Could Empowering Low-Income Parents Help Close the Math Achievement Gap?

Elizabeth Green’s article in The New York Times Magazine, “Why do Americans Stink at Math?” and her new book, Building a Better Teacher, have triggered heated debates on the subject of math – and the problems with math teaching. A particularly sharp response to Green’s article comes from the Brookings Institution’s Tom Loveless. Sure to be a major topic at the Fordham Institute’s event next Tuesday, Loveless outlines six apparent myths in Green’s article, arguing that she is biased toward progressive views of math instruction. But something else is also missing from Green’s article: Like many before her, Green glosses over the foundational role that early math skills play in preparing children for higher level math. Developing early math skills and overcoming the systemic deficiencies present in American math instruction will require improvement at all levels. Beginning with children’s first teachers – their parents – could be a good place to start.

Every few years, researchers evaluate national and international assessments and arrive at the same conclusion: Low-income students fare worse in math than their more affluent peers, and American students as a whole continue to hover near the international average with regard to math achievement. The most recent scores available from the 2011 Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS) and 2012 Program for International Student Assessment (PISA) were no different. Reformers continue to search for the weak link and often find fault with American classrooms after comparing them to those in higher performing countries.

According to Green, the answer to why Americans stink at math lies in the way that K-12 teachers have been prepared to teach. Loveless claims that students are not falling behind simply because of unprepared teachers. Instead, he points to the high level of outside instruction that Japanese students receive through cram schools and Kumon centers, when surpassing US students in math achievement. Unfortunately, in his discussion of cultural differences, he neglects to mention the role that Japanese parents and teachers play in advancing early math learning by embedding instruction in everyday activities. This is described in a recent study in the International Journal of Educational Studies in Mathematics, which examines the potential impact of that instruction and describes previous research showing that Asian parents see math as requiring more effort than innate skill. Many Americans hold the opposite view, and low-income parents especially may lack confidence about their own "academic" knowledge. Perhaps addressing parents' attitudes toward math and emphasizing the importance of early math development outside of school could be a more valuable lesson to borrow from Japan.

Non-English speaking and low-income parents with poor literacy skills have received a barrage of support over the years with campaigns like “Reach Out and Read” and “Reading is Fundamental,” encouraging them to pick up a book and read with their kids even if they struggle to pronounce the words.  While there have been math tip sheets and other resources for parents suggesting fun games to play at home with early learners during meal time or in the bath, these efforts have been dwarfed by the literacy movement. These tip sheets have done little to encourage a similar, you-can-do-it attitude of joint exploration with math concepts.

With only 34 percent of US fourth graders performing “proficiently” on the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), children are clearly not receiving the fundamental math skills they need. NAEP scores also show a gap between children from middle-to-upper-income families and those who qualify for free-or-reduced-price lunch. Contrary to popular belief, higher-income, better-educated parents are not inherently more adept with numbers than their lower-income counterparts. But many of them have access to expensive resources and tutors (including Kumon centers), or at least have the time and awareness to seek out free resources to counter this deficiency.

Parents with lower incomes should not be written off, however. In her article, Green aptly notes that low-wage workers tend to exhibit higher performance with tasks requiring basic math than their more educated managers. Middle class and lower-income jobs often require quick thinking and repetitive math skills. For instance, construction jobs depend on frequent measurement and geometry, working as a cashier requires making change and taking stock, and landscaping relies on record keeping and price quoting based on the area of a yard. Lower-income parents who have to learn, relearn or teach themselves math for a job can draw on recent and concrete math challenges at work to guide their children. When preparing low-income parents to be their children’s first teachers, we may want to check our assumptions about their math abilities.

Low-income parents can complement preschool learning and help to provide a strong math foundation that their children will need in the future. Empowering these parents by offering explicit instructions for how they can take skills developed in the workplace home could go a long way in closing the math achievement gap. Low-income parents may have the tools. They just need more information about how to use them.