Common Core Teaching, What Do You Think About It?

[OldCoyote]

I think I might have a little problem with this.


www.nationalreview.com/article/373840/ten-dumbest-common-core-problems-alec-torres

[ArchietheDragon]

We just had curriculum night at our daughter's school.  They are on board with common core and they like it, or at least they are giving the company line that they like it.   They said the biggest change for them was how they teach math concepts and it really has changed how they go about it, with the focus on getting the students to not just know the mechanics, but understand the why behind it. 

Other than that, I don't have any real opinion pro or con. 

[ken a.k.a OMK]

  I was helping my gs with his math. Getting the answer was easy, but then he had to give the rules he used.  Also it took me a while to understand the number line and how to use it.

[imanangel]

Common Core is a list of standards. What you posted above was a publisher's interpretation of the Common Core Standards.

Every publisher has a different interpretation.  The schools decide how they want to teach the standards and what curriculum they are going to use.  There is not a set curriculum. 

Here are the actual Common Core Standards.  www.corestandards.org/read-the-standards/

[Angel!]

I will add some of this just seems stupid if you don't understand the ideas they are trying to teach. Examples 1, 2, 4, and 5 are the way my son is learning math and it is actually really good, IMO. A lot of visualization to help teach the concepts.

This also teaches methods that will allow kids to do more complicated math in their heads in the future. A skill that many people sorely lack, so I find that important.

I also don't see the problem with teaching the concept of shorter than and longer than either.

A few worksheets clearly just had mistakes, which isn't really a problem due to common core.

[Shooby]

It will push more kids to just drop out of school trying to learn an idiotic way to do math.

[Angel!]

Sept 27, 2014 11:42:04 GMT -5 Shooby said:

It will push more kids to just drop out of school trying to learn an idiotic way to do math.

All those worksheets were for around first grade. I think most first graders aren't dropping out regardless of the methods being taught.

[Shooby]

When they get to HS, they aren't going to have a CLUE how to do basic math. Then, they will drop out .

[Angel!]

Sept 27, 2014 14:52:25 GMT -5 Shooby said:

When they get to HS, they aren't going to have a CLUE how to do basic math. Then, they will drop out .

Actually they will have a much better understanding of basic math. The problem is that the old methods left too many kids lost and unable to do basic math. That is why very few adults think math is at all useful or have any ability to do math in their heads.

This teaches the concepts much better. And it is a better method for doing math in your head. I would actually guess that most people who successfully do math in their heads use these methods, I know I do. It was just something I figured out along the way, but most don't. Teaching kids this will make them much more successful later.

I get that it is very difficult to understand if you don't do this sort of math in your head and you didn't learn with these methods. But watching my son learn this stuff, I think it is far better than the old ways.

[Shooby]

I don't think there is anything particularly difficult about memorizing and UNDERSTANDING multiplication tables. When you teach a kid 12 x 12 = 144. They understand you mean 12 + 12+ 12 +12+12+12+12+12+12+12+12+12 = 144.

[Angel!]

Sept 27, 2014 18:43:57 GMT -5 Shooby said:

I don't think there is anything particularly difficult about memorizing and UNDERSTANDING multiplication tables. When you teach a kid 12 x 12 = 144. They understand you mean 12 + 12+ 12 +12+12+12+12+12+12+12+12+12 = 144.

You can only memorize so much. What do you do if you want to add 538+784 or if you want to multiply 24*13?

If you know basic concepts, then you can easily do these in your head as well.

[Shooby]

I don't need to memorize past that. I can understand how to do math and multiplication. My point is that kids understand the CONCEPT versus this idiotic common core math which is supposedly trying to teach concepts.

[Angel!]

Sept 27, 2014 18:54:23 GMT -5 Shooby said:

I don't need to memorize past that. I can understand how to do math and multiplication. My point is that kids understand the CONCEPT versus this idiotic common core math which is supposedly trying to teach concepts.

You shouldn't memorize beyond that. My question is can you do those in your head? I can, quite easily.

The way they are teaching our kids math, they will be able to also. I think that is a good thing.

