[top.htm]

                  

NCTM National Meeting, Salt Lake City, UT
(PowerPoint Presentation)
April 10, 2008

 

"Metric, Once and For All"


An Initial Plan for Converting
the United States by January 1, 2004

by Tom J. Price
Norris Middle School
Firth, Nebraska

July 12th, 1999

to fulfill the requirements
of the Independent Study

Doane College Graduate Studies, 

Crete, Nebraska


"Metric, Once and For All"


Outline


1. Why is now a good time to switch to the metric system?
        a. TIMSS study
        b. Education is under the gun
        c. International trade
        d. New emphasis from grass roots

2. Why has metrication failed before?
        a. Previous national bills
        b. Lobbying efforts - local agencies

3. The plan
        a. Norris School Board
                i. Talk with other disciplines in September, October
                ii. Set up a board meeting date for November
                iii. Proposal, one way or another
        b. Nebraska Unicameral
                i. Meet with U.S. House of Representative Doug Bereuter
                ii. Meet Senator Dennis Byars, Beatrice
                iii. Meet with Senators Bob Kerrey and Chuck Hagel
        c. Run for Nebraska Association of Teachers of Mathematics president
                i. The "election" campaign
                ii. Start on meeting people from the first year of the three year "term", building                          bridges, selling the idea
        d. Presentations on the plan
                i. Speak at the NCTM Regional in the fall of 2000 in Omaha
                ii. Speak at other NCTM regionals
                iii. Speak at the National meeting (which one?)
        e. Work with other educational groups
                i. Nebraska Department of Education
                ii. Science teachers
                iii. Universities

4. Who will be the biggest opponents?
        a. Identification of potential problems
        b. Identify government agencies that will help in the switch
        c. Sports

5. Once the bill has passed, how to implement the training
        a. Across the nation, seminars to help the U.S. citizens change
        b. Block grants to state
        c. Tax added on to real estate transactions to pay for changing
                records in the vaults of all government agencies
        d. Anything new must be in metric

6. Time line of projected events

7. Projected costs of the switch
        a. Cost comparison for the next 10 years

8. Media Ideas for the entire country
        a. Hire a firm (NCTM)
        b. Who will pay?

9. Other possible solutions
        a. Have the education system just teach one measuring system
        b. Have the entire United States vote in the fall of 2004

10. What happens if the U.S. doesn't change?





"Metric, Once and For All"


The United States has embraced the English system of measuring so tightly that finally converting the nation solely to the metric system will be quite a battle. The intent of this paper is to not only show why the current time (1999) is a great time for another and final thrust for conversion, but will also outline a systematic, five year plan to carry Americans forward.

