---
title: "Math wars"
chunk: 2/2
source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Math_wars"
category: "reference"
tags: "science, encyclopedia"
date_saved: "2026-05-05T04:18:04.272464+00:00"
instance: "kb-cron"
---

Mathland (no longer offered)
Investigations in Numbers, Data, and Space, criticized for not containing explicit instruction of the standard algorithms
Core-Plus Mathematics Project, criticized for failing "to convey critical mathematical concepts and ideas that should and can be within reach for high school students", downplaying "algebraic structure and skills" and "inability to build geometry up from foundations in a mathematically sound and coherent way".
Connected Mathematics, criticized for not explicitly teaching children standard algorithms, formulas or solved examples
Everyday Mathematics, criticized for putting emphasis on non-traditional arithmetic methods.
Critics of reform textbooks say that they present concepts in a haphazard way. Critics of the reform textbooks and curricula support methods such as Singapore math, which emphasizes direct instruction of basic mathematical concepts, and Saxon math, which emphasizes frequent cumulative review.
Reform educators have responded by pointing out that research tends to show that students achieve greater conceptual understanding from standards-based curricula than traditional curricula and that these gains do not come at the expense of basic skills. In fact students tend to achieve the same procedural skill level in both types of curricula as measured by traditional standardized tests. More research is needed, but the current state of research seems to show that reform textbooks work as well as or better than traditional textbooks in helping students achieve computational competence while promoting greater conceptual understanding than traditional approaches.

== Later developments ==
In 2000 the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (NCTM) released the Principles and Standards for School Mathematics (PSSM), which was seen as more balanced than the original 1989 Standards. This led to some calming, but not an end to the dispute. Two recent reports have led to considerably more cooling of the Math Wars. In 2006, NCTM released its Curriculum Focal Points, which was seen by many as a compromise position. In 2008, the National Mathematics Advisory Panel, created by George W. Bush, called for a halt to all extreme positions.

=== National Council of Teachers of Mathematics 2006 recommendations ===
In 2006, the NCTM released Curriculum Focal Points, a report on the topics considered central for mathematics in pre-kindergarten through eighth grade. Its inclusion of standard algorithms led editorials in newspapers like the Chicago Sun Times to state that the "NCTM council has admitted, more or less, that it goofed," and that the new report cited "inconsistency in the grade placement of mathematics topics as well as in how they are defined and what students are expected to learn." NCTM responded by insisting that it considers "Focal Points" a step in the implementation of the Standards, not a reversal of its position on teaching students to learn foundational topics with conceptual understanding. Francis Fennell, president of the NCTM, stated that there had been no change of direction or policy in the new report and said that he resented talk of "math wars". The Focal Points were one of the documents consulted to create the new national Common Core Standards, which have been adopted by most of the United States since 2010.

=== National Mathematics Advisory Panel ===
On April 18, 2006, President Bush created the National Mathematics Advisory Panel, which was modeled after the influential National Reading Panel. The National Math Panel examined and summarized the scientific evidence related to the teaching and learning of mathematics, concluding in their 2008 report, "All-encompassing recommendations that instruction should be entirely 'student centered' or 'teacher directed' are not supported by research. If such recommendations exist, they should be rescinded. If they are being considered, they should be avoided. High-quality research does not support the exclusive use of either approach." The Panel effectively called for an end to the Math Wars, concluding that research showed "conceptual understanding, computational and procedural fluency, and problem-solving skills are equally important and mutually reinforce each other.  Debates regarding the relative importance of each of these components of mathematics are misguided."
The Panel's final report met with significant criticism within the mathematics education community for, among other issues, the selection criteria used to determine "high-quality" research, their comparison of extreme forms of teaching, and the amount of focus placed on algebra.

== See also ==
Anti-racist mathematics – Educational plan meant to reduce perceived prejudice in educationPages displaying short descriptions of redirect targets
California Department of Education § 2021 mathematics framework
Computer-based mathematics education
Critical mathematics pedagogy – Liberation-focused math education
David Klein (mathematician) – American mathematician
Jo Boaler – British mathematics education professor (born 1964)
Marian Small – Educational researcher
Mathematics for social justice – Approach to education
New Math – Approach to teaching mathematics in the 1950s and '60s
Three-part lesson – Inquiry-based learning method

== References ==

== Further reading ==
"America's maths wars". The Economist. 6 November 2021. ISSN 0013-0613.