. 

Mr. MCKEON. Yes. Thank you. 

Chairman MILLER. Thank you. 

Mr. Kildee? 

50

Mr. KILDEE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Dr. Staggers, I was a Latin teacher. Only because of pride and 

memory, I got A’s in math. I went as far on as trig, but got A’s 

in math. I really was discovering little or nothing. I never had like 

‘‘eureka’’ moments of joy when I worked the problems. But because 

of pride and memory, I knew how to lay out the problem. 

You indicate that real applications for math and science, while 

preparing the student for the workforce, are post-secondary education. How do you put that theoretical math together with some 

practical application where one can have that ‘‘eureka’’ moment, 

and realize that this math plays a very, very important part in 

their life and the lives of our society? 

Ms. STAGGERS. In mathematics in high school and middle school, 

for example, you study inequalities—less than, greater than, and so 

forth, less than, greater than, and equal to. Those are basically tolerance intervals. So in manufacturing, you look at that range of 

values as plus or minus, say, five-thousandths of an inch when you 

are measuring a part in manufacturing. 

Some of the algebra and trig that is used where you are just simply looking at right triangles, in engineering when you are designing bridges, truss structures for roofs or walkways—any kind of inclined plane—you need to use those angles and that trig to figure 

out distances. 

So rather than just take a problem out of a math book and say, 

you are given this, find that, actually give them a realistic problem 

where you want to put so much force on this structure, and what 

types of beams do I need to have under that structure. So with that 

application, the students realize the importance of their calculations to a certain degree. It is not ‘‘did I get close.’’ It is very important that you got it right. [Laughter.] 

Mr. KILDEE. I never had those ‘‘eureka’’ moments, where I got 

this right and it is going to make a difference. 

Ms. STAGGERS. Well, if you are putting two parts together and 

you are designing a part to go in your car, if the part is not designed properly, even the slightest fraction of an inch, it is not 

going to fit. 

Mr. KILDEE. Coming from a General Motors town, I realize the 

importance of that. [Laughter.] 

Dr. Fennell, you mentioned that teachers in junior high who really for the most part could have a better background in math. Do 

they illustrate to the student the application or how this really 

does play a role in their lives and the lives of our society? 

Mr. FENNELL. Well, I would certainly like to hope so. It seems 

to me that we need—I mean, one of the things we sort of get into 

when we have discussions like this is this sort of cultural comparison. We have to acknowledge that frankly our kids are different, 

and that we do need to get them connected to the mathematics 

they are learning. 

The notion of tolerance that we just heard, whether you are 

going to be able to get over the bridge, whether you are going to 

be able to start your car, if that doesn’t get a kid sort of connecting 

with the mathematics that they are learning relative to inequality, 

I don’t know what would. 

51

So that notion that equipping teachers to be able to do that, rather than just going through the motions of, if you will, I heard the 

comment earlier about your grandfather’s mathematics or perhaps 

the mathematics that you and I learned so many years ago. 

Mr. KILDEE. Well, I got A’s in math, but I would have hesitated 

to drive my GM car over that bridge. I really was not able to connect. 

Mr. FENNELL. I thought that was a great response to your question in terms of how to really connect it to a life-like situation. 

Mr. KILDEE. Thank you very much. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Chairman MILLER. Thank you. 

Mr. Keller? 

Mr. KELLER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

I am the father of four small children. I can tell you anecdotally 

I thought I was dealing with a math problem with my 12-year-old 

son. I asked him if you had five apples and I asked you for one, 

how many apples would you have? He said five. I said, wouldn’t 

you have four? And he said I am not giving you any of my apples. 

So I didn’t have a math problem. I had a little Republican on my 

hands coming up the ranks here. [Laughter.] 

Let me ask you, Ms. Slover. You work with the different states. 

Last time I looked at the NAEP scores a few months ago, I believe 

it was Massachusetts that was number one in the country for 

fourth-grade math and eighth-grade math. Is that right? 

Ms. SLOVER. Yes, that is correct. 

Mr. KELLER. Okay. And Dr. Fennell, you are saying that? 

Mr. FENNELL. Yes, right. 

Mr. KELLER. Let me ask both of you, since you are familiar there, 

is Massachusetts doing something different that maybe the other 

states can learn from? Or is it just socioeconomic factors? What are 

they doing that makes them number one, and that the rest of us 

can learn from? 

Dr. Fennell, I will let you go first. 

Mr. FENNELL. I am happy to take that one on. I think that there 

are two things that come immediately to mind, and you hit one of 

them. One is whenever you begin to do this sort of state-by-state 

comparisons, whether it is a national assessment or even your own 

state test, I do think you have to take into account the background 

of the students and where the students were and so forth. So I 

think that is part of, for instance, Massachusetts compared to Florida. 

It is also part of the fact that the Florida standards were one of 

those states, up until the last year, that frankly had 89 objectives 

for classroom teachers at the fourth-grade level and so forth. Whenever you have that many perceived expectations, you can’t dig 

deep. You don’t really have the opportunity to drive down, because 

you are trying to scattershot and make sure that you hit all 

those—in the case of Florida, the FCATs—which then those students are samples for the NAEP. 

The Massachusetts standards are trimmer, if you will. They are 

more closely tied to the National Assessment of Educational 

Progress. So what the students are seeing both in their expectaVerDate 0ct 09 2002 21:46 Dec 01, 2008 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00055 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 G:\DOCS\110TH\FC\110-93\42335.TXT HBUD1 PsN: DICK
52

tions and their state test and the NAEP are just more compatible 

measures. 

Mr. KELLER. Okay, more mainstreamed benchmarks that they 

are having to hit, and also a little different socioeconomic background? 

Mr. FENNELL. Right. Yes, and again, I alluded to it earlier and 

I knew that you were from Florida. Florida has very recently taken 

those 89 objectives and gone all the way back down to 30, so they 

are clearly getting the notion of, if you will, less is more, and let’s 

make sure that our students really know the important mathematics well, along with other mathematics, prior to this thing we 

call algebra. 

Mr. KELLER. Ms. Slover, do you have any comment? 

Ms. SLOVER. I completely agree with Dr. Fennell. Massachusetts 

has exemplary standards. We actually use them as an example of 

high-quality standards in our own work, and we share those with 

other states and hold them up as an example of how to do standards right. 

Interestingly enough, Massachusetts does not have state graduation requirements. They allow the locals to make those decisions, 

so they are not using that graduation requirement lever, but they 

are providing incentives and encouraging their teachers to really 

look at those standards and do a lot of professional development 

around those standards. 

Mr. KELLER. All right. Next, I am going to talk about teacher 

quality for a minute. I am going to give Dr. Staggers a chance to 

answer this, as well as Dr. Fennell. 

Before I do, let me just say this. We are all sensitive on a bipartisan basis that we have a massive shortage of good math teachers. 

So we have passed legislation already that provides loan forgiveness—$17,500 if you agree to be a math teacher in a Title I school. 

Three of us were just in the Oval Office a few days ago with 

President Bush and Senator Kennedy, when President Bush signed 

into legislation expanding SMART grants to provide $4,000 additional for Pell-eligible students who are going full-or part-time to 

become math majors. That will help 100,000 students and will provide them with $8,800 a year in Pell money that they never have 

to pay back, to increase the number of folks going into these fields. 

So we are sensitive to that. 

Teacher quality. Raytheon just did a landmark study where they 

applied modeling and simulation principles to the education system 

to see how can we predict who is going to be successful in math 

and science. Do you remember that study, Dr. Fennell? 

Mr. FENNELL. Yes. 

Mr. KELLER. The number one correlation with whether or not 

you are going to pursue math at the college level, more than student-teacher ratio, more than poverty of your family, was whether 

you had a high-quality teacher. The number one thing that discouraged people from pursuing it is they had a bad teacher experience. 

Are you familiar with that study, Dr. Fennell? 

Mr. FENNELL. Yes. 

Mr. KELLER. The biggest challenge that the researchers had was 

they can tell after someone has been teaching a couple of years 

whether they are a good teacher or not. It is pretty hard to tell 

53

when you are doing your interview whether someone is going to be 

a good teacher or not. So let me just let Dr. Staggers and Dr. 

Fennell answer. 

How do folks know on the front end, since you are involved in 

hiring math teachers, whether someone is going to be good? And 

then once they are there, how do you know that they are going to 

be good, to maintain the good folks and weed out the bad? 

I will let Dr. Staggers start with that. 

Ms. STAGGERS. I don’t know if there is a way to tell off the bat 

if a teacher is going to be good. It is sort of like preachers, I want 

to say. They don’t always start out good, but they get better as 

time goes on. 

Mr. KELLER. Right. [Laughter.] 

Ms. STAGGERS. And so up front, we may not know that, but seasoned teachers are good. If you find out that they are not good, 

there needs to be a way to rectify that very quickly, rather than 

just keep them on because the paperwork becomes too difficult. 

Mr. KELLER. Dr. Fennell, I am out of time, but maybe the chairman will let you answer before we go to the next witness. 

Mr. FENNELL. Yes, let me just say that what you refer to with 

regard to successful students and the impact of a teacher kind of 

picks up on the research of Sanders and Rivers in Tennessee, and 

also more recently the Dallas Independent School District, where 

essentially if a child has three ineffective teachers in a row, that 

child never recovers. So this is a tremendous challenge for us. 

One of the frustrations in our work with the National Math 

Panel was it was clearly easy for us to see that teachers do make 

a difference, but what we couldn’t get underneath of and say, well, 

is it certification? Well, is it an NCATE accredited teacher education program? Well, is it particular aspects of professional development? 

It is one of those things where we don’t know and we had better 

find out. As I said in my remarks, if colleges of education don’t 

hear that and hear it loudly, I don’t know what more needs to happen. I am a teacher-educator for 30-plus years, and I like to think 

that maybe the teacher-preacher model was part of what I did and 

continue to do, but we have to be far more strident in what we are 

doing preparing and nurturing and, again, retaining effective 

teachers. 

Mr. KELLER. Thank you. 

Chairman MILLER. Thank you. 

Ms. Woolsey? 

Ms. WOOLSEY. Thank you to this panel. This has been an excellent morning, but it makes me very frustrated, so you are going to 

hear all of this. 

First of all, we know that you can’t learn unless you can read, 

so reading is very, very important to our kids. You have proven 

without a doubt something that we also know, that the more math 

you learn, the more you earn, as Ms. Slover told us. But we also 

know that we have to educate the whole child. We have to have 

music. They need to know geography and history and the humanities. 

So there are some things that we just know. That doesn’t mean 

that we are wise enough to act on that. We know that a child who 

54

eats breakfast learns better. They test better. Their discipline is 

better. Their attendance is better. We know that, but we don’t feed 

all kids breakfast. I mean, it would cost too much money, obviously. 