[Shooby]

Um, yeah, I managed to get through College Calculus, Physics, Inorganic and Organic Chemistry classes, etc. So, um yeah.

Thank GOD my kids aren't going to have that nonsense rammed down their gullets at the elementary level.

[ՏՇԾԵԵʅՏɧ_LԹՏՏʅҼ]

I wouldn't call it "idiotic" - if it was idiotic, they wouldn't be teaching it. It's a different concept/technique on how to calculate/do math than what you are accustomed to using.

I remember when my nieces/nephews were learning the "new math". It had my head spinning, til I started to study it further.



www.straightdope.com/columns/read/1529/what-exactly-was-the-new-math

In the more abstract mathematics, however, the 'hands-on' connotation was disturbing to teachers and parents who had learned the addition facts and multiplication tables by rote. One focus of the new math was set theory, where students were encouraged to think of numbers in a new, hopefully more concrete way. Students would take a set of four items, and add it to another set of five. Yes, the result was still nine, but the emphasis was on the concept of addition, rather than the answer per se. Using this technique, students were hoped to discover that the sets would yield the same number regardless of their order (the commutative property), and that taking one original set from the combined set would yield the other original set, thereby discovering subtraction, the inverse of addition. Other aspects of the new math including using number bases other than base-10 and introducing more abstract number theory concepts such as prime numbers earlier in the students' careers. As you say, none of these concepts were newly discovered in the 20th century; the shift was purely in teaching technique, not in basic concepts.

[Shooby]

Here are some genius problems:
freepatriot.org/2014/02/03/ridiculous-common-core-math-right-answer-wrong/

[Angel!]

Sept 27, 2014 19:00:46 GMT -5 Shooby said:

Um, yeah, I managed to get through College Calculus, Physics, Inorganic and Organic Chemistry classes, etc. So, um yeah.

Having taken all those classes is no sign that you can do this in your head. I work with a lot of engineers that either can't or it takes them too long so they won't do thus type of math in their heads.

But, you can do it, so how would you do those problems in your head? Break it down step by step.

I'm asking because if you are doing it the easy way, then you are already doing this the way they are teaching kids today. If you are doing it the way we were taught, it is much slower and more difficult, which is why even engineers opt to pull out calculators.

I think teaching kids the best method to quickly do math without pulling out a calculator is a good thing. You are free to disagree.

But I am really curious as to your methods. It was a serious question.

[Shooby]

I add vertically, not horizontally. Pretty simple. Doesn't need a lot of complex boxes, "bonds", 00000's or whatever like the Rotten Core method.

[Shooby]

If you really want kids to learn to do math, take the calculators out of the school until High School.

[ՏՇԾԵԵʅՏɧ_LԹՏՏʅҼ]

Did you read the comments in that link, Shooby ? The "MyMathLab" site that the link (and pic) is referring to, is a poor example of how to do the calculations.

[Deleted]

Sept 27, 2014 18:43:57 GMT -5 Shooby said:

I don't think there is anything particularly difficult about memorizing and UNDERSTANDING multiplication tables. When you teach a kid 12 x 12 = 144. They understand you mean 12 + 12+ 12 +12+12+12+12+12+12+12+12+12 = 144.

It is 12, 12s.... But adding 12' 12 times isn't the only way to get there... Flexibility of thought, the ability to think of numbers as fluid, is a goal. 

Im not a fan of early testing, so I'd love if testing didn't start till about 11...  So about 6th grade (unless significant developmental issues are present). 

But as far as high school and switching to skills testing, I'm all for that. And CONSIStENT skill expectations across the country... Yay. 

I can remember us talking Algebra on here, and how some had 2 years, some 4, and it must be that Algebra 4 is what some called advanced math and others pre calc and others Trig/analyt.... Nuts... 

[ՏՇԾԵԵʅՏɧ_LԹՏՏʅҼ]

It's fine to teach basic mathematics, adding/subtracting/multiplication at an early age. But making more advanced calculations - higher multiplication tables, algebra, calculus is easier to absorb and learn at a younger age - the younger the better. Kids are like sponges, if you start them early enough. It gets more difficult to learn or teach, the older they get.