Educational Reform to Lead the Way

    Any U.S. citizen who has followed the metric system in the United States already knows many stories, jokes, and anecdotes of how the federal government has tried to initiate this measurement change. In the early 70's there was a gigantic push from the federal government to reform the country. The 1975 Metric Act was the beginning of many changes here in the U.S. Many of us can remember road signs having both English and metric measurements, maybe even remembering things like metric shingles. But what happened? Somewhere along the way the English system slipped back as an alternative that would be allowed. The U.S. did not convert totally; we only kind of made a "suggestion" about changing. American pride took root and those who did not want to change simply were not forced to change.
     What's different now that would warrant enough evidence to change now? The Dow Jones average is at an all time high, there is hardly any unemployment, for the first time ever there is a federal surplus, and we have survived economic scares from Asia, Brazil, and Kosovo. So what's the hurry? If the U.S. still remains the dominant nation in all of the world, why spend the money and hassle of trying to teach our citizens a new way of measuring?
     The biggest reason is the TIMSS report. The Third International Math & Science Study (TIMSS) has shown that U.S. students fall behind their counterparts in other parts of the world. For years the American educational process has been assaulted by reports of how poorly our students do when compared to Japan, Taiwan, Germany, etc. Our fourth grade scores are fairly well, we start slipping at the eighth grade year, and by high school we don't even rate as average. What can be done to change our international scores?
After looking at the American educational system and the TIMSS test, one can be assured that none of the questions on the test (or any other international educational study) had any questions that used English measurements. That means American students had to do all the work in metric units, whether they were proficient at them or not. Had the U.S. been totally metric, those questions dealing with area, volume, rates, distances, etc. would not have been as difficult or time consuming. If the U.S. students had grown up with just one system, they would have been on equal ground with their international counterparts.
     After looking at TIMSS documents, it appeared to me that although measurement1 was a category where U.S. students rated low, there has been no suggestion that we go entirely metric. There are proposals for teacher training, developing a more challenging curriculum, reducing class size, etc. but nothing about switching to the system that the rest of the world uses! According to the same report, the Second International Math Study (SIMS) report of 1982 also states that American students are below average in measuring2.
     The second important reason the U.S. should switch is the time, energy, and money spent by the educational system in trying to teach two systems of measurement. For years American teachers have had to answer the question: Which system do we teach? If we just teach the English system, the science and medicinal communities will be in an uproar because students will not be able to understand cubic centimeters or kiloPascals. If we just teach just the metrics, the local community will cry, "FOUL!" because our students won't be able to measure a quarter of an inch or figure how many quarts are in a gallon. Thus, the American teacher has to somehow teach BOTH systems so that students can go either way, depending on the career they choose.
     If two weeks are devoted each year to teaching measuring (and then reinforced throughout the year), then two weeks a year are wasted. If two weeks of instruction are wasted every year, and school children go for thirteen years (K-12), that's twenty-six (26) weeks of wasted instruction by the time they are out of high school!
     Not only is time wasted, but our students can't measure accurately in either system! We spend so much time and money (like on sets of manipulatives from both systems), that neither system is really developed fully.
     Instead of spending double time on this one important aspect of mathematics, we could use that twenty-six weeks in teaching other areas of our subject. A school year is jam-packed the way it is already, but over the last twenty years plenty has been added to the curriculum (or teacher workload) but hardly anything has been taken away. Added items include cooperative learning, technology, state standards, national standards (NCTM), problem solving, advisor/advisee, school-to-work, and more. When do we have time to keep all those records and teach all those skills? Is the school year any longer in the last twenty years to give us additional time to focus on these issues? NO! Is the school day any longer to accommodate these issues? Again, NO! So how can the American teacher teach everything that is expected?  It is a huge task since many more things are required of teachers and hardly anything has been taken out.   Teachers wouldn't have to make plans on how, when, and where to teach both systems, and if the U.S. would go totally metric the metric measurements would get reinforced at home instead of getting combatted at home.
Kids right now are getting mixed messages. At home, the typical system is obviously English. In high school and college science classes, it is obviously metric. In vocational school, it is probably English. Anything done internationally obviously has metric units involved.
     A third reason for change is the international market place. Obviously the phrase, "a global economy", has been around for a while. If the U.S. wants to be even more competitive, a general population that can measure accurately is important. Our products, sales, and general communication should be done in metric to insure efficient and accurate products. With the NAFTA agreement a few years ago, both our neighbors (Mexico and Canada) have more open markets for U.S. goods, but the products must be in metric! Our trade with the European markets must already be in metrics.
     Finally, the U.S. federal government has been a leader in trying to change the American system of measurement. They are not to blame for trying.  I hope this "grass roots" campaign, through the educational system, would be seen as a solid reform movement with no ulterior motives. I am not proposing this change so that I can make more money or my company will have better profits. My intent is to help the American student be able to measure more effectively, with the most efficient system that is available to us. I am not a government official trying to be bureaucratic and force the American public with governmental legislation. Maybe a campaign that starts small and grows will convince the American public that a change is the best way to go.

Why has the metric movement failed?

