More Topics / Less Depth? 1512- Post #1

There are so many topics that need to be covered in math. Looking specifically at the Minnesota Math Standards you can see all of the different topics within math that need to be covered. Each topic has standards that need to be reached. The same the topics reappear year after year, and the standards change slightly. Topics are often reintroduced many times for review. During our first week of class we read an article which touched on the set up of math curriculum in the United States. The article was called, A Coherent Curriculum, The Case of Mathematics. It was written by William Schmidt, Richard Houang, and Leland Cogan. The article described the math curriculum that is in place in the United States to be "a mile wide and an inch deep."

When it comes to education, what does that mean, being a "mile wide and an inch deep?" Basically the author explained that the U.S. covers many topics within a years time. Then these same topics are reintroduced many times throughout a student's education, but never really in much more depth than it was the previous time. Many other countries cover less topics within a years time, but cover the topics in much more depth. With the way that the academic standards are set up for the U.S., it is hard to eliminate any of the topics covered. The curriculum is based on and around what needs to be covered and reached through the standards. So while the standards are a wonderful guideline that is used to make sure students are where they need to be, do they contain too many topics per year? Is it better to have less topics that are covered more in depth?

I am honestly on the fence about this. The way I see it, you can look at it two different ways. First, you could say yes, our students are missing out on learning these topics in the depth that they should be due to the amount of topics and information covered in a years time. Second, you could say no, being there are so many different topics being covered our students are receiving a nice, well-rounded education. Each approach seems to have its benefits, so it is hard to say what works best for the math curriculum of the students of the U.S.