Some of the Math syllabus is very relevant to life. Some is not. The syllabus and its presentation needs an overhaul to distinguish between the two. Also, the hidden Maths syllabus needs to be made visible... Still, sadly, pupils do not want to touch anything that is hard. Two of the hidden syllabus items are to teach children how to do hard thinking and (hard) problem solving.

I agree with you mats. Some math teachers are indeed lousy. They do not teach the math in way that students can see the relevant of it.

There has been a strong emphasis in the new Australian Curriculum on the need for an inquiry/thinking approach to teaching and learning. This in itself is a step forward and will eventually support the more 'hands on' and real world approach and engage students. (Which I think is the key to improving student learning, be it maths or other disciplines). As educators, we need to make the connections between the curricula and the student.

I think that there is some polarization between mathematics/science and arts. Early on teachers need to engage students and show them that these subjects are not mutually exclusive! When I was teaching in a K-12 setting I often tried to find out what the students who felt, "mathematics is not for me, just something I have to get a credit in" or, "I will not use mathematics since I am interested in fine art" and other such attitudes were most interested in and bridge the gap. Sometimes this was as simple as asking prompting questions such as, "do you think the graphic design artists who work on video games such as the Wii require some knowledge of mathematics and physics?" Sometimes I would show the inherent beauty found in mathematics such as art with illusions, or fractals. Finally You-tube videos of amazing billiards trick-shots, cars drifting, aerobatics, and feats of engineering which are truly beautiful (eg. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b694exl_oZo)

seemed to give some motivation to the students to give mathematics a chance. Ultimately we as individuals who use mathematics, and may even admit that we enjoy or love mathematics have difficulty making some of the mundane topics interesting for students who are less enthusiastic.

I think that is possible to postulate a domino effect.

It frequently happens that the teachers who do not have confidence in their math abilities usually avoid engaging their students in an educational approach based on a mathematical vision of different experiences.

If to this we add the presence of actual mathematical learning difficulties in some pupils, then the instructional problem becomes really relevant.

Finally, the development of a teaching and a pedagogical thinking oriented by mathematical and scientific conceptions is, however, relatively recently and hasn't been able to show his best outcomes on a broader scale.

Maybe some children do not have the Maths Gene? http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/obituaries/10255561/Professor-David-Rees.html

When we speak of competences within mathematics, usually, we refer to different skills, complex and not completely interconnected. So, as such, cannot be simply related to a particular genetic structure.

On the other hand, as in all areas of cognition, there are educational contexts that favor the development of a personnel talent and others who, in contrast, can create a veritable inhibition toward learnig.

Poverty surely is an inhibitor for learning and not just of Maths.

Being smart does not necessarily mean you are good at math. One mathematical learning disability is called dyscalculia:

How Can a Smart Kid Be So Bad at Math?

Scientists search for the cause, and treatment, of a mathematical learning disability called dyscalculia.

http://discovermagazine.com/2013/julyaug/20-learning-disability-dyscalculia-explains-how-a-smart-kid-can-be-so-bad-at-math#.UhlGGLyfLig

Why is math so hard for so many?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answer-sheet/wp/2013/03/27/why-is-math-so-hard-for-so-many/

I would have to say that I concur with many of the posts that teachers are part of the problem. But besides that there are some underlying problems with how math is taught in general( I will speak of what I see in this part of the world and not necessarily everywhere):

1) Teachers are not the best paid professions and that is a deterrent for some top minds

2)The perception that pure mathematics is not a glamorous science since it does not have a direct application to the real world(as engineering). Emphasis on pure math is in general being neglected.

3)Currently teachers focus on mechanics instead of the underlying concepts. That is a reason why books are getting so damn big.

4) Students at an early stage have the biggest amount of brain plasticity and capable of absorbing vast amount of information, yet we are boring them with simple mechanics, instead of teaching core concepts and then inspiring them with potential applications. We must focus on iterative learning going deeper into the subjects as opposed to using modules where we test and go on to the next module.

5) Teachers should also know and teach the history of mathematics. Some professors discourage children from mathematics by failing them automatically. We did not arrive were we are at overnight (that is why we must study the history of mathematics to see how long it took). Also how many failures do researchers in math have before completing an elegant proof.

It is important to keep the proper distance between a problematic learning (which may relate, for example, a slowing in the ability to process logical and numeric information as well as a reduced calculation memory) compared to a real situation of disability (for example, connected to a neurologic damage, with specific limitations in attention and in the recognition and definition of simple operational sequences).

In the first case we can think a custom education within the ordinary teaching, in the second case is required a set of special interventions in an integrated and inclusive educational environment.