     I believe the metric movement failed because of American pride and the inability of humans to accept change. Governmental agencies, starting with Thomas Jefferson, have tried to get the U.S. to go metric for over 200 years. The metric system not only uses the best number around (10), a standard set of prefixes (kilo-, deci-, centi-, etc.), but also has the units efficiently connected (1 liter = 1 dm3). Why wouldn't you want to use the best system available? Quite possibly it is American pride. The idea might be that we are the most powerful country on earth, therefore, we shouldn't have to change to someone else's standards but they should conform to ours. For instance, here is a typical line of reasoning:

"Our ancestors designed it. It was good enough for them.  It allowed the United States to become the most technologically advanced country in the world. And it's good enough for me."3


     The only problem is that that is the past, not the future. The English system was a better system than some previous systems, but now it has a replacement. In order to sustain our world prominence, we need the best measuring system around to keep up in a technological world.
     The other important consideration is that people resist change. All of us hate to give up something we know and learn a new system, whether it be metrics or using a computer. Human beings get into a comfort zone and resist change, especially if someone, especially government, forces us! If we come to the point to make up our own minds that the change would be beneficial to us, change is a lot smoother.
     Local groups (governmental agencies, construction contractors, etc.) have planted their feet and have said they will just continue using the English system. There has not been a total change, only a voluntary change. The federal government has initiated plans but has not forced compliance. When given the option, the English system has been allowed to stay.

The Plan

     The starting point for my plan is the local school board. I plan on meeting with the Norris school board in November, 1999. I will propose that Norris go totally metric starting in the 2000-2001 school year.
     Before that meeting, I will hold a series of meetings in September and October with the staff to resolve some of the problems that will come up. I will try to persuade them why the metric system is so much easier and why our students should have to learn just one system. I will gather feedback and adjust accordingly.
     Of course there will be opposition. The three major thrusts of my arguments will be the TIMSS report, the time wasted by teachers, and the inability of our students to measure in either system. The science teachers will want metrics; most all the other teachers will want English. I will point out that math teachers have to teach both, which is a waste. One important point to emphasize with them is that this is just the beginning of a national campaign. If it was just the Norris district, I wouldn't propose it . If Norris is just the first school to do this with the rest of the nation following, I think it would have a better chance of passing.

Starting with Nebraska

     I have already made contact with Representative Doug Bereuter at his "Town Hall" meeting on Thursday, July 8, at Norris High School. I will be working with his staff, especially Marcia Glover, in organizing material and looking at past legislative bills. The U.S. Federal government has led the way and have done their part, so I hope to use the expertise of Rep. Bereuter in pushing the legislation down to the local level.
     At my first opportunity this fall, I will be meeting with Senator Dennis Byars from Beatrice this fall. I will inform him of the concerns and hopefully have a reasonable solution. I would like to encourage him and his colleagues to lead the nation in this effort to make a stronger America.
     I have emailed Senator Bob Kerrey concerning these issues as well. I have also called his Lincoln office and left a message. Before school starts I will either visit in person or make contact by phone to start this process. Senator Kerrey has been a firm supporter of education and would seem to be a better choice on these issues than Senator Hagel, although any support would be welcome. Helen Banzhaf of Seward High School is on some kind of educational committee of Senator Hagel's and I have made initial contact with her about this proposal.

Leading the Educational System

     One of my first steps is running for the office of president for the Nebraska Association of Teachers of Mathematics (hereafter known as NATM) in the fall of the year 2000. I believe I have a strong shot at winning the position due to my experience at NATM conferences and the feedback I get from these presentations. I have had a lot of neat experiences from the Nebraska Math Scholars program, the MathVantage video series, and now the "Math Splash" conference held at Doane College. I have had the privilege of working with a lot of Nebraska educators and have a network that I think I can count on.
In my election "campaign", metrics would be the first of three issues addressed. The second issue would be to somehow use NATM officers to go to schools and visit different sites to improve mathematics instruction (go to the people instead of hoping they come to the NATM conferences). The third issue would be to hire a full time aide for Deb Romanek at the State Department. Should I not be elected by the NATM members, I would take that as a sign that I should not continue as a leader in this venture.
     If I am elected, I would immediately start looking at the NCTM regional meetings coming up that I could speak at and I would send in proposal forms to talk about metrics.
The position of president is a three year term. For the first year (2001), I would be second vice-president and responsible for the preservice training. This involves providing a workshop for college students in conjunction with our fall NATM meeting. I would have a session on metrics, start spreading the message to these future teachers, and making connections to these future leaders. I would also submit a plan to the NATM leadership for consideration in making all NATM publications, articles, etc. metric. I would also encourage NATM to work directly with NCTM representatives to push this at the national level. Beth Anderson of Brownell-Talbot is the NATM representative to NCTM and I have already made initial contact with her about this proposal. Another proposition is that NATM would lobby the Nebraska Legislature for the entire state to go metric, much like the Norris school board being the first school in the state, Nebraska could be the first state in the nation.
     During the second year of service (2002), I would be first vice-president and help the second vice-president with the preservice conference. If the NATM membership allows, I would start making contact with the science education groups, the university/college representatives, the Nebraska and U.S. Departments of Education, etc. I would hope to have a legislative bill or other plan in place by the end of 2002.
     During the third year (2003), I would be president. I would present a session at the national meeting and should have most things in place for a target date of January 1, 2004 for conversion. At the national meeting, hopefully all the work will have been done and just an informational (rather than confrontational) session will emerge.