So what I am asking you, given what you want us to be doing, 

which I respect very, very much, even if we had good math teachers available, even if we valued teaching education in the first 

place, and math particularly, and we had the incentives and we 

had all these math teachers, where is the time to do all of this? 

What do we need to do differently? Where do we make room? Do 

we need to make our school year or school day longer? 

I will start at the bottom and move up on that. Let’s talk about 

where is the give in this formula. 

Mr. CASTELLANI. One of the unfortunate parts of this, and I am 

not a trained educator, I should say, however, that I am the son 

of two teachers, one of whom is a math teacher and the other 

English. But the unfortunate reality is that there are no priorities 

among essentials. All that you talked about are essential, but one 

of the critical needs that we recognize right now, particularly as 

our economy is evolving, is math and science. Math particularly is 

a gateway. 

It will allow us as a nation better economic growth, better competitive standing, and hopefully more resources for all of the spectrum of education that you mentioned. So I think all of the experiments that you have mentioned, and we have looked at a longer 

school day, a longer school year. From our perspective, it is very 

simple. These are the talents we need if we are going to own the 

higher end of the value-added chain in the future, and we have to 

find the way to do it. 

Ms. WOOLSEY. Dr. Wolf? 

Ms. WOLF. Thank you. 

One thing that I have noticed is that as we worked to implement 

NCLB and accountability, it often seems like it is done in a way 

that contradicts what we know that works and makes sense. I don’t 

think that is the intent of the law in any way, shape or form, but 

when you look at how in some schools and some districts they have 

reacted to those requirements, it doesn’t involve 21st century skills. 

It doesn’t involve interdisciplinary learning. It doesn’t involve the 

depth that we are all talking about today that makes a real difference. 

Now, when you say about the time, I have a deep interest in that 

topic. I will tell you that I think the response is that it is a systemic reform piece. We have looked at many programs, including 

the one I referenced in Texas, but North Carolina implemented one 

as well. They provided an instructional technology coach to those 

schools to work with teachers in groups. It started to save time, because there was co-planning and co-working. Using technology is 

one way. 

I don’t think technology is a silver bullet in any way, shape or 

form. But what we do know is it can help other things work really, 

really well. When we looked at those, what I find fascinating is 

teacher retention in schools in North Carolina, where achievement 

was 33 percent more likely to be on grade-level when technology 

55

was used and these coaches were in place, teacher retention was 

65 percent higher. 

You would immediately think that is the young teachers, but it 

wasn’t the case. It was also the master teachers because they were 

able to be creative and use the teacher skills they had to do all the 

things we have mentioned. So I think there is a real opportunity 

there to focus on those pieces. 

Ms. WOOLSEY. Dr. Staggers? 

Ms. STAGGERS. I think a weakness is that maybe teachers who 

teach music, art, history and these fields that you are speaking of 

don’t realize that there is math in every one of these fields. So we 

don’t really need to make the day longer. We need to incorporate 

the math that is found within them. Take the field of art, that is 

geometry. You could use a computer to do art with. 

We do it with the Project Lead The Way introduction to engineering design course. In music, the timing—that is mathematics. 

In history, reading graphs, charts, timelines—all that is math. 

Every discipline that is taught in our schools has a math component. The teacher who teaches that discipline needs to be prepared 

to pull the math out of it and introduce it. 

Ms. WOOLSEY. Thank you. 

And Mr. Chairman, I will ask the other three in the second 

round. 

Chairman MILLER. Thank you. 

I would just like to chime in on this because I think this is an 

argument that is very often made. I think is demonstrates more a 

lack of capacity than a problem with the law. I mean, we had testimony here from an award-winning school—a complete turn-around 

in Southern Oregon, where they decided their road to success was 

to become a math academy and they decided they would do it on 

the backs of every other course that they teach. 

They had the most engaged group of students I had ever seen at 

the elementary level. They all had to play an instrument. They all 

had to understand the mathematics of music. They all had to understand the mathematics of history and the size of ships and the 

depths of the oceans and the distance between the continents. They 

worked it out. 

But you know what? You had to have teachers that had capacity 

so that they can multi-task those subject matters. If the teacher is 

a page ahead, there is no chance that that is going to happen. So 

what you want is simplicity, separation, drill and kill. There is 

nothing in the law that requires that. 

In fact, I think we are starting to see the emergence of those who 

are in fact turning around schools are doing interdisciplinary studies. They are doing collaborative learning. They are reaching across 

classrooms to bring in these other subject matters to demonstrate 

the mathematics in that. We had the Mickelson ad of the golf 

swing—one of the most amazing graphics that played over and over 

and over. It told me I am never going to be able to hit that ball 

straight, but you know, that is depressing. [Laughter.] 

So I think it is out there, but it requires serious professional development skills and talent. Those who cave in, those who shrink—

again, there is no requirement under federal law that you do that, 

56

but it is because I think there is a question of whether they have 

the capacity to differentiate and develop this. 

I saw it on Indian reservations where math was used to explain 

the history and the natural resources of that, and engaged those 

students. So I just don’t want this to become that somehow this is 

what the law requires. It simply doesn’t. 

Who is next here? Mr. Hare? 

Mr. HARE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

I am going to have two questions here, one for Dr. Wolf and then 

maybe one for the panel. In my congressional district, I have a lot 

of rural areas, a lot of rural schools. The studies show students 

who take these challenging courses are much more likely to succeed in college and possess skills necessary for the workplace, but 

rural schools don’t have and don’t offer as many of these advanced 

courses. 

I would like to know how can the teaching and learning of math 

in rural schools be improved through the integration of technology? 

I know you might have touched on that a bit with my friend, Congresswoman Woolsey, but as you know, I am very interested in this 

whole issue because in my district, as I said, I have so many rural 

schools. You would be surprised that people who live in Chicago or 

larger cities don’t think we have problems, but it is all the same. 

It is not. Our young kids in rural communities need a lot of attention, too, so maybe you could help me with that one. 

Ms. WOLF. Sure. I think there are two areas where this really 

comes into play. One is providing access to rigor and access to 

these opportunities. We see many, many states across the country 

utilizing online courses. They need to be high quality. They need 

to be interactive. They need to do all the things we know are about 

good education. We are seeing those emerge and there are those. 

So access to those kinds of courses I think make a huge difference for kids, especially when encouraged. There are things that 

need to be in place to make that happen. I know that, and there 

are policies that make it easier. So I encourage you to look at that. 

Can it be taught by a teacher from another state? Those kinds of 

things definitely make a difference. 

The other piece that I see making a tremendous opportunity, especially when we look at rural areas, is what technology can do for 

professional development. I taught only 12 years ago, but I did do 

the 2-hour workshops and I worked kind of in a box and I didn’t 

have those mentors and those online opportunities. What we know 

now is that through online cadres and through cohorts of teachers 

in online courses, teachers can constantly be connected with one 

another and share lesson plans and share what works. 

I think with math in particular in rural areas, we are finding 

that so many teachers have partners. We are the state that used 

videoconferencing so teachers of the same type of subject could 

watch over time what it looked like when it happened to another 

one. And you know what happened? Teachers changed what they 

were doing because they had a peer there saying, hey, I think that 

is what works. 

The last thing with professional development—because for me 

this is an area where I see technology playing such an important 

role—really is that opportunity to provide those rich resources that 

57

bring the outside world in. Whether it is the basis of Project Learning or it is allowing kids to use interactive math tools that make 

things come to life, we see all that working. I would love to share 

with you more details just on some of those projects because I 

think there is a tremendous amount of professional development 

and the access to rigor. 

Mr. HARE. If you would be willing, doctor, to maybe get a hold 

of my office, we could talk about that, because I really think that 

is very important, particularly for rural areas. I thank you for that. 

Ms. WOLF. Thank you. 

Mr. HARE. Let me just ask the panel, what is being done to ensure that preschool-age children arrive at school ready to excel in 

math? What programs are out there? How can we, or how can all 

of us, promote and support early childhood education? I would 

think the sooner the better here. I am just interested in your 

thoughts on preschool children and what we need to be doing, or 

maybe what we are not doing that we should be doing. 

Mr. FENNELL. Let me just start. 

Mr. HARE. Sure. 

Mr. FENNELL. The panel really had some strong recommendations there. For one thing, we know that young children come to 

school with a lot of mathematics understanding. So there is a starting place that has already begun. What we also know, sort of tragically, is that far too many young children don’t have the kinds of 

experiences I just alluded to. 

There is research out there that is beginning to show that when 

we provide parents and other caregivers with the kind of support 

necessary to have the conversation at home, have the conversation, 

frankly, anywhere about numbers, about other mathematical relationships, that you can begin to close that gap many of us talk 

about. 

So it is a tremendous area to think about as a starting point. 

One of the things that we have to do, to do all of what schools are 

now supposed to do, is to engage far more directly, far more frequently parents and other caregivers in this process. This is not 

solely the job of the classroom teacher. This is not solely the job 

of the local schools. So the area that you cite is an area of tremendous promise, as well as need. 

Ms. SLOVER. One leverage point that states have is to simply require that students go to pre-K. Many states don’t require that and 

leave that up to local jurisdictions to decide, and in many local jurisdictions there is not enough money for all kids. It is optional, et 

cetera. 

So one leverage states have is to make it a requirement. And 

then if they do, it would be important for them to define what kids 

should know and be able to do by the time they leave pre-K so that 

the consistency in what schools are offering is there. So that, you 

know, kids are getting a quality education no matter where they 

are going to school. 

Mr. HARE. Thank you. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Chairman MILLER. Thank you. 

Mr. Scott? 

Mr. SCOTT. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

58

I thank all of our witnesses for their testimony. 

Dr. Fennell, you talked about cultural values. One of our cultural 

values is the idea that we are going to maintain most of the control 

of education in 15,000 different school boards. As a member of the 

National Mathematics Advisory Panel, can you tell us whether it 

makes any sense to try to have more national standards, rather 

than have 15,000 different standards? 

Mr. FENNELL. I guess I probably shouldn’t share with you that 

to one of our early panel members, I suggested exactly that, that 

we consider national standards. And somebody spoke up about as 

quickly as one could and said that would take an act of Congress. 

I guess maybe I am talking to the right audience. [Laughter.] 

In all fairness, I get the notion of local control. I understand very 

directly the need for local school districts, states and so forth, to 

have that sort of autonomy, as well as authority. Having said that, 

I think that there is a need for all children to have a deep understanding of particular mathematics before they enter certain levels 

of their education. 

I would love to see whether it is the critical foundations benchmarks or NCTM’s focal points, or what have you, be at least a 

starting point for a voluntary national curriculum, or a voluntary 

set of must-haves, because to not have something like that is the 

splintering that you are referring to around perhaps the state of 

Virginia, certainly around the country. 

Mr. SCOTT. Thank you. 

Ms. SLOVER. Could I comment on that? 

Mr. SCOTT. Sure. 

