Responding to NCSM framing

In this episode, Anna is joined once again by Dr. Sarah Powell, a professor at the University of Texas at Austin whose research focusses on supporting students with math difficulties. They respond to a recent NCSM statement criticizing the Science of
Math movement.

Anna and Sarah unpack what the Science of Math is and why high-quality evidence matters.  They address misconceptions about explicit instruction and “one-size-fits-all” teaching and explore why math instruction deserves the same scientific scrutiny as reading instruction. This episode is a must-listen for educators, school leaders, policymakers, and parents navigating the current math education landscape.

This episode is also available in video at www.youtube.com/@chalktalk-stokke

SHORT COURSE 

La Trobe Short Course:  Evidence-informed Mathematics Teaching – An Introduction https://shortcourses.latrobe.edu.au/evidence-informed-mathematics-teaching

TIMESTAMPS

[00:00:22] Introduction and an overview of the NCSM statement
[00:10:25] What is the Science of Math?
[00:12:07] Is this only about special education?
[00:14:24] Math learning through the general lens of learning science
[00:17:19] Is the Science of Math equivalent to the Science of Reading?
[00:20:01] The instructional hierarchy applies to learning anything
[00:24:07] The same groups tried to discredit What Works Clearinghouse
[00:26:30] Responding to claims about research citations
[00:29:49] Addressing the NCSM’s claims about quantitative research
[00:31:21] Why quantitative research and data matter
[00:38:24] Why alignment with IES and What Works Clearinghouse is a strength, not a flaw
[00:40:18] Importance of measuring learning 
[00:42:59] Strange statements about an impoverished pedagogical approach
[00:47:30] Misconceptions about explicit instruction
[00:51:25] Is there quantitative data that supports mixed approaches or inquiry?
[00:55:20] Does explicit instruction fundamentally minimize learners' autonomy?
[00:56:32] Final Claim: The one-size-fits-all teaching method
[00:58:04] Problems with the phrase “math wars”
[00:59:59] Why is there such strong resistance to The Science of Math?
[01:02:51] Final Thoughts

RELEVANT PREVIOUS EPISODES 
Reading and math: Parallels and pitfalls with Matt Burns
https://www.podbean.com/ew/pb-8aj3f-1508af6

Red flags in education research with Ben Solomon
https://www.podbean.com/ew/pb-cp5xt-156072c

Science of Math with Amanda VanDerHeyden
https://www.podbean.com/ew/pb-bksbz-13c732d

Supporting students with math difficulties with Sarah Powell
https://www.podbean.com/ew/pb-ciqgm-17def6b

The power of explicit instruction with Anita Archer
https://www.podbean.com/ew/pb-93dcw-19a3530

Mailbag: Building Thinking Classrooms, number talks, & more with Zach Groshell
https://www.podbean.com/ew/pb-stw9g-186807f

EPISODE TRANSCRIPT
https://www.annastokke.com/transcripts/ep-65-transcript

EPISODE RESOURCES

https://www.annastokke.com/resources/ep-65-resources

MUSIC

Intro & Outro: Funk Jazz Big Band -  ColorFilmMusic

Website: www.annastokke.com

FB: Chalk & Talk

IG: @chalkandtalkpodcast

Tiktok: @chalkandtalkpodcast

X: @rastokke

LinkedIn: www.linkedin.com/in/anna-stokke-3a1b4c

Bluesky: @rastokke.bsky.social