Other Educational Groups

     Deb Romanek, Nebraska's math consultant at the Nebraska Department of Education, will be contacted about this venture. I have a good working relationship with Deb and admire her efforts.
     The National Association of Teachers of Science would be a key partner in this campaign. Science and medicine are already metric and would have a lot of expertise in this area.
     I will make contact with Dr. Jim Johnson, Doane College professor, to ask for assistance and advice. Other math professors that I know (and know me): Dr. Mel Thornton at University of Nebraska-Lincoln (UNL), Dr. Monty Fickel at Chadron State, Dr. Liz Behrens at Hastings College, Dr. Al Arth at UNL, Dr. Jim Paige at Wayne State College, Dr. Dick Vogt at Nebraska Wesleyan University, Dr. Chris Masters at Doane College. Using these professors as a starting point, other connections will be made into the science and engineering field.

Opponents of the Metric System

     Almost the entire American population will be opposed in one way or another. It will be rare when someone whole-heartedly is eager for the switch. Citizens who have recently moved to the United States or who work currently with metrics exclusively at their job will be jumping for joy!

     Most of the American population can probably be won over if enough sound reasons are given. The old reason that "everyone else in the world is doing it" won't work this time. The major hurdle that will have to overcome is the fear of change, but as long as things are delineated and a reasonable plan is developed for helping the "average" citizen into the metric system, I think we can do it! The biggest opponents will be in the construction industry. All of the plumbers, electricians, carpenters, concrete workers, etc. will be greatly affected because they use measurement every day, and rely on accurate details in their plans.
    There will be a chunk of people who will not be convinced at all. They believe the American system is the best because America is the best. It's partly American pride and partly not wanting to learn something new. They would gladly welcome anything that they can complain about. I found one web site that astonished me (www.freedom2measure.org), but their reasoning I think can be overcome without much trouble.
    People over 40 will be a tough challenge. The young Americans (20 and under) probably won't have a problem at all. College educated people should be fairly receptive.
The good news is there are some resources available that will be quite useful in the conversion. Going metric will not be a new subject, thus there were several books in the library card catalogue that could be used. There are many educational products already on the market since the metric system has to be taught already. Thus the thrust will not be developing new material (expensive), but choosing which is the best route. The U.S. Metric Association would probably serve well in this capacity.