Ms. SLOVER. Achieve does a lot of work with states. I think it is 

critically important that we agree on the common core and that all 

states are delivering that curriculum. I think we are very much in 

sync with the National Math Panel on that message and with 

NCTM. 

I think from Achieve’s perspective that work is already happening in states, so we would like to see that continue. More and 

more states are revising their standards. As they do that, they are 

both making them more focused, more coherent, and they are making sure that they have that common core so that one byproduct 

of all the work that the American Diploma Project states are doing 

is that standards are becoming better, number one, but also more 

alike from state to state. 

Not exactly alike. There are still some state differences, but I 

think there is general agreement on what is most important for 

kids to know. So it is bubbling up from the states that as they revise their standards over time, the standards are becoming much 

more consistent and focused around the same set of core issues. 

Mr. SCOTT. But we would need to kind of encourage the national 

standard. If everybody has the different standard, you can’t get 

there. 

Ms. SLOVER. That is true, and yet if they have the same content 

in their standards, they are getting to that national consistency 

without having something federally mandated from them. If they 

use mechanisms like tests that they share, there is a way to check 

on their progress to make sure that kids are learning what is in 

those standards. 

59

Mr. SCOTT. Thank you. 

Dr. Haver, the mathematics specialists—I noticed that they have 

to be specialists both in mathematics and in teaching. Is it important that they have both content and good teaching abilities? 

Mr. HAVER. Right. And what the specialists can do is to work 

with teachers in the schools to develop both of those skills—the 

teachers that they work with to develop a better understanding of 

the mathematics that they are teaching so that it is not just a 

bunch of rules they tell people to follow, and that they have ways 

that are effective, and effective to teach. 

This professional development takes place in the schools. The 

specialists work with the teachers in the schools. They work as 

they co-plan their lessons with them. They perhaps co-teach, and 

they develop these teaching skills and the knowledge within the 

teachers of what they are teaching. 

Mr. SCOTT. Does the specialist—is that a classroom teacher that 

has this as an extra duty? Or is this all they do? 

Mr. HAVER. This is all they do. Their job is to provide in-school 

professional development ongoing. 

Mr. SCOTT. Do you find that they handle more than one school? 

Mr. HAVER. Typically, as I say, there are about 400 such places 

in schools in Virginia, typically they are one school, grades K 

through five. They will have weekly meetings with the kindergarten teacher, with the first-grade teachers, with the second-grade 

teachers. Of course, in some rural areas, they would be shared between schools, when the schools are smaller with less teachers. 

Mr. SCOTT. Now, is the specialist paid more than other teachers? 

Mr. HAVER. No. In many school systems, they have an extra 

month time in the summer and get that extra money, but typically 

it is a teaching position. 

Mr. SCOTT. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Chairman MILLER. Should it be a teaching position? 

Mr. HAVER. Yes. They are teachers. 

Chairman MILLER. You wouldn’t draw a distinction between 

them as an additional resource person? You didn’t in Virginia. 

Mr. HAVER. Our model has been that they are not administrators. They are not supervisors. They are teachers. They work with 

their peers. They help. In elementary school, a third-grade teacher 

has to know all these other important things—reading, arts, social 

studies. But what the math specialist brings is this deeper knowledge of mathematics and effective ways that work and develop 

these abilities in all the teachers in the schools. 

Mr. SCOTT. But they don’t get paid more? 

Mr. HAVER. Well, in Virginia there is a certification to be a math 

specialist, and that comes with a master’s degree. Because of the 

degree, they get higher. 

I would like to add one other thing about what the federal government can and has done, and express our appreciation for the 

support we receive from the National Science Foundation and the 

NSP program, both in the Department of Education and the National Science Foundation. 

We can get support in Virginia to help pay for these teachers to 

have these positions to be there, but to do the research about 

whether or not this work, having these specialists, makes any difVerDate 0ct 09 2002 21:46 Dec 01, 2008 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00063 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 G:\DOCS\110TH\FC\110-93\42335.TXT HBUD1 PsN: DICK
60

ference or not, it is harder to get the state government to do that. 

This research of this nature of understanding what makes a difference and what people can learn is something that can be used 

by all states. It is not just something in one state. 

I think that is a clear national responsibility, just like in health, 

where we don’t expect each state to come up with its own methods 

to cure cancer. I think we can’t expect each state to determine 

which methods are most effective for teaching. 

Chairman MILLER. Thank you. 

You are welcome to take seats at the table there. You are welcome to come up here and sit in these empty chairs if you want, 

but you don’t get to ask any questions. [Laughter.] 

Because Mr. Holt would be very upset. 

Mr. Holt is recognized for 5 minutes. 

We are in a hearing on teaching math in America. 

Mr. Holt? 

Mr. HOLT. It looks like some of our subject matter is here. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

I thank the witnesses for good testimony. 

I particularly appreciate the line that there is no math gene, but 

I would also like to suggest that we not slip into thinking, and we 

did a few minutes ago, that there is a teaching gene. I served on 

the Glenn Commission, now 6 or 8 years ago, whenever it was, 

with good recommendations based on the principle that, yes, Before 

It Is Too Late, is a title that is not yet overtaken by time, I think. 

But a principal point we made was that through professional development, good teachers can be developed. So just as no one 

should be told that she or he is incapable of learning math, similarly we shouldn’t give up on teachers. There are just not enough 

genius teachers out there to fill the need. 

I certainly liked your testimony about why we need math to 

avoid fallacious thinking and to make sense of the world. We, 

among our colleagues and our staff, do constantly see the problems 

of poor understanding of statistics. We see it out in the country at 

large—inability to make order of magnitude estimates, clunky computation, and so forth. 

But here, we are extolling quantification and why we need this 

for everyone, and yet what we are talking about today we are unwilling to quantify. What is most striking about the report of the 

Foundation for Success of the National Mathematics Advisory 

Panel are phrases such as we need methodologically rigorous scientific research. Basic research is necessary. 

Research does not permit detailed conclusions. Very few studies 

were identified that probed the effectiveness of mathematics specialists. Research is smaller and less consistent than that which 

would be necessary. The body of high-quality studies on this topic 

is small. And yet we are making recommendations. 

It seems to me the recommendation that we need to make is we 

have to spend some billions of dollars in educational research. We 

are spending $100 billion roughly in teacher salaries. We are not 

spending a tiny fraction of that in the research that is necessary 

for us to understand. We can avoid that because each of us is an 

expert on teaching, because each of us was a student. But if we will 

listen to what we are talking about here today, it seems to me we 

61

will be drawn irresistibly to making a major commitment to research. 

So my question for you is, where should that be? If we are going 

to spend hundreds of millions of dollars in research so that we can 

quantify and understand what we say needs to be done, where 

should it be spent? Should it be the NSF? Should it be the Department of Education? Should it be NCTM? Who is going to do it? 

Let me start with Dr. Fennell please. 

Mr. FENNELL. What a great catch on your part, because in fact 

the charge of the panel was to look at the research that is driving 

the field. What many of the task groups found was there isn’t 

much. So were I to target where dollars ought to be spent, they 

would probably go in the following areas. 

We looked at the issue of curriculum focus and coherence. There 

is no research out there on that, and that is going to be a decision 

of what we decide relative to important mathematics for our culture. That is not a research-driven area. But the issue that you 

mentioned, at least one of them, is. And that is what do we know 

about teacher background? What do we know about what works in 

professional development? What do we know about alternative 

teacher certification versus what students might receive at Rutgers 

in your state or wherever? That research is dying to be done by colleges of education, by other people who prepare teachers at virtually every level. 

Similarly, we couldn’t find a level of reliable research we might 

like on emerging technology. We have been using graphs and calculators in high school classrooms since, frankly, Texas Instruments and Casio figured out a way to do that. We don’t have the 

research that talks about the impact of that on learning algebra, 

or frankly learning other higher-level mathematics. 

What about the research of distance learning as a technological 

vehicle? What about the research on particular materials in classrooms? We need, this culture of ours needs, to be more firmly 

grounded in research, particularly as technology emerges seemingly 

nightly, for us to grab hold of. 

So I couldn’t agree with you more with regard to teacher background, with regard to instructional strategies. We know a lot 

about learning the subject. In fact, that aspect of the report was 

stronger than some others, but you can go through some of the 

areas that you cite. 

We see, by the way, the notion of a math specialist as a very 

promising practice, but only went down the path where we did 

have some research. The work of Bill Haver and his project and 

others kind of popping up around the country gives us promise, but 

we need to collect that data, look at it very carefully, before we say 

everybody ought to think about math specialists, everybody ought 

to think about calculators or what have you. 

Mr. HAVER. Could I add something to that? 

Mr. HOLT. With the chairman’s permission. 

Mr. HAVER. That kind of research is very expensive. We are very 

fortunate to have a grant from the National Science Foundation 

that permits this research to go on, to get the kind of treatment 

and control school thing that we have going on extending over a 

6-year period of time, of having the school systems agree that they 

62

are not going to assign a math specialist to a school even if the parents are upset that the school next door has a math specialist as 

part of the study. 

This is a big project that takes a lot of money. I think something 

that I hope is considered is that it is better to fund serious expensive programs that are going to provide real answers to questions, 

than a whole bunch of little things, each with its own little small 

evaluation piece of it. You don’t learn anything from that. 

Chairman MILLER. Well, I am not going to do the math here, but 

we would start by dividing it by 100,000 schools. So it is a big 

study, but——

Mr. HAVER. Yes, but we can’t have each school do the study. 

Chairman MILLER. Right. 

Mr. HAVER. We have to determine who is best qualified to do it, 

and to conduct it and to get real answers to real problems. 

Chairman MILLER. Mr. Hinojosa? 

Mr. HINOJOSA. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and Ranking Member 

Buck McKeon for having this congressional hearing. I find it to be 

extremely interesting and one that I think we need to have a second and third round of questions. 

I want to say that in following up with what Congresswoman 

Woolsey said about having a complete program for children to have 

art and sports and all that, I believe is very important and possible. I went to visit here in Northern Virginia the Thomas Jefferson Math and Science Academy because they were producing about 

40 National Merit scholars, and I wanted to know how they could 

do it. 

To my surprise, they had a program that was very rigorous, but 

included theater, debate, chess, sports, band—everything. I asked 

the young juniors and seniors with whom we spoke how they could 

do that. They did say that it was a longer day than most of the 

public schools. I said, well, give me just one example of a day, an 

average day here at Thomas Jefferson. The young woman said, I 

get up at 6:00 in the morning, and I go to bed probably about midnight, but I go to school by 7:00 or 7:30, and I don’t get home until 

after the extracurricular activities, and it might be as late as 7:00 

or 8:00 o’clock at night. 

To my surprise in seeing their school, they had wonderful science 

laboratories. They had lots of teachers with master’s degrees and 

some with Ph.D.s. It was just a place where you could not get a 

job as a teacher because teachers didn’t want to leave. They didn’t 

have any turnover rate. I found out that they had diversity. They 

had lots of girls. They had Hispanic, African American, Asian 

American. 