The 12/12 example above (adding up 12 twelves is the long and backward method - when you can do a simple multiplication of 12x12 in a mere fraction of the time.

[Deleted]

How do you 'do' multiplication though? Memorization? ... I do 12 x 12 as 120 + 24 = 144... 

My kids and I rarely approach a problem the same way. Explaining our thought processes is general what leads to the best learning. The thing is being able to be flexible in application of concepts. 

Algorithms... Are NOT flexible. Memorizing a single answer is not flexible. 

[Ryan]

I don't know that much about it, but I see all these videos posted on youtube talking about how complicated it is compared to the "old and simpler" way.  I guess I'd only say that the old and simple way didn't seem to really get us very far, so I'd approve of trying the new and improved way.

[Angel!]

Sept 27, 2014 19:12:25 GMT -5 Shooby said:

I add vertically, not horizontally. Pretty simple. Doesn't need a lot of complex boxes, "bonds", 00000's or whatever like the Rotten Core method.

I'm not even sure what adding vertically vs horizontally means when you are doing math in your head. Are you literally picturing the vertical equation as you go? I use to do it that way until I found much easier methods.

Breaking it down step by step would make a lot more sense, because I am really confused by your answer.

[Angel!]

Sept 27, 2014 21:36:13 GMT -5 oped said:

How do you 'do' multiplication though? Memorization? ... I do 12 x 12 as 120 + 24 = 144... 

My kids and I rarely approach a problem the same way. Explaining our thought processes is general what leads to the best learning. The thing is being able to be flexible in application of concepts. 

Algorithms... Are NOT flexible. Memorizing a single answer is not flexible. 

Exactly. And they are teaching this now. The worksheet that has 7+7 which it breaks down into 7+3+4 is teaching a concept. Yes, it seemingly overcomplicates 7+7, but the concept works really well when you get into triple digits.

I think earlier I said 538+784. Using this same concept 84=62+22. 538+62=600. Which leaves you 600+722=1322. There are a lot of ways you could approach this in the same manner.

Not sure if I am explaining it well, but trust me when I say this is way easier and more intuitive than the old school right to left carry the one method. That method is extremely hard to do mentally. So hard that you would never opt to do it vs pulling out a calculator.

Whereas the new method makes mental math easy and means you don't need a calculator for many things. In this day and age we need kids to learn this stuff or most will just learn to rely on a calculator for everything.

As someone who uses math daily and does a lot of it in my head, I find it awesome they are teaching our kids a much more intuitive method for solving problems without needing a calculator. We are teaching kids problems solving skills, not just algorithms.

[ՏՇԾԵԵʅՏɧ_LԹՏՏʅҼ]

Angel! - I got 1322 from your example in a few seconds by doing a simple multiplication in my head..

[imanangel]

Sept 27, 2014 19:14:49 GMT -5 Shooby said:

If you really want kids to learn to do math, take the calculators out of the school until High School.

I am not sure what schools you have been in, but I teach 5th grade, we do not use calculators at this level. 

I was against Common Core until I started teaching it.  I was outraged at all of the horrible worksheets floating around the internet with the ridiculous math problems.  Then I started actually teaching the standards, and it makes sense!  It makes sense to me, it makes sense to my students.  As I stated before, Common Core are STANDARDS!  It isn't a curriculum.  We can use whatever tools we would like to teach THE STANDARDS.  I do not use most of the worksheets, because worksheets make me stabby.  I also teach the math through games, videos, interactive SmartBoard lessons, and journals.  The students are getting it.  The students can explain it!  I could never explain math when I was a kid. 

[Deleted]

Common Core Teaching, What Do You Think About It?

I think it's crap. (But I also think letting kids use calculators in High School is crap... We didn't get to. We had to learn it all the long way.)

To be honest, the only thing that should have changed in the past 30 years is... the History books (and then, only to add what's happened recently... NOT to re-write history like they are doing in Texas).

[Deleted]

Calculators are tools. Tools we all carry in our pockets. It's crazy not to teach their correct application.