Sports, an American Classic

    On a national scale, sports has grown tremendously since 1980. There are more kinds of sports, sporting events, sporting clubs, sporting clothes and equipment, television programs, cable channels, etc.
    If the U.S. is to go metric, all of these sports must make some changes. The biggest change is our truly American pastime: football. If we could get the football fields to be 100 meters instead of 100 yards, I don't think there would be any problem for the country to shift into high gear for metric conversion. Even when the National Football League started a European league, I thought the field would be in meters, but no! The fields were all done in yards! How arrogant! Do it the American way even on foreign soil!
    The football fields would cause a big problem, as most stadiums (professional and college) would not be able to lengthen them without a substantial cost. Most high school fields would probably be okay. Of course, the field would not have to be extended at all if the field was narrowed to 90 meters (about 98.4 yards). Hey, that would really help out geometry because 90 degrees is the most import angle! And two 45's would be reinforced!
Track has gone metric, but people still refer to the 880 or the 220, which are English units, not metric. It's interesting that although the races are in metric distances, the field events are still English! The high jump, long jump, pole vault, etc. would have to be stated in metric units. This could be done easily and would be a nice start on the process to make the public aware of some of these units.
    About the only thing done to baseball is change the signs and the records. The fields would not have to be changed. Basketball would not experience much of a change either. Who cares if the three point line is 28 feet of 9.1 meters? Swimming and soccer are already metric. Horse racing would not experience a cost in changing over but in reporting only.


Once the Bill has Passed

    What would be the key ingredients in the bill that will finally project us to metric? This is where the experience of our Congress representatives is necessary.
    One key component will be training. Since this is an educational bill, my proposal is that all school districts in America, public or private, would hold meetings where the public could be instructed. I envision about 4 meetings during the year 2004, quite possibly with a free kit or videotape that the public can take home with them. Teachers, not necessarily classroom teachers, would be selected (after applying?) who would teach the four seminars in the evening.
    Block grants to the states might be a good idea, thus giving the power of each state to do the procedure the best way they feel. It would be fine if some other kind of funding is valued.
    One interesting point was made to me by a city engineer in Lincoln. What are we going to do about our records? Everything is kept in a vault, especially road maps, sewer maps, city sidewalks, etc. Would everything have to be changed to metric and then reshelved? I'm not sure of that answer, but if we do need to convert them, one way of financing this is a tax on real estate transactions to help fund the changeover.
    Any new product or construction after January 1, 2004 would have to be entirely metric in measurement. Machines that are already in place, however, would not have to be torn apart and refigured with metric parts. Thus, English parts would have to be kept around a while to service old machines, etc. A whole new industry might be born in converting English parts (sewage lines, gas pipes, etc.) so that things fit!



Projected Timeline

July 8, 1999 Met with U.S. House Representative Doug Bereuter
July 9, 1999 Emailed all Norris staff about upcoming fall meetings
July 9, 1999 Initial contact with Senator Kerrey's office
Sept., 1999 Write a letter to all Nebraska Congress representatives
and Governor Mike Johanns (done)

September, Meet with other curriculum departments at Norris (Sept.15th & 22nd, only 4 participants)
October 1999 Meet with Senator Dennis Byars, Beatrice
November, 1999 Norris School Board vote on proposal (scheduled for October, postponed)

November, join the US Metric Association, join their listserve

Winter 1999 Adjust plan, meet with Congressional representatives
        in light of the decision by the Norris School Board
Summer 2000 Start on writing initial legislative bill,
work on web site at Norris to promote metrics
Fall, 2000 Run for NATM president
Spring 2000 Gather information through NATM contacts
Fall 2000 Speak at the Omaha NCTM regional meeting
Summer 2001 Finalize draft of legislative bill
Fall, 2001 Have NATM leadership help draft a training plan for the
country

Fall, 2002 Submit legislative bill in Congress

January 1, 2004 Total conversion

Jan-Dec, 2004 Training, inservice, help all across the country


Projected Costs

        Going Metric Staying English

1999         0              $200 million

2000         0              $210 million

2001     $50 million $220 million

2002     $100 million $230 million

2003     $150 million $240 million

2004     $2 billion     $250 million

2005     $1 billion     $260 million

2006     $500 million $270 million

2007         0              $280 million

2008         0              $290 million

2009         0              $300 million

2010         0              $310 million

Totals $3.8 billion $3.06 billion

     These figures are just arrived at pure estimating. I will have to work
with other governmental agencies to even come close to being accurate. The "Going Metric" costs would be bore by the federal government, while the "Staying English" costs are figured by their embedded nature in the repetitive tasks associated with having two systems. I increased the English costs by $10 million a year, while the Metric conversion was mainly for the years 2004 and 2005. During the years 2001, 2002, and 2003 I estimated the costs of meetings across the country with key leaders, finding resources, and developing a plan for 2004.
     My point is that there will be a huge initial investment in the process, and after a few years in the metric system, there won't be a cost. If we keep having a dual system, every year there will be time wasted in schools all across America, there will be dual labels on most all of our products, specification guides for federal contracts won't have to be printed in two systems, and international trade will be that much smoother.