So the myth that children of minority families can’t learn is indeed a myth. It is that type of a program, and maybe Dr. Haver 

said it best when he said that research can be very expensive, but 

some of these schools can also be very expensive. So it is challenging for Congress and for the state legislatures to be able to create such an environment. 

So I am going to ask my first question to Dr. Wanda Staggers, 

because I have a great deal of interest of being a voice for minority 

students, for girls and minority children, African American, Hispanic, Asian American, because it seems that our children have 

63

less opportunities to be in an environment as I just described, but 

when they are placed in that environment, they perform very well. 

So my question to you is can you tell us more about ‘‘It Is a Girl 

Thing?’’ Did you experience barriers to pursuing math and related 

fields in your career? And how can we encourage more African 

American, Hispanic American, Asian American children to pursue 

careers in STEM fields? 

Ms. STAGGERS. For myself, I was directed into being a math 

teacher in 1972. I was never told anything about engineering, and 

I think it was because I was a female and maybe a minority. My 

guidance counselor was an older man, and he never suggested that 

I could be an engineer. 

Since that time, I am now enrolled in an associate program in 

engineering because I am determined that I am going to hold a degree in engineering. 

Mr. HINOJOSA. Good for you. 

Ms. STAGGERS. Because of my determination, I don’t want that 

to happen to other young females or minorities. So a couple of 

years ago, I started getting some grant money to offer summer programs. The biggest problem we have with our summer programs is 

they were girl’s camps, and we would bring them onto the campus 

and introduce them to technology, is that they didn’t have the 

transportation to get there during the summertime. 

So I formed a partnership with Clemson University, with Serita 

Acker. She is the director of women in science and engineering. She 

is also working to get females into the college level. So we decided 

we would form a pipeline starting at middle school. We got some 

grant funding from the Engineering Educational Foundation and 

from the American Association of University Women. 

What we did differently is we now go into the middle schools 

during the school day, so that way the kids are already at school. 

It is open to any girl who wants to be in the program, and they 

don’t have to worry about transportation. We visit each of three 

middle schools in our district once a month. What we do is Serita 

has two female engineering students from Clemson University who 

design a lesson for the kids to carry out, and they come with us 

to the middle school and they teach them about chemical engineering, industrial engineering, biomedical, electrical. 

So each time we go into the schools, we take a hands-on activity 

that those girls can get excited about. With some of the funding 

that we have left, we are going to offer a 2-week summer camp this 

summer. That one is funded by the Society of Manufacturing Engineers, and we are going to send one girl from each one of the middle schools to the WISE summer camp. That is about $650 a girl. 

We are trying to get funding from wherever we can to introduce 

these girls to engineering. 

Mr. HINOJOSA. Thank you for that wonderful answer. 

Mr. Chairman, I want to welcome a group that comes from my 

congressional district. These young ladies and their professors come 

from the All American city of Edinburg, Texas. That happens to be 

where I have my congressional district office. They have come to 

learn a little bit more about Congress and how it works. They represent an institute that is very interested in helping us with 

64

HESTEC, our Hispanic Engineering Science Technology program 

that I have brought to Congress. 

We are going to have 10 models in 2008 and 10 more models in 

2009. It describes everything that you have said, Dr. Staggers—

just creating an opportunity to tell students that they can be a scientist, an engineer, a mathematician, and then put them through 

the program that you just described. So thank you for coming to 

be with us and to be here in Washington. 

Mr. WU. If the gentleman would yield just for a moment. 

Mr. HINOJOSA. Yes. 

Mr. WU. I very much appreciate the Texan’s presence here. Although we very much appreciate Mr. Keller holding the fort, we do 

hope that there are a few Democrats left in Texas and the fact that 

they are sitting on the Republican side is not an indicator of 

their——

Mr. HINOJOSA. There were so many, David, that we had to——

[Laughter.] 

Chairman MILLER. The chair reclaims the time of the committee 

here. We want to welcome you very much and hope you enjoy your 

experience here. Thank you for joining us. 

Mr. CASTELLANI. Mr. Chairman, may I make just a very brief 

comment on what Mr. Hinojosa just said? 

Chairman MILLER. Sure. 

Mr. CASTELLANI. It is indeed a math problem that business recognizes. This is a very simple part of the problem. Where the majority of the graduates of universities will be women for the foreseeable future, where a substantial portion will be African American 

and Hispanic, if we don’t find ways to attract those people to come 

into the STEM disciplines and become engineers and scientists for 

us in industry, then we cannot meet the goal of 400,000 a year. 

Mr. HINOJOSA. You are a courageous genius to be able to observe 

that. 

Chairman MILLER. Yes, will you guys go out in the anteroom? 

[Laughter.] 

Mr. Tierney? 

Mr. TIERNEY. Thank you. It segues into what my line of questioning was going to be. 

I want to thank all of you, first of all, for your testimony. This 

is very enlightening. It shows me clearly why I didn’t proceed further in math, and I am identifying all the issues now, a little late. 

But Mr. Castellani, corporations are oftentimes criticized for that 

relentless drive for the bottom line and people thinking that maybe 

the concept of corporate citizenship is suffering because of this real 

or perceived issue of having to have a return to your shareholders 

all the time and that takes paramount responsibility. 

So my question to you really is what should we expect of industry in terms of improving teacher preparation and capabilities of 

that? And how do we motivate it? And how do we organize it? 

Mr. CASTELLANI. Well, in fact it is a very good question, and the 

two are absolutely tied together, because the demands of our shareholders, many of whom are pension funds—in fact, almost twothirds are institutional shareholders—are that we provide better 

returns. 

65

We know we cannot provide better returns unless we can compete, and we know we can’t compete and succeed in the international marketplace unless we have more qualified employees at 

all levels to be able to design, be able to manufacture, to be able 

to service, to be able to finance, to be able to distribute the products that we now find in every corner of the world. 

So what you see is a tremendous emphasis on corporate philanthropy in education. It is the biggest single focus of our members, 

and I think it is across all corporations. In fact, the numbers are 

difficult to add all up, but it is by our best guess somewhere between $600 million and $1 billion a year. 

The motivation is a very simple one. If we do not have high-quality graduates from our high schools, our colleges, our community 

colleges, then we will not be able to compete and meet our shareholder expectations. 

Mr. TIERNEY. When you direct resources in that way, do you get 

any push-back from people who may think that the quarterly bottom line could be bigger if you weren’t putting resources over 

there? And is there any need for legislation or some notion to resolve that liability issue? 

Mr. CASTELLANI. No. You know, I think there are some people, 

but it is a very minority of investors who say it is not the role of 

corporations to be engaged in philanthropic activities. In fact, the 

preponderance of investors recognize that it is the role of corporate 

leadership to make sure that we have the resources to sustain our 

companies in the future, and this is the most critical resource. 

Mr. TIERNEY. So here is the next question. I would open this to 

the panel. How do we organize that? I know that there are a lot 

of different philanthropic efforts out there, a lot of corporations in 

my district and like that. Are we getting the best bang for our buck 

as they all go off individually and do what they think is the notion 

of what needs to be done? How do we organize it in some way constructively that we focus it right in on, say, this math problem of 

getting those teachers? Who does that and how do we do it? 

Mr. CASTELLANI. That is a very good question. We organize on 

an ad hoc basis. Achieve is one good example of how we can organize to share best practices and to share experiences. The National 

Math and Science Initiative is another way to do that. 

One of the things that is a shortcoming, and we have our members get together themselves in our own initiative on education in 

the workforce is we don’t share enough information about the success of the programs that we support with each other. 

In fact, last year just before he retired, Herb Allison, the CEO 

of TIAA-CREF, convened a number of our members in New York 

and, together with the Business Higher Education Forum, we are 

beginning an effort to share those experiences so that we know 

among our own community what works and what doesn’t work and 

focus better on those things that do work. 

Mr. TIERNEY. Does anybody else on the panel—Ms. Slover, do 

you want to address that? How is this working in this particular 

math issue? Can it be better organized and how? 

Ms. SLOVER. Thank you. Well, Achieve does have engagement 

with business. We have business leaders on our board. 

Mr. TIERNEY. And Massachusetts participates. 

66

Ms. SLOVER. Yes. And so I think there are several ways in for 

business leaders, and many business leaders choose to act on the 

local level because that is where they get the most recognition. We 

heard a little bit earlier about two companies, TI and ExxonMobil, 

and there are numerous companies, particularly those on our board 

who I should acknowledge, that do work at the national level. 

So I think it is finding for each business and business leader the 

way that they are going to connect with these issues. Achieve has 

some tools. We have a website called BizTools for Schools that really engaged business leaders in how they can act on many different 

levels, particularly around math and science. 

Mr. TIERNEY. I just think we are coming to more and more of a 

realization, and I think the chairman has been good at this, that 

we can’t do it alone and that business has such a high stake in this 

that we really need to martial our resources. I am just wondering 

if we are not letting some of that leak away in the ad hoc approach, 

and if there isn’t a better way to martial it so that we are not asking unfairly for more than ought to be asked for, but on the other 

hand we are getting all that we can get, and focusing where it 

needs to be addressed, where the needs are greatest. 

Ms. SLOVER. Right, so you can avoid the fatigue of just throwing 

money at a problem that always seems to get bigger. I think actually the Business Roundtable does a good job of really coalescing 

the business groups around a particular issue, identifying the important issues, and then helping them move en masse towards a 

solution. 

Mr. TIERNEY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Chairman MILLER. Thank you. 

Mr. Wu? 

Mr. WU. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Professor Haver, I apologize. I came in right in the middle of 

your answer. We frequently have multiple committee assignments, 

all simultaneously holding their hearings. But were you analogizing curriculum development to federally sponsored scientific research in other fields? 

Mr. HAVER. Yes. I think as——

Mr. WU. Thank you. I just wanted to depart from there. I am a 

little concerned about that analogy because research and biology or 

physics or other such things, that holds kind of a not quite universal, but a more global truth to it, if you will. Whereas curriculum has traditionally in our society in America been left to 

local development. 

It is not because there aren’t universal rules of mathematics, but 

it is because there are some concerns about how such things should 

be taught at a local level. Instead of French education, where the 

French education minister in Paris on any given day knows what 

book a third-grader and what page a third-grader is on, but that 

is not true of the American education system for cultural and historic reasons. I am deeply concerned about an advocacy for a federal development of curriculum in any given subject. 

Would you care to respond to that? 

Mr. HAVER. Yes. I think there is a difference between finding out 

things, for instance the math specialists that we have that was 

putting a math specialist in a school with the job of professionally 

67

developing all the teachers and developing a math program. Does 

that make a difference in student performance? That is the research that we are conducting. 

When we receive support from the federal government, the National Science Foundation, for this, nobody said that if we find out 

that this makes a real difference, that the federal government is 

going to make every school system do it. 

