Contributors

Dr. Darja Barr, Senior Instructor (PhD in Math Education), Dept of Mathematics, University of Manitoba

Dr. Jim Clark, Professor, Dept of Psychology, University of Winnipeg

Dr. James Currie, Professor (Mathematics), Dept of Mathematics & Statistics, University of Winnipeg

Dr. Payman Eskandari, Assistant Professor (Mathematics), Dept of Mathematics & Statistics, University of Winnipeg

Dr. Shakhawat Hossain, Professor (Statistics), Department of Mathematics & Statistics, University of Winnipeg

Dr. Narad Rampersad, Professor (Mathematics) & Chair, Dept of Mathematics & Statistics, University of Winnipeg

Dr. Anna Stokke, Professor (Mathematics), Dept of Mathematics & Statistics, University of Winnipeg

Dr. Ross Stokke, Professor (Mathematics), Dept of Mathematics & Statistics, University of Winnipeg

Dr. Matthew Wiersma, Associate Professor (Mathematics), Dept of Mathematics & Statistics, University of Winnipeg

Background

In response to a Winnipeg Free Press article by Dr. Martha Koch, Associate Professor in the Faculty of Education at the University of Manitoba, we conducted a thorough review of the 22 references she provided to support her claims that recent amendments to the Teaching Certificates and Qualifications Regulation under The Education Administration Act in Manitoba are research-based.  These amendments significantly reduced the subject-area expertise required for teacher certification. 

Our analysis found that none of the references provided by Dr. Koch credibly substantiate her conclusions and some even contradict them.

Key concerns include assuming faulty premises, drawing unsupported conclusions, serious methodological flaws, and disregard of contradictory evidence within some of the cited articles.  

Given the potential influence of these claims on public policy–including statements made by Manitoba’s Acting Minister of Education and Early Childhood Learning, describing the amendments as “based on research in math education, not opinion”– this is a matter of serious concern.  

We recommend that Dr. Koch retract her Winnipeg Free Press article, as it gives readers the misleading impression that her claims are supported by research.  We also urge the Manitoba government to consult more broadly, and to exercise greater caution when relying on education research to inform policy decisions.

This review was undertaken as a public service to uphold educational standards, protect the educational quality of Manitoba children and prevent the spread of misinformation about research-based claims in Manitoba Education.

We include our Executive Summary below, followed by our full 47-page analysis.

Executive Summary

Download the full report

In a Winnipeg Free Press article, Mathematics education of Manitoba teachers should be based on research (November 13, 2024), Dr. Martha Koch, an Associate Professor in the Faculty of Education at the University of Manitoba, made several claims about recent amendments to the Teaching Certificates and Qualifications Regulation under The Education Administration Act.   These amendments significantly reduced the subject-area expertise required for teacher certification. Koch used the phrase “research shows” 15 times in her article.  Some key claims put forth in the article include:

1. “The recent changes mean that Manitoba’s teacher certification requirements are better aligned with current research in mathematics education.”

2. “Notably, research shows that early and middle years teachers (grades K-8) who have taken more undergraduate university courses in mathematics are not more effective teachers of mathematics. That is, their students do not have better outcomes in mathematics.” 

3. “In fact, some studies have shown that K-8 students actually have lower achievement in mathematics if their teachers have more undergraduate courses in mathematics.”

Since Koch’s statements seemed dubious, she was asked to provide supporting evidence.  She responded by circulating an eight-page research synopsis referencing 22 articles and books.  After reviewing all 22 references, we found that none credibly support the above claims, and some even contradict them.

Additionally, Koch made statements about research on “mathematics knowledge for teaching” (MKT) in her Winnipeg Free Press article. The references she provided contain repeated, unambiguous statements emphasizing mathematical subject content knowledge as a necessary component of MKT—an important detail omitted by Koch.

The potential consequences of relying on claims that appear to lack evidence are significant, particularly given their possible influence on public policy affecting Manitoba children.

Our main findings

1.  Faulty premises and conclusions not aligned with evidence

• Koch implied that pre-service K-8 teachers are being required to take standard undergraduate math courses—similar to those designed for physicists,  mathematicians, and engineers—even though all Manitoba math departments offer specialized courses tailored for K-8 teachers.

• In several cases, Koch appears to draw conclusions that are not supported by the articles.

2. Lack of supporting evidence

• Not one article provided by Koch concludes that "K-8 students achieve lower outcomes when their teachers have more undergraduate math courses."  

• Many of the articles appear to contradict Koch’s claims, have been applied out of context, or are irrelevant to the discussion.

• Based on our analysis, the articles do not provide support for the idea that K-8 pre-service teachers should avoid math courses provided by university math departments.

3.  Serious methodological issues

• Several studies clearly lacked proper design, or reported results that lacked statistical significance, making causal inferences impossible.

4. Disregard of contradictory evidence

• Several studies omitted by Koch indicate a positive correlation between math content courses taken by teachers and improved student achievement.

• Several of the articles Koch cited emphasize the need for stronger math content preparation for prospective teachers.  One even referred to a recommendation for a minimum of six credit hours in math as an admission requirement for K-8 pre-service teachers—contradicting Koch’s conclusions.

5.     Impact of misinformation

• In the Manitoba Legislative Assembly on November 22, 2024, Tracy Schmidt, the Acting Minister of Education and Early Childhood Learning, stated that the amendments to the The Education Administration Act “were based on research on math education, not on opinion.”  This raises concerns about the role of Koch’s claims in shaping these policy changes, particularly given concerns about the lack of supporting evidence. 

Conclusions and recommendations

Our detailed review discusses each of the cited papers, demonstrating that none appear to substantiate Koch’s claims.  

Given the serious implications of Koch’s statements, and their potential impact on public policy, we make the following recommendations:

1) Retraction: Dr. Martha Koch should retract her Winnipeg Free Press article, as it gives readers the misleading impression that her claims are supported by research.

2) Policy Caution: The Manitoba government should consult more broadly and exercise greater caution when relying on education research to inform policy decisions.