In spite of being a life science student and teacher, I have a great affinity for maths and am good at maths, only because of the excellent teachers I had !! Maths is a subject which needs lot of concentration, in the sense, every letter and figure has to be concentrated upon, analytical mind, overall, a different sort of application, which is not developed in all the students or maybe it has not been developed !

I spent the past year teaching introductory Statistics to undergraduates at Purdue University North Central (PNC). I found a great deal of my students had very little to no interest in math whatsoever. According to their advisor, the class was designed just to full-fill a Math requirement for Bachelors in Liberal Arts (BLS) students. I was enrolled in the BLS program between 2003-2005 when I graduated with a Mathematics and Computer major. At PNC, it was very rare anyone was interested in Mathematics outside of engineering. To date I have taken 2.5 years of Statistics, 1 year of Engineering Calculus, and a semester of Linear Algebra only to be earning a PhD in Education. According to my old advisor at PNC, she described me as the 0.1% of the student body who enjoyed Mathematics. I found this to be a very weird statistic. Math had always come easy to me but I did have a few horrible teachers in secondary education in Mathematics. I learned more by teaching myself Mathematics during the winter breaks and summer vacations than I ever did in class. I found the major of instructors I had in secondary education had no academic interest in Mathematics and were only there to acquire a paycheck.

I like to think to the math as a dimension of human intellectual sensitivity much akin to art or music. Then a form of knowledge that has to do with the domain of cognitive functions of analysis and computation, but in equal measure has to do with the comparative analog functions, as well as intuitive and hypothetical.

One of the relevant problems in the educational math training is to have assigned an excessive weight to the first order of competences, implying with this a structural weakness in the development of second.

Gardner (1993, 1999) outlines several potential types of intelligences including logical-mathematical, linguistic, musical, bodily-kinesthetic, interpersonal, intrapersonal, and naturalistic. Gardner stated the two most valued in schools are logical-mathematical and linguistic (1983, p. 41). From what I have gathered from studying Gardner's work, these intelligences are possessed by every individual in some varying degree.

Reference

Gardner, H. (1993). Frames of Mind: The Theory of Multiple Intelligences (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Basic Books.

Gardner, H. (1999). Intelligence Reframed: Multiple Intelligences for the 21st Century. New York, NY: Basic Books.

While the 10th anniversary edition of Frames of Mind is out, I suggest reading it first to get full details about the intelligences. I must admit though the Intelligence Reframed text was very easy to read and quite informative. Both are highly recommended.

Dear Brian Wood,

we agree with you,

but speak about different types of cognitive potentiality, such as those mathematical logic, it is not the same thing as thinking in terms of high and low study performance or learning difficulties.

Certainly, mathematical competences are possessed by every individual in varying degree, but here come into play important aspects as can be educational relationships, learning environments, cultural stimuli and family solicitations.

Hello Mauro,

Are you thinking part of the problem could be from the memorizing and purge method for learning different techniques for solving math problems could be the problem? I know for a fact one problem my students had with studying Statistics this past year was the fact no matter what the rationalization, only one answer was correct. Common Core is coming to address this problem by allowing multiple answers for math problems if the rationalization for the incorrect answer is sound. I believe this is a major mistake. How exactly is this method going to help engineers who have to work with tight tolerances with materials? I believe this is a major mistake. Students will be prepared through secondary ed in at least math they are never wrong and when they get to the college level they will be seriously disappointed.

Many children are not high achievers at Maths because they did not have a parent who had Lancelot Hogben's, Mathematics for the Million, London, Allen & Unwin, 1936 on the bookshelf. They did not see Dad applying Geometry at home to do woodwork, brickwork and plumbing. They have not seen micrometers, spirit levels and drafting instruments at home.

Hello Brian,

In the previous reply I pointed out the importance of distinguishing between problematic learning and real situations of disability, as well as the need for different educational perspectives.

For the rest, I agree with you on the fact that the preparation related to the curriculum in mathematics, must take place progressively.

With equal attention within the Primary and Secondary School.

In this sense teaching (and learning) through a systematic use of multiple-choice tests is not of much help.

It is clear, in every area and degree of study it is fundamental use a maieutic approach, involving individual reasoning (and collective) in the solution of problems of various kinds, (intuitive and analytical).

Hello Tavia

Thank you for this question

really there is many factors effect the why children don't do well in math

the importance and the first one return to the teachers because they tend to teach for the test not for understand as popham says. secondly, the math anxiety among the students which mixed with their attitudes to mathematics which is mostly negative. thirdly, teaching strategies closed to the traditional method ( chalk and talk) without using the new ones or technology.