Mr. WU. So you are not advocating for one particular mathematics curriculum. 

Mr. FENNELL. The word ‘‘curriculum’’ is being used here inappropriately. 

Mr. WU. Dr. Fennell, would you care to jump in? 

Mr. FENNELL. Yes. I mean, what Bill was responding to was his 

initiative with regard to the preparing and the impact of mathematics specialists at the elementary level. It wasn’t a response to 

specific curriculum materials used anywhere. 

Mr. WU. That is reassuring. I was taught mathematics one particular way. It was the new math. It was a break from the past. 

It didn’t scar me for life. It was okay. My kids, who are 8 and 10 

right now, are being taught math a different way. It is very different from the way that I was taught math. I am not sure that 

it is the right way or the wrong way. I would prefer to leave those 

decisions to teachers and local decision-making, especially in light 

of the gaps in research which Mr. Holt pointed out earlier. 

Mr. HAVER. That is what I was speaking to, the need for that research so that the individual school systems and states can make 

the decisions based on facts, not on opinion. 

Mr. WU. Very good. Then you have educated me. Thank you very 

much. 

I yield back the balance of my time. 

Chairman MILLER. Mrs. Davis? 

Mrs. DAVIS OF CALIFORNIA. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

I am sorry I had to leave. I got all of your testimony earlier, and 

you might have covered this, but I know that you were talking 

about Massachusetts when I left, and the scattershot versus really 

being much more focused, and certainly the research from other 

countries has demonstrated that. 

To what extent do you think our textbook selections drive these 

decisions? What role do you think Congress might play in trying 

to mitigate that problem? It seems to me that it is a real one and 

I wonder if you could comment on that with some of your suggestions. 

Mr. FENNELL. Yes. One of the early meetings of the panel included an invitation to all of the major publishers of textbooks in 

this country. Our work caused us to get through virtually everything in print. One of the panelists has coined the phrase that 

American textbooks—and I love this phrase—are bloated. I have 

several grandchildren, and one of them is carrying back and forth 

to school a 738-page third-grade book. I am concerned about a hernia at age 8. 

There is no good reason for books to be that bloated. But that 

market the publishers are reacting to, what the state standards 

are, and when you have 50 state standards that are frankly all 

68

over the place, and you are trying to sell that book in an open territory in this country, that is how it looks. 

Now, the publishers look us right in the eye and say, oh, you 

know what? We will change that. We are willing to change that 

when the states redefine their syllabi and so forth. And there are 

encouraging signs. I have seen books lose 200 pages in the last couple of years because the state, a major state that was either California or Texas, I forget which one, that sort of redesigned their 

curriculum framework so they have fewer objectives, then you have 

fewer pages. 

And by the way, it is not just elementary school. I have looked 

at algebra books that have over 1,100 pages. You talk about hernia. 

So the notion of what is important in that book and how it maps 

to really important mathematics is a critical question. It is not just 

the state directors of mathematics and the framework people who 

are responsible. Textbook publishers have to be in this, and we 

need to push on that. 

Mrs. DAVIS OF CALIFORNIA. Go ahead. I am sorry. 

Ms. SLOVER. I just wanted to reinforce that. It is absolutely the 

case that the states need to take the first step in narrowing and 

focusing their set of standards, and then the next step is for the 

textbook publishers to follow suit. We have talked among the states 

that we work with, the 33 states in the American Diploma Project 

network, about having a sit-down, face-to-face meeting with those 

textbooks, including the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics in that conversation, to really make that point. We need 

help both ways to really cut that curriculum down and make those 

books a little more manageable for our kids to carry. 

Mrs. DAVIS OF CALIFORNIA. Well, I wonder, too, if it goes, Dr. 

Staggers, to the teacher preparation as well, and training. Because 

I think in many ways teachers are asked to cover so much material, and so when they sit in a textbook meeting to try and decide 

on textbooks, they are impressed also with the length of the book, 

how much material is in the book, but not necessarily the depth 

because in some ways they haven’t necessarily been schooled in 

that depth as well, unless they have been retrained and had that 

opportunity. 

So I guess I am seeing that a lot of that plays in together. What 

else should we be looking for in this area? 

Ms. STAGGERS. In many of our Project Lead The Way classrooms, 

we don’t have class sets of textbooks. You can if you want, but I 

would rather have a collection of resource books, rather than 30 

copies of the same book. I would rather take that money and put 

it into some type of technology, because the books become outdated 

so quickly. 

We can use the Internet to find up-to-date information, and as 

I said, a collection of resource books. We can use authority figures 

on those topics. That is where I would rather invest my money. 

Now, if it is a subject area that is not going to change, then that 

may be different. But even math books, it doesn’t change, but the 

photographs and things in the book and the type of references to 

the word problems in the book are no longer relevant to that generation. So sometimes it is better to have a smaller resource and 

be able to update it readily. 

69

Ms. WOLF. If I may, can I add one thing as well? Is that okay? 

I have been involved in a task force looking at the future of content, and all the major publishers have been there. We held hearings in Texas and in Florida, where we brought in teachers, district 

leaders, state leaders—people in the nitty-gritty of textbook adoption. 

When you take a step back and you start to listen about what 

is possible, teachers do want to have some options to make decisions because they are in fact experts and they can have professional development. There are different possibilities, and textbooks 

are one key piece. 

But as Dr. Staggers just alluded to, there are many different 

kinds of curriculum and opportunities, whether it is through digital 

or other resources that may play into what that content looks like. 

I do encourage all of us to talk about it in that way because sometimes the depth that has been referenced that we want to get to 

is much more possible, or that application of knowledge may come 

through in some of those digital content areas in a way that just 

the stand-alone textbook does not. 

But again, if you look at what publishers put out there, there 

usually is a range. So I think in thinking about this in a new and 

creative way of what is it that we need to give our children the best 

content and give teachers that flexibility to utilize it to meet the 

needs of No Child Left Behind in those ways. 

Thank you for letting me jump in. 

Mrs. DAVIS OF CALIFORNIA. Yes. Thank you. And it is the exposure also, and I think the problem that you have cited earlier is 

that unfortunately not everybody has the same kind of exposure in 

teacher professionalism that you are talking about. 

Thank you. 

Chairman MILLER. The chair is recognized for a second round of 

questions here. 

I think that Mrs. Davis opened up a very important discussion 

here. It goes to your testimony, Dr. Wolf. That is that you stated, 

or the pamphlet that you handed out states no industry or organization can remain competitive without comprehensive use of technology as a matter of course in its operations. 

Schools are fighting mightily against that trend. We haven’t seen 

any major institution in the world that has engaged the Internet 

without its architecture dramatically changing. In some industries, 

it has turned out to be a profit-killer because of the dramatic 

worldwide competition that it introduces. It has introduced massive 

efficiencies. It has introduced massive collaborations. It has introduced massive markets to people who were making jam in Pennsylvania and all of a sudden they are selling it all over the world. But 

schools are going to keep it out as long as they possibly can, apparently. 

What I find amazing is that teachers of mathematics have not 

yet developed an open-source textbook that is available to teachers 

and they can take it. I visited an organization in Silicon Valley 

where the woman running the organization is developing the equivalent of the California textbooks with all the same writers, same 

editors and the rest of that, and you can have it any way you want. 

So you don’t have to lug around a 12-pound textbook. You can have 

70

it by CD. You can have it at home. You can download it. You can 

pick and choose. You can change the pictures. You can add in today’s, and it is a Wikipedia approach to the world. 

The basics of mathematics haven’t changed very much. There 

has been new discovery, but there is a lot to be added in terms of 

the teaching of that. At some point, if we can’t engage this, you 

know, that bridge, you don’t have to build a bridge. You can do all 

of those studies with your students virtually, right? You can do it 

and you can load that bridge down and those trusses will eventually break or they won’t, and they will have success or they won’t. 

The reluctance to engage the technology is just stunning to me 

when I see the opportunities. So if you talked about one of the students engaging in after-hours problem-solving and back-and-forth 

with students who wouldn’t speak up in class, but were participating in those text sessions or e-mail sessions or whatever they 

were using at that time. 

We went to a conference on technology and education by CUNY, 

with one of the founders of Sesame Street in New York last week. 

We listened to the creative director of Electronic Arts, which this 

month is most famous for Grand Theft Auto—$500 million bang in 

a week—but also for John Madden Football. He demonstrated 

there John Madden teaching mathematics. 

The probability that if you match the linebacker head-on-head 

with a specific runner, what was the probability that that tackle 

would be made; what is the probability, according to the statistics, 

of that season that if you hit that running back at an angle, that 

that tackle would be made. This is what a generation of people did, 

as he pointed out, around baseball, before you had all the other entertainment. 

Now, John Madden may not be the best mathematics teacher in 

the world, but there is a curriculum there for somebody in those 

discussions and those very applications of mathematics. I am just 

stunned that we would suffer a bad math teacher when we can import a good math teacher on the video. That doesn’t mean that is 

the answer. It doesn’t mean they don’t need support systems, but 

that is the subject of another hearing and this will be back before 

the committee. I know you look forward to it. [Laughter.] 

Dr. Haver, what do we know about—we have had reading specialists around longer than math specialists. I know in California, 

my father started a program called the Miller-Unruh Reading 

Teachers. Politicians got together and decided they should have 

extra reading resources. Most of them are gone now in the state 

over the last 30 years, but I always find it interesting that the 

wealthier districts never gave them up. 

They are all gone from the poorer districts because of budget 

cuts, because if you lost them, you could never get them back. But 

parents in the wealthier districts have always scrambled to keep 

them. I just wondered, I don’t know if there was any study, except 

that obviously somebody liked their participation and teachers rave 

about them, but we never had any hard studies on their effectiveness, or have we? 

Mr. HAVER. In Virginia, most of the reading specialists until very 

recently have been involved with pulling out students out of a 

classroom that are having difficulty, and working with those stuVerDate 0ct 09 2002 21:46 Dec 01, 2008 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00074 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 G:\DOCS\110TH\FC\110-93\42335.TXT HBUD1 PsN: DICK
71

dents. That hasn’t been our model for the math specialists. The 

model there is for them to coach the teachers and team-teach with 

the teachers to change the way mathematics is taught in the whole 

school. 

A very pleasant side effect of the work we have been doing with 

math specialists in Virginia is that the reading specialists are 

gravitating to that model more, too. 

Chairman MILLER. You are building capacity with the teacher? 

Mr. HAVER. That is right, getting the teachers so that they can 

do it. If a teacher doesn’t know mathematics very well, they are 

going to have to just isolate it. They are going to have a difficult 

time integrating it into a study of geography or art or anything unless they can get help to do so. So that is what the math specialists 

do. 

The reading specialists are in many of the schools that have the 

math specialists, and are working on developing that same capacity 

doing that same thing. That would be a very interesting question 

to see the impact of that, and whether it makes a difference. And 

no, I am not aware of any research along those lines. 