Media

      A key player in all of this will be television. My initial idea is develop a series of television "ads", much like the popular "School House Rocks" series shown to kids. If there was a 2 minute teaching video that could be shown on national television, the American public would see the metric system in a different light. This could be produced before 2004 with the hope of helping the American public becoming more familiar with some of the key aspects of the metric system.
     Another key piece of the media would be guest spots on some of the talk shows to sell the vision. I have absolutely no idea who would be on there or when or what, just that if this campaign picks up enough steam, these kinds of exposures could really help the cause.
Press releases in newspapers would also be quite helpful. NCTM would be the key leader in releasing these publications.


Other Possible Solutions to the Measuring Problem

1. We could lengthen the school year by two weeks and concentrate solely on measuring in the math classroom. (probably too costly)

2. We could lengthen the school day by 30 minutes and thus have more time, especially in the elementary school, to focus on measuring. (probably not logistically possible)

3. We could cut out sports from school and thus not be distracted by the time, money, and energy devoted to those extracurricular activities. Clubs could be formed in the community to replace the school's teams. (will never happen)

4. We could go to the metric system, solely in the school system and not teach the English system. The country would not have to switch and the American population would not have to buy liters of gasoline. However, those jobs that require English units would have to teach their workers on the job site and bear the costs of such teaching. Those students who have come through the educational system would be very well versed in the metric units and would not require any further training. (would be fought by lots of businesses)

5. We could solely teach the English system and leave the metrics out of the educational process. Science teachers would have to convert back and international employers would have to bear the costs of training their employees. (fought by science teachers and international trade groups)

6. We could come up with a national vote. In the fall of 2004, put a national referendum for the American people to decide once and for all.

What Happens if the U.S. doesn't change?

     If the United States doesn't switch, we will have two systems of measurement for a long time. The embedded costs of serving the American population in English and trying to serve the rest of the world in metrics will continue every year. Our students will not be good at measuring in either system. The double labeling, producing conversion tables, and dual production in certain areas will continue every year.
     The process will not be easy as change is always tough. The U.S. has tried many times over the years to change to the metric system. There will be quite a bit of opposition, as expected. However, if enough time and effort is put forth before the conversion, it is my belief that America can change smoothly.
     Do we want our students to be able to measure accurately? The answer is yes, and the answer is metrics.


Footnotes and References

1 "Improving Mathematics in the Middle School - Lessons from TIMSS and Related Research", Edward A. Silver, U.S. Department of Education report, page 3.

2 "Improving Mathematics in the Middle School - Lessons from TIMSS and Related Research", Edward A. Silver, U.S. Department of Education report, page 5.

3 "No, Let's Keep America American", Nick Brunt, Popular Mechanics, September 1996, page 46

"Yes, America Needs to be Metrified", Richard Bonner, Popular Mechanics, September 1996, page 46

"Mathematics Achievement in the Middle School Years - IEA's Third International Mathematics and Science Study" Albert E. Beaton, Ina V.S. Mullis, Michael O. Martin, Eugenio J. Gonzalez, Dana L. Kelly, Teresa A. Smith, 1996, Center for the Study of Testing, Evaluation, and Educational Policy (CSTEEP), Boston College


Internet Sites


www.freedom2measure.org - totally against changing due to culture

www.ed.gov - all sorts of publications on bills, speeches, etc.

www.whitehouse.gov - President Clinton's speeches and proposals

www.aashto.org/metric/index.html - American Association of Safety
and Highway Transportation Officials

http://lamar.ColoState.edu/~hillger - U.S. Metric Association

http://www.csteep.bc.edu/timss Boston College site for TIMSS

(last updated 10-4-99)

Go back to the Main Page