And some related to the students beliefs and perception about the mathematics, they perceived math as a difficult subject and it need a special competences and special abilities to understand it, their tongue want to say mathematics is not for all students it is for elite.

anyhow, there is an implicit reason which is the mathematics content, and the teachers pedagogical content knowledge are not Alignment not consistent ( i.e. teachers don't have enough competences to simplify the content of math to be learnable from the most students).

finally, the classroom discourse in the math class should be developed in-order to enhance the students to express their ideas.

Affinity for numbers, being able to see beyond numbers, being very quick in thinking what to do with them, are some things which help in liking mathematics! Really, very few people are originally very good at maths but students can be trained to like mathematics and be good at it !

I believe there are a couple of paths to this issue.

Firstly, as a principal of a primary school I often hear from parents justifying their child's poor maths performance by inferring they themselves were poor at maths at school. Most parents grew up in an era of large class groupings where learning was predominately by rote and/or drill and practice. Some of these parents became teachers and follow very similar teaching methodologies. Maths is a conceptual phenomenon where 'thinking' and 'connecting' is needed. We need a maths curriculum that guides the teaching strategies to a more 'problem based' approach.

Secondly, (although generalising) students entering university to become a teacher have poor mathematical skills to begin with; thus bringing into question the entry requirements.

I love Mathematics! So when I when I hear about low achievement in Mathematics I always think students don’t study.

I agree that teachers affect strongly students. The way they explain Mathematics content is very important. But I should say, when I was a student in compulsory and high school I had several different teachers and they all were good. So from my personal experience, I could never state that Mathematics is hard because teachers are not doing enough to make their students love math and show confident that they can master the subject.

Not all teachers have the same passion for Math’s, or explain content with the same facility, or explore new methodologies constantly, or integrate technology in class, or establish a good relationship with all students …

Well, teachers aren’t perfect and some are better than others. Even so, Mathematics is a difficulty subject that requires hard work from students.

If students don’t study at home the minimum, their achievement will be low.

Due bitter experiences at the elementary stage of education, pupils will get negative attitude towards mathematics and develop mathematics phobia. Then gradually become slow achievers in mathematics. Moreover, some of the teachers announce that only bright people can learn mathematics very easily and dull students can not get better achievement. At times teachers make mathematics difficult due to their hardship in teaching that particular concept. When the teacher is able to relate mathematics to the daily life activities of the pupils, then they will learn easily. Teaching of mathematics must be joyful and enjoyable.

You question is interesting and significant. I’m sharing my thoughts not to answer your question but linking your question to related topic for investigation in context and beyond. I’m connecting your question to explore the relative effects of heredity and environment on learning abilities and skill in mathematics. Mathematical skills and abilities among siblings in a family vary yet they came from same parents, given similar parenting, and raised in common home environment. This is the internal environment of the child. While on the external environment of the child the variables are, teacher, curriculum, and school learning resources.

Children, who struggle to understand mathematical concepts, subsequently find themselves frustrated by their lack of success in mathematics. This situation then may develop a phobia due to fear or even antipathy towards mathematics (Hembree, 1990; Izard, 1972; Zettle and Houghton, 1998). Dislike and fear of mathematics, in turn, can cause children to develop ‘mathematics anxiety’. Mathematics anxiety is a fear of mathematics and an intense negative reaction to it (Sherard, 1981). Due to this anxiety, children avoid the use and study of mathematics.

I believe that students lack confidence. Mathematics takes a lot of reasoning and interpretation. If children in at very tender age develop the habit of loving maths, then when they are in higher grades, it will not be a 'mighty problem' for them to overcome. Mathematics very important. We a teachers should strive to make mathematics fun and interesting for students to understand.We therefore need to try several methodology and know which one work for the students.

I believe in most of the cases teachers' poor professional skills are creating many hurdles

In mathematics and Physics there exists a stigma that students can't, or won't be successful or interested. One of the key's is to get students motivated. It is truly amazing to see what highly motivated students can do or come up with. Students can achieve this motivation by many means, and is often unique to the students. It is important to show students what can be done, and how it relates to different aspects of life which they find interesting such as art. Students must have the opportunity early on to  realize that art and math/science are not mutually exclusive.

"The walls between art & engineering exist only in our minds"--Theo Jensen 

Due to motivation and appropriate pedagogy from kindergarten

Lack of motivation from kindergarten

This is due to a number of reasons, which may be due to the lack of a strong structure in mathematics, or the result of their negative attitudes toward mathematics, or the negative attitudes of their parents towards mathematics.