Chairman MILLER. Thank you. 

Mr. Keller? 

Mr. KELLER. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. 

I appreciate all the witnesses for being here. I am convinced of 

three things if we want to get more math majors. First, we have 

to reward good teachers and we have to get rid of bad math teachers. Second, we need more girls taking more math courses and become more math majors. And third, we have to give kids the realistic information about the career applications of mathematics. 

If I can be specific on each three, and I will follow up with Dr. 

Fennell on merit. We have a teacher at one of our inner-city high 

schools who happens to be a basketball coach. He teaches advance 

placement calculus. His classroom is filled with low-income and minority kids who really kicked butt on the AP calculus class, the 

best rate in the whole county. He takes the poorest kids and they 

are all passing AP calculus classes. 

I would love to be able to pay that guy more. On the flip side, 

if we have a horrible second-grade teacher who is incompetent after 

a couple of years, I don’t care what the union says. We have to get 

rid of her or him, whoever it is. That is just some straight talk, and 

I am not going to ask you all the way into the controversial issues 

of local union stuff, but that is the truth, in my view. 

Second, on gender, I will ask you about that. In this report, Dr. 

Fennell, I looked through it and it is pretty silent on the gender 

issues except when you get to pages 31 and 32: social, motivational 

and effective influences. Average gender differences are small or 

nonexistent. I assume you are talking about test scores, as opposed 

to the number of boys and girls taking mathematics and engineering courses. Is that correct? 

Mr. FENNELL. Actually, that data does look at test scores, but I 

would claim that the issue of surrounding gender is much different 

than it was even 5 years ago. We have far more girls and young 

women majoring in mathematics in this country, doing more advanced calculus at the high school level, and on beyond calculus. 

72

Mr. KELLER. If I looked at 100 students taking AP calculus at a 

typical public high school, what percentage would be girls versus 

boys? 

Mr. FENNELL. Well, the gentleman just walked out, but the high 

school he mentioned in Northern Virginia probably would be 50/50 

or even more favoring the girls, but it is going to depend on the 

area. 

Mr. KELLER. I have not seen that anecdotally, I will tell you that, 

at all. I mean, no even close. I took advanced placement in calculus 

and there were no girls in the room. I took organic chemistry and 

physics in college and a very small percentage were——

Mr. FENNELL. That has turned around quite a bit. 

Mr. KELLER. If I looked at the number of math majors and engineering majors at MIT today, do you think it would be a 50/50 split 

on gender? 

Mr. FENNELL. No, not at those places, but at smaller places 

where there is more inclusive attitude toward all people achieving, 

you would probably see more. 

Mr. KELLER. I think it is a flat-out problem. I think if you took 

the calculus class and test, and Dr. Staggers took the calculus test, 

I think you both would get fives and you both would get great, and 

I wouldn’t see a difference in scores. But when you looked around 

the room, I think there would be more males and more boys taking 

the calculus class. I just have observed that, and I think we ought 

to get more girls taking it. 

That leads me to my third thing. I think guidance counselors 

have to do a better job of telling these young girls and low-income 

kids, boys and girls, the consequences and the ramifications of taking math classes. I have a little girl. I have three little girls, but 

I have an 8-year-old little girl who does okay in math, and she tells 

me that she doesn’t really like it. Her dream in life is to become 

a veterinarian. 

I said, Christy, you are not going to be a veterinarian unless you 

can do trigonometry and physics. That is just the bottom line. And 

to do trigonometry and physics, you have to work your way up. I 

took a bunch of children from an inner-city school in eighth grade 

out to Lockheed Martin to meet with folks who design video games 

and simulators. 

I said, how many of you like to play video games? And all the 

hands went up. How many of you would like to design video games 

and simulators? All their hands went up. How many of you know 

that you have to take 3 years of math classes and do trigonometry 

before you can get a job doing this? None of them knew that. We 

have got to make sure that these kids know the consequences of 

taking 3 years of math and science. 

I will just give you one final example. I think nursing is a wonderful profession. Being a doctor is a wonderful profession. But I 

personally know, and I have friends of mine who are females who 

decided to be nurses, even though they are as smart as everybody 

else, because they didn’t want to take calculus. Well, that is fine, 

but when you make that decision when you are 17 years old that 

you are going to be a nurse instead of a doctor because of calculus, 

well, 12 years from now when you in the neurosurgical suite and 

you are making $50,000, you are going to be handing the scalpel 

73

to somebody making $900,000, all because you didn’t want to take 

a trig class and no one told you that in high school. 

Now, we have got to do a better job of guidance counselors telling 

these young ladies the consequences. Don’t pretend like there are 

not consequences. There are. And encourage them to keep their options open by taking 3 years of math classes in high school. 

Dr. Staggers, do you want to weigh in on that as both a mathematician and a female? 

Ms. STAGGERS. I completely agree with you. I keep going back to 

Project Lead The Way. Part of their professional development 

model is to have training for counselors as well. So in their component, they not only train teachers, they train the counselors and 

the administrators. So the counselors know what to tell the students, because you are right: students don’t know. Just as I said 

when I was in high school, I didn’t even know what engineering 

was and no one offered to tell me, so I didn’t know to ask. And I 

didn’t have parents who were college-educated who would have told 

me. 

So I agree with you totally. Maybe the teachers need to take on 

some of that responsibility as well, of being sure the students know 

the consequences of their choices. 

Mr. KELLER. Thank you. 

My time has expired, but maybe the chairman will let Ms. Slover 

respond. 

Chairman MILLER. Does Ms. Slover have a comment? 

Ms. SLOVER. Thank you so much. 

I just wanted to jump in here, because Achieve has just recently 

completed some work that speaks to your question directly. We 

have to communicate better that the more math you learn, the 

more money you earn, and that the choices you make in high 

school have repercussions for a long time. 

What students don’t know or may not know is that even in professions that don’t require a 4-year college degree, math is a requirement—you mentioned nursing, other health professionals like 

lab techs, aeronautics, manufacturing, construction, technology. We 

have just done a lot of research in the last 8 months about those 

professions and how mathematics is used every day on the job in 

those professions. 

We have come out with several publications which I would be 

happy to share with you, congressman, that make the case in very 

simple, easy to follow language, for policymakers and for students 

and teachers that math is important, why it is important, and 

what the impact will be on their career choices. So I would like to 

share that with you afterwards. 

Chairman MILLER. So you think even policymakers could follow 

this? [Laughter.] 

Ms. SLOVER. I think so. 

Chairman MILLER. Okay. 

Mr. Hinojosa? 

Mr. HINOJOSA. I want to say thank you for having a second 

round of questions. This one is directed to Mary Ann Wolf. 

I want to say that, or rather ask, you mentioned that online professional development is a means to positively impact the practices 

of teachers, and ultimately increase student achievement. Can you 

74

expand on that? How do you measure the impact that online professional development on teachers and students can be assessed? 

Ms. WOLF. Thank you. I look more at professional development 

as needing to be ongoing and sustainable. There is a body of research that has been around for a while and continues to be looked 

at by Joyce and Showers that shows that a one-stop shot workshop 

has about a 5 percent change of a teacher implementing that in the 

classroom. I will tell you that I went to those workshops. I was all 

excited, as I believe you referenced, and then I had no time to go 

back and do any of it with my students. 

But if you look at Joyce and Showers research over time, and you 

add mentoring and online communication and ways for teachers to 

connect and ultimately coaching and mentoring, there is a 90 percent chance that those teachers will change what they are going in 

the classroom. That is what I think we all want to do. 

The reason I speak so highly of online professional development 

in this context is that for a lot of people there may not be that instructional coach in the school or maybe they are teaching in a subject area where there is no other calculus teacher in the state perhaps. So what online professional development does in education 

portals and those other ways is it provides access to those opportunities to connect teachers in a sustainable way, and that is what 

we do know that makes a difference. 

So I think those rural areas, to some inner-city areas and other 

places, that just is a tremendous opportunity for more and more 

teachers. We look at Alabama that has great resources in place 

where they are connecting teachers and students with online development and resources, as is Arizona and many others. 

So I really appreciate the question. I think we can do more to 

look at, and I think we are beginning to. eLearning Delaware has 

a program now directed directly at math where teachers can take 

three courses. One is actually developing those beginning algebra 

necessary skills even before kids get to algebra, and they are helping to teach that. So I think online professional development plays 

a key role in that ongoing and sustainable piece. 

Mr. HINOJOSA. Thank you. 

My next question goes to Dr. Fennell. I liked what I heard from 

you and Dr. Haver about the involvement of the private world, the 

profit-making businesses that are looking for a trained workforce 

and how much they are needed, because we can’t do it alone. Certainly, the state legislatures throughout the country can’t do it 

alone. So we need their participation, their involvement. 

Tell us how it is being done in your states. I think, Dr. Haver, 

you come from Virginia. I think that with the examples, models 

that I have seen in Virginia, we need to better understand how to 

bring business and industry as partners, and to put in some of 

their treasures into this effort that is being made in math and 

science. 

So I will start with you, Mr. Fennell. 

Mr. FENNELL. Sure. I actually come from Maryland. While I can’t 

immediately recall a business partnership, I am going to share 

with you a governmental partnership. The National Security Agency, NSA, works very directly with teachers in four or five counties 

surrounding the Baltimore and Annapolis area to provide profesVerDate 0ct 09 2002 21:46 Dec 01, 2008 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00078 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 G:\DOCS\110TH\FC\110-93\42335.TXT HBUD1 PsN: DICK
75

sional development, to provide activities for children, and even 

competitions for kids. So there is an opportunity where an entity 

that is governmental in nature has found a way to reach out to 

connect with people who are in classrooms, as well as children, and 

showing them what can go on. 

Mr. HINOJOSA. Where does the money come from and how long 

is the program? 

Mr. FENNELL. This project has been going on for a long time. You 

can define a ‘‘long time’’ by sort of looking at me, probably 15 or 

20 years that I am aware of. My guess it comes somehow from 

their budget, but I know that teachers in Anne Arundel County, 

Maryland, and Howard County, Maryland, and Baltimore County, 

Maryland have seen the fruits of that partnership. 

Mr. HINOJOSA. You didn’t mention any businesses coming into 

the partnership here. Have you all looked at that? Or do they partner for the schools? 

Mr. HAVER. I would like to respond to that. 

Mr. HINOJOSA. Dr. Haver? 

Mr. HAVER. I am from Virginia, and have been talking here 

about the work we have been doing with math specialists over the 

last dozen years. We have had a very helpful partner in this work, 

ExxonMobil. They didn’t just give us money. Their staff members 

work with us. They had a sustained interest in what we were doing 

over the 10 years. They didn’t expect immediate results or to fix 

something and then get out. They made a long-term commitment 

to seeing what could be done to make a difference. I think that 

kind of support is much more valuable than just money. 

