Critically Evaluate Research Origin and Downsides in Math Instruction

Key Quotes

"Women are not small men." And yet, for decades, all the research about women's health, how men lose weight, how men's bodies respond to medication -- all of it was just taken and applied to women as if women's bodies work exactly the same, just smaller. But that's not how it works. Women's bodies are different, they respond differently, and applying men's research to women without questioning it can cause real harm.

The host, Christina Tondevold, uses this quote to establish an analogy for how research is sometimes misapplied in education. Tondevold argues that just as applying male-centric health research to women can be harmful, applying research from one academic field, like reading, to another, like mathematics, without critical evaluation can also lead to negative outcomes. This highlights her core concern about the uncritical adoption of research findings across different disciplines.

Math is not reading. The way our brains process mathematical thinking is different from how we process language. The way kids develop number sense is different from how they develop phonemic awareness. And yet, we keep taking reading research and saying, "Well, if it works to help kids read, then it should also work to help kids learn math." That's like saying, "This helped 100 men lose weight, so it should help 100 women lose weight." It's just not the case.

Christina Tondevold emphasizes the distinct cognitive processes involved in learning mathematics versus reading. She explains that number sense development in children is fundamentally different from phonemic awareness, which is crucial for reading. Tondevold uses this distinction to caution educators against assuming that research findings successful in reading instruction will automatically translate to effective mathematics instruction, likening it to a flawed generalization from one population to another.

So when you see something that research says works for developing students' math fluency, but there's just something in your gut telling you it just feels wrong, here's what I want you to do: list out the benefits of what doing that thing does for students, and then look to see if you can get those same benefits without all the yucky stuff.

Christina Tondevold advises educators to trust their intuition when research findings seem contradictory to their practical experience. She proposes a method for critically evaluating such research: first, identify the purported benefits of the practice, and second, seek alternative methods to achieve those same benefits while avoiding any negative consequences. Tondevold suggests this approach allows educators to harness the positive aspects of research-backed strategies without succumbing to their potential downsides.

What are the benefits of timed tests? And I know this is hard because all we've heard about are the negative parts of it, so let's break it down a little bit. One benefit I see is that it pushes students to actually get faster with the retrieval of their facts. They do have that pressure of getting faster. Benefit two, they get that feeling of pride when they see that they are getting faster. They see their accomplishments. And really, that's what leads me into benefit three, is they get that sense of achievement when they hit a goal.

Christina Tondevold deconstructs the perceived benefits of timed tests in mathematics education. She identifies that timed tests can encourage faster fact retrieval due to pressure, foster pride in improvement, and provide a sense of achievement when students meet specific goals. Tondevold presents these points to demonstrate that even practices with known drawbacks can offer valuable outcomes if their positive aspects are understood and potentially replicated through different means.

Was the research done with mathematics, or was it in another subject area and people are just applying it to the learning and teaching of math? If the science looks good, but it still feels just not quite right to you because of the bad side effects that you've seen, then find the parts that do help students and find ways to do that without the bad parts.

Christina Tondevold offers two key questions for educators to critically assess research claims in mathematics education. The first question prompts an examination of the research's origin to determine if it was specifically conducted within mathematics or borrowed from another field. The second question encourages educators to isolate the beneficial components of a research-backed strategy and implement them in a manner that mitigates any observed negative side effects, thereby ensuring student well-being and effective learning.