Mr. HINOJOSA. In Texas, we have seen ExxonMobil start up a 

program that they call UTeach. It has been proven for the last 5 

years at the University of Texas in Austin that it works, so now 

they are expanding it using that model through other states. But 

I am very pleased to see that they are producing very well prepared teachers like all of you talk about us trying to produce. They 

are certified to teach advanced placement and international baccalaureate programs, which then prepare the children to get into 

these STEM fields. I just wish that we had more companies doing 

that. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Chairman MILLER. Thank you. 

Let me just say, you have been very generous with your time. I 

don’t know if any of you have a time problem. Feel free to leave 

if you have to. 

We are going to have votes in about 10 minutes on the floor, so 

if you can stay, I would appreciate it. If you have to leave, not a 

problem. 

Mr. Wu is recognized. 

Mr. WU. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

I want to re-open a topic which the gentlelady from San Diego, 

Susan Davis, opened about textbooks, and which the chairman followed up on about the adoption, or the failure of adoption, or new 

and innovative technologies. I know that none of you are necessarily textbook experts, or maybe you are, but I have been working on this textbook issue for about 5, 6, or 7 years, but in a college 

context and in a cost context. 

76

I am stunned, Dr. Fennell, to hear that a third-grader would 

have a 730-some-odd-page textbook. I never had a textbook that 

long in college. There was a two-volume physics, the HallidayResnick was two volumes——

Chairman MILLER. Before you get to the third volume, get to the 

question. These people have been here a long time. 

Mr. WU. I never had a textbook that long in medical school. It 

wasn’t until law school that we had a textbook that long. 

Does the thickness of that book not only weigh down the student? Is there a cost factor to the school or the school district for 

that textbook? 

Mr. FENNELL. Absolutely. I think this is a very complex issue—

the fact that published materials are trying to meet so many goals 

from so many states just to be, if you will, adopted. In some cases 

around this country, as some of you represent, you are in a state 

adoption state where you can only list so many books, so it becomes 

very competitive. In other places, it is open territory so the books 

frankly become more bloated in those areas. 

And then the chairman mentioned Madden football or whatever, 

which I understand very well, by the way. But the piece is that 

every published program in elementary school mathematics and 

high school mathematics is available on the web, can be picked up, 

and frankly isn’t used. 

That is a teacher problem. That is a teacher acceptance problem. 

That is a teacher comfort problem. But that would sure save a 

whole lot of kids and folks lugging home stuff, but it is just one 

piece. 

Mr. WU. Is there a failure to edit on the part of the textbook industry? You know, just throw it in; they will pay for it somehow? 

Mr. FENNELL. I think it is also a need to be attractive, so maybe 

you have more pictures than you need. And you have problems that 

are particularly relevant to particular areas, as in programs that 

are trying to be tailored——

Mr. WU. Throw it all in and somebody will pay for it. 

Mr. FENNELL. Yes, exactly. Yes. We have something for everybody here. 

Mr. WU. Yes. So it creates a problem in this case for school districts. 

Mr. FENNELL. Sure. 

Mr. WU. And at higher education levels. 

Mr. FENNELL. You allude to a very silent audience. You alluded 

to the college student audience who is paying an astronomical fee 

for that intro biology book that is going to be used only in that 

course for lots of them. 

Mr. WU. They are not silent. 

Mr. FENNELL. Good. 

Mr. WU. We have received more mail on the textbook issue than 

any other issue that we worked on. 

Mr. FENNELL. Good to hear. 

Mr. WU. It is a very motivated, intelligent consumer group. They 

are not going to stand silent for this for very much longer. I think 

we have a piece in the higher education bill to try to address this 

for college students. It is interesting to hear that is an issue for K 

through 12, that somebody else, the taxpayer, is footing the bill. 

77

Chairman MILLER. Mrs. Davis? 

Mrs. DAVIS OF CALIFORNIA. Just really quickly, because I want 

you to be able to go. 

Would you think of some way that we could incentivize a different approach as we work on No Child Left Behind? Is there 

some suggestion? Part of it would be research. I would love to see 

research that shows that the number of pages is directly not proportional to the amount of learning that takes place or something. 

Mr. FENNELL. What about research that looked at student understanding? By ‘‘student understanding,’’ I mean real understanding 

and proficiency and the ability to solve problems, if you will, critical foundations, really important mathematics that leads to algebra, as compared to such bloated programs where it is a scattershot 

approach to the subject. 

Mrs. DAVIS OF CALIFORNIA. A look at those best practices, yes. 

Chairman MILLER. Also, it is interesting that California history 

and Texas history looks different in an open-source textbook by 

high school history teachers who are Hispanic, than it does by the 

publishers. And Hispanic students seem to be more engaged and 

interested in that version of California history, which is every bit 

as accurate as the other one. So there are a lot of possibilities here. 

I think that textbook publishers are about to encounter the next 

iteration of the web and its architecture. They are obviously deeply 

engaged in changing that architecture because they can see what 

is happening, when they measure the carbon footprint, and today 

when they do it, you can go to Kendall on Amazon and download 

your book in a minute and be on your way, but the student has 

to lug it around the neighborhood. 

I would just like to go back to one question, and then we will let 

you go. This is for Dr. Wolf and whoever wants it, but the question 

you raised in the panel was about formative assessments. Obviously, this committee in No Child Left Behind is struggling with 

assessments. You found them to be helpful. It goes to the question 

of real-time feedback in terms of how I am asking the question. 

Mr. FENNELL. The research in that area is pretty solid. It is solid 

solely at the elementary school level, and it essentially means the 

following. If you are the classroom teacher, you can use things like 

observation as you spot, if you will, how your students are doing 

on a topic. You can use quick end-of-class, if you will, maybe paperpencil, maybe computer-driven assessments to not only monitor, 

but begin to kind of track the progress of how you are teaching, 

what you are teaching, and also your students. 

It is a guiding effect, if you will, to the classroom teacher. At 

least in this panelist’s opinion, it ought to be part of the repertoire 

of every classroom teacher. What is interesting to me is that the 

research that was located and found and which drove this recommendation is solely at the elementary school level. And yet, 

wouldn’t middle school teachers, wouldn’t high school teachers also 

benefit by using such guiding assessments to drive their practice? 

Chairman MILLER. Ms. Wolf? 

Ms. WOLF. Thank you. We also see the opportunity here as tremendous, and technology makes it possible. When I taught, I literally had one child who couldn’t read in fifth grade, and I made 

10 flash cards every night for that child, but I could individualize 

78

for one student. What formative assessment is, especially when you 

consider using technology does, is it allows you to constantly know 

where kids are. It can look like a test, but can also be students 

using clickers where a teacher can see exactly who knows how to 

multiply that fraction, and yet the kids don’t have to know who got 

it right, but she immediately knows, okay, I need this group to do 

this, this group to do that, or this student here. Or I need to start 

all over. 

So there are many different ways to embed assessments over the 

course that constantly tells the teacher what they need to do, how 

to target, and I think ultimately it individualizes the instruction 

where we can meet the needs of all students. I think this is an area 

where a lot of different schools are really starting to look at, invest 

in having data teams. I think it is a place that encouraging can 

only help education for all kids. 

Chairman MILLER. Dr. Haver, is there anywhere here in terms 

of feedback between the specialist, the teacher and outcomes in the 

class with formative testing? 

Mr. HAVER. Absolutely. What we know for good instruction is 

that teachers have to think about what is going on in their classroom, what has happened today, and how that changes what happens tomorrow. It is another reason why we don’t want to have 90 

outcomes, because otherwise you have to move on to outcome 47 

the next day once you have done 46, but to take advantage, to 

think about what has happened today and have that influence 

what happens tomorrow. 

And yes, that kind of ongoing professional development for teachers, whether it is through the specialists in our model or whether 

it is through technology or whether it is through other sustained 

activities is necessary to bring about a change in how many students are successful. We have to develop the skills in the teachers 

to use a variety of tools to have their students learn in a way that 

is possible. 

Ms. SLOVER. This may be obvious, but at the risk of being obvious, all of these things are so important and can be so useful as 

long as they are part of a coherent package. I think that Dr. 

Fennell and Dr. Wolf both were moving in that direction. 

The formative assessment has to be aligned with the end-of-year 

assessment. It has to be aligned with the curriculum and the 

standards. And all of those things have to move along together, 

otherwise you will have kids going in all different directions. So 

forgive me for being obvious, but I thought that was worth stating. 

I really appreciated what Dr. Fennell said about formative assessment also including just the teacher’s interaction with students. So often, there are great technological solutions and we 

could spend a lot of money, but we also have to remember that part 

of the craft of teaching is to be able to assess your students every 

day in the classroom on what they are learning. 

Chairman MILLER. Thank you very much. 

Thank you all for your time and your testimony and your expertise. We are already plotting the second hearing up here, playing 

off of what you have said here today. So it has been very helpful. 

I want to introduce into the record the testimony that was going 

to be presented by IBM had they participated. 

79

[The information follows:]

Prepared Statement of IBM Corp. 

Thank you for giving IBM the opportunity to convey our support for the National 

Math Advisory Panel’s recommendations focused on raising expectations and standards for mathematics and improving teacher preparation and professional development for math teachers. 

IBM, like many U.S.-headquartered companies, has become a globally integrated 

enterprise. As our economy becomes more globally integrated and competition becomes more fierce, there is growing recognition that innovation is the key to being 

able to effectively compete. Localities, states and nations are striving to become 

places where knowledge is generated and transformed into new commercial and societal value. They recognize that an innovative, knowledge-based society creates 

jobs, raises living standards and generates growth that competitors can’t duplicate 

rapidly. 

The question we face is what needs to be done to create an environment that will 

foster innovation? An important criterion will be the quality of education in order 

to equip students with the needed skills for the 21st century workforce. Mathematics is a critical skill in this equation. 

A report recently released by the U.S. Department of Labor suggests that over 

the next 10 years, the need for technical people in this country is going to grow not 

by 30 percent, but 50 percent! While the demand for these jobs is increasing, the 

supply of talented workers isn’t keeping pace. A skilled and talented workforce is 

a fundamental requirement to attract investment, foster real wealth creation and 

spur innovation in this country. It is critical for our continued competitiveness. 

We are firm believers in the need to build the base of scientists and engineers 

and prepare the next generation of innovators. It is clear that if we are not going 

to have a constant flow of talent in science and engineering, we concur with the report’s recommendation that we need to focus on the earliest stages in the K-12 pipeline. We also must ensure that students, from elementary school all the way 

through graduate school, are having the experiences that will generate enthusiasm 

about math and science and their ability to solve problems. They also must complete 

a rigorous and relevant curriculum so that they have the option of pursuing scientific, technical and multidisciplinary degrees in college or being adequately prepared to enter the 21st century workforce. 

What needs to happen to prepare students to participate in a knowledge-based 

economy? 

• First, our children need to be prepared to discover new things every day using 

a focused, coherent progression of mathematics learning; 

• Schools should implement a mathematics curriculum in grades pre-K through 

8 that is streamlined, with an emphasis on proficiency of key concepts; 

• Students need reinforcement that achievement in mathematics comes from effort and isn’t a skill that only results from an inherent talent. 

Education is a part of IBM’s DNA. We consistently play an active role in promoting and boosting education efforts at both national and local levels. For many 

decades, IBM has been one of the leading corporate contributors of funding, technology, and talent to non-profit organizations and educational institutions across the 

U.S. and around the world. We are committed to applying our skill and ability as 

an innovator against the challenges that exist in communities, addressing both education and societal concerns, and doing so in a fundamental and systemic way. 

Why does IBM believe this is such a critical issue? The number of students taking 

advanced math and science classes and choosing engineering or technical careers is 

declining, yet the U.S. needs to grow its population of qualified, technically proficient workers in order to remain competitive. 

This is a tall order and goes well beyond mastery of math and science skills and 

knowledge. Fundamentally, this requires a cadre of incredible math teachers in our 

schools, teachers who have the content expertise, the real world experience, an understanding of problem-based learning and the pedagogic practice to launch the next 

generation of innovators. 

Studies have shown that over the next 10 years we need 2 million more K-12 

teachers in this country; and, in addition, we need a quarter of a million math and 

science teachers in the next two years. Nearly 80 million baby boomers are going 

to leave the workforce some time soon. That’s a huge problem for the U.S. In addition, over 40 percent of the same population of teachers are 50 years or older. This 

underscores the importance of this issue and the fact that our country must invest 

in improving and enhancing our education system. 

80

Classroom teachers with strong knowledge about mathematics have a central role 

in math education. We agree that rigorously evaluated initiatives for attracting and 

appropriately preparing prospective teachers and evaluating and retaining teachers 

are critical to our students’ success. The mathematics preparation of elementary and 

middle school teachers must be strengthened to improve teachers’ effectiveness in 

the classroom. This includes: pre-service teacher education, early career mentoring 

and professional development. 

As the report states, ‘‘The impact on students’ mathematical learning is compounded if students have a series of effective teachers. Teachers should understand 

how to provide clear models for solving a problem type using an array of examples, 

offer opportunities for extensive practice, encourage students to ‘‘think aloud,’’ and 

give specific feedback.’’

IBM Initiatives 

In 2006, IBM announced Transition to Teaching, our initiative to address the K12 pipeline issues and encourage young people to enter science and engineering careers. IBM’s leadership in school reform has grown steadily since we first launched 

Reinventing Education in 1994, a global program, working with more than 100,000 

teachers. Our most recent partnerships with school districts focus almost exclusively 

on professional development because if we want great schools, we must have great 

teachers. 

We established the Transition to Teaching initiative by leveraging our greatest 

asset—IBM employees. Of course, most IBMers have backgrounds in math and 

science, whether they are currently working in software development, research, consulting or management. IBMers are also great volunteers; more than 115,000 have 

signed up for volunteer assignments through our On Demand Community, contributing about 5 million hours of service. Moreover, the majority of IBMers who volunteer do so in a school, whether as one of the legions visiting schools for e-Week (engineering Week); showcasing IBM’s new 3D internet multi-player game, Power Up, 

focused on solving problems related to energy and the environment; as one of our 

8,000 eMentors providing online academic assistance to students; or one of those 

working with children in a Head Start or daycare program that has a KidSmart program. They also lead after-school programs for middle school students and coach 

high school students for science fair and robotics competitions through 

TryScience.org. 

This is an issue that impacts us all, but we do need to have a targeted strategy 

that is appropriate and effective in each and every community. That’s why this 

month, IBM hosted the America’s Competitiveness Summit to focus attention on the 

specific challenges we face to maximize the talent in the Hispanic Community and 

encourage young people to prepare for and explore STEM careers. 

These IBMers tell us repeatedly that they have a passion for education, young 

people and for giving back to the community. Recognizing that there is a national 

teacher shortage in math and science and that there is large group of IBM employees who are eager to continue being productive and contributing to their communities, we created the Transition to Teaching program. Transition to Teaching specifically targets our mature workers who are interested in a second career in teaching, providing guidance, support and funding to help them transition into teaching 

as their next career move. 

Specifically, IBM provides each participant with up to $15,000 for tuition reimbursement and stipends during their time in the classroom. Each participant chooses his or her own teacher certification model, but we encourage colleges of education 

to develop flexible programming, involving both online course work and more traditional courses with flexible scheduling. The IBMers also participate in online mentoring, both while they are still working and going to school, and once they graduate 

and begin teaching. We have a special social networking site for them at 

www.ibm.com to enable them to share and learn from their experiences. Finally, we 

have designed a special leave of absence program that provides each participant to 

conduct up to a year of student teaching while they maintain their benefits. 

Today, there are 100 IBMers participating in Transition to Teaching. IBM designed the Transition to Teaching program after a careful review of the research, 

the experience of second career teachers, best practices in teacher preparation and 

our own focus groups with IBMers. We have a few program essentials. 

First, teachers must have a strong, in-depth background in the subject area. Our 

criteria focus on IBMers who already have a Bachelors degree or higher in a math 

or science discipline. 

Second, we believe that IBMers need to learn the craft and skill of teaching, classroom management, and instructional practice to be effective. Thus, we are reimbursing their tuition costs for education preparation. 

81

Finally, we believe that it is absolutely essential for an individual to have practical K-12 classroom experience, observe good teaching and then practice good teaching BEFORE taking responsibility for a class of children. Therefore, we provide support for them to do student or practice teaching. We know there is a huge gap between mastery of a subject and the ability to teach that subject to others. We owe 

it to our IBMers and to our students to give them all the preparation they need, 

and we have designed Transition to Teaching to meet that standard. 

Transition to Teaching and similar efforts are not a panacea, but they are part 

of a unique and real solution to the math and science teacher shortage. IBM is 

proud to demonstrate our corporate commitment to implementing solutions to the 

math/science teacher problem in our country, and we are working with other companies to encourage them to adopt a similar model for their transitioning workforce. 

In addition, we also continue to collaborate with individual colleges of education 

and national organizations to improve teacher preparation programs and develop 

new models; we strive to enhance the reputation of teaching as an option for math 

and science professionals; and we continue to drive a national discussion with Members of Congress and other influencers to develop solutions that will address the urgency of improving math education. We would welcome and strongly encourage 

other corporations to join us so that 100 become 100,000. In the final analysis, we 

would like this program to be implemented across the country. 

Addressing the challenge of investing in math and science education, preparing 

teachers and exciting students are responsibilities not only of parents and businesses, but also of government. With Congress’ overwhelming passage of the America COMPETES Act last year and its enactment into law, Congress demonstrated 

a partial commitment to the principles of advancing math and science education, as 

well as basic research in the physical sciences. The unfortunate reality is that the 

authorized programs in the COMPETES Act were not funded. This is a critical issue 

that must be addressed as soon as possible. We strongly encourage Congress to fulfill the promise of the COMPETES Act by appropriating the funding necessary to 

support both education and research. We need tangible results. Funding these programs will enable us to train math and science teachers; provide scholarships to 

keep students in these fields; enable graduates to seed our economy and push the 

frontiers of knowledge through university research; and promote diversity in STEM 

fields. 

In conclusion, we believe that a national dialogue among math and science education stakeholders is needed. Public and private sector representatives, parents 

and teachers must be involved in developing stronger academic preparation for K12 students to get them ready for STEM courses in college, focusing on improving 

teacher quality, curriculum quality and offering tutoring and mentoring services to 

students. Unless we capture more minds, more hearts, more souls and more passion 

for math and other STEM disciplines, the innovation leadership and global competitiveness of the United States will be extremely challenged, if not threatened, in the 

foreseeable future. 

Chairman MILLER. Again, thank you so much. 

With that, the committee will stand adjourned. 

[The statement of Mr. Altmire follows:]

Prepared Statement of Hon. Jason Altmire, a Representative in Congress 

From the State of Pennsylvania 

Thank you, Chairman Miller, for holding this important hearing on the National 

Mathematics Advisory Panel Report. This report adds critical new information about 

the state of math education in the United States. As I am sure we will hear today, 

we have a lot of work to do. 

The average score of American students on the 2006 Program for International 

Student Assessment (PISA) was below that of 31 other countries. This is simply not 

acceptable. The 21st century economy is requiring increasing levels of technological 

and engineering understanding. The foundation for this understanding is math. In 

order for our nation to remain the preeminent economy in the world, it is critical 

that we provide every student with, at a minimum, a basic level of math literacy. 

Doing so will ensure that all students can fully participate in the 21st century economy and also allow many of these students to pursue careers that require deeper 

levels of mathematical understanding. 

Thank you again, Mr. Chairman, for holding this hearing. I yield back the balance 

of my time. 

82

[The statement of Mrs. McMorris Rodgers follows:]

Prepared Statement of Hon. Cathy McMorris Rodgers, a Representative in 

Congress From the State of Washington 

Thank you Chairman Miller and Ranking Member McKeon. I thank the members 

of the National Mathematics Advisory Panel for being here today to report their 

findings and recommendations on math proficiency. 

I would like to take this opportunity to stress the importance of quality math and 

science education in our schools to increase our nation’s competitiveness in order to 

create a skilled, 21st century workforce. To meet the demands of an increasingly advanced, global market we must better train and equip our nation’s workforce. A 

major area of concern in our nation’s effort to remain competitive is the rate of improvement in mathematics achievement and the impact that our current lack of 

mathematics preparation has on the state and national economy. 

This process must start at the education level, making sure students have adequate skills when entering the workforce. In order to facilitate economic growth, we 

need to work collaboratively with the education and business communities to ensure 

that students are receiving the necessary education, skills and training to be successful. I have been encouraged by the steps President Bush and Congress have 

made to strengthen math and science skills through the No Child Left Behind Act, 

the America COMPETES Act and most recently through the College Opportunity 

and Affordability Act. It is my priority to strengthen our nation’s math and science 

in order to remain competitive through scholarships for these fields and the placement of content specialists to bring real world experience into classrooms. 

However, we still have a long way to go when 1 in 3 of students do not from graduate high school. To make things worse, only half of these high school graduates 

are proficient in math and English. We must do better. Today, over half of China’s 

undergraduate degrees are in math, science, technology and engineering. Yet, only 

16 percent of American undergraduates pursue these fields. 

If our country is to stay competitive, we need home grown engineers, scientists 

and mathematicians. In addition, women are playing an increasingly important role 

in key sectors of the economy and must have access to the opportunity to excel in 

mathematics. 

As a Member of the Committee on Education and Labor, I am committed to ensuring that every child in America is afforded the highest quality education possible 

and that every worker in our country is free to pursue the American dream. 

I look forward to hearing your findings today. Thank you. 

[Whereupon, at 12:44 p.m., the committee was adjourned.]

Æ