i haven't really figured out what's so bad about that either, except that it's different and everyone is terrified of change. i'll admit i don't know exactly how common core works, but i've seen basic descriptions and it seems like it's pretty much putting onto paper how you do math in your head anyway, which seems like a logical way to teach it as far as i can tell.
Just watched a video on it and it makes sense. My problem with it is that one of the examples I saw was to show the math on how you came up with the answer. For you maybe it's adding 10 to the first number. For me maybe it's adding to the number till it equals 10. I have no problem with teaching the formula. The problem I have is forcing kids to do it one way and one way only.
The other problem is when a kid has a problem the parent can't help because they don't know the common core way...maybe that was the plan all along.
i agree with that, but then that's how it was when we were in school too, it was just a different one and only way. i remember one particular time my math teacher announced in front of the whole class that i had cheated on a test because i didn't show my work and it was impossible to do that math in my head, even though i had just done all that math in my head, using basically common core methods.
I had the same problem earlier in school with long division. The way they wanted me to walk through the problem, in slow motion, was a way to find the answer, but it wasn't the only way. I memorized a list of decimal equivalents (Multiply by 0.5 = dividing by 2. by 0.25= dividing by 4, etc.) to get through division problems faster. I admit, I hated division, which is probably why I developed a work-around. But it the long run it just made me look stupid to the teachers, but not to anyone else. So I learned it their way and they got off my back. Imagine what it's like to have a teacher cram shit you know isn't true at you. I graduated in the late 70s and discovered all the money for college went to the commune my mother was trying to establish. So I joined the Navy where instructors taught at about the 8th grade level, easily putting half the class to sleep. Once again I figured a faster way through Boolean and pissed off the instructor who sent me to night study (pitiful Navy punishment where you get 4 more hours of school for as long as you seem to need it). Since this kind of thing cut into my toking time, I turned it around quickly. Then came Reagan!
I don't believe Common Core mandates instructional techniques, just goals. Math can be taught anyway you want as long as you're addressing the particular math goal. For example, here is one math goal for grade 4: This is a rectangular array: This is a rectangulat model:
I am drinking at the moment so please excuse any oversights but I distinctly remember a common core question which asked to show the work and the answer came from adding a 10 to the first number. Why a 10 is all I could think at the time. I mean basic math tells us just start at the right. (Like I said I am not against teaching this way.. just against only teaching this way)
I know what you're talking about. I'm not math major so I don't know if that method of teaching is required by Common Core.
Was it where you multiply everything by 10 to make the numbers a little neater? I actually like that method, my OCD kicks in when math is too messy
Here's what I found. The other method "fuzzy math" is used to teach students why the above method works. It's called Everyday Math and comes form the University of Chicago. Remember Common Core is a set of standards or goals, local school districts pick the methodology used to reach those goals through their curriculum. Is Everyday Math the Worse Math Program Ever?
No it was just to make the first number neater then it was subtracted at the end. I apologize for not having the example handy. Never knew there would be a hipforums thread on the subject. In unrelated but relatable stories. A new guy was weighing a chemical to put in a mix. It needed 1.28 pounds. He put in 454 grams and then asked if I knew how much more was needed. His math figured put in a pound first then figure out the .28 later. If he wasn't a new guy he would know to just multiply 454 times 1.28. But his common core way failed him.
Just something I just came across in the local newspaper regarding schools. The district I now reside in is hiring two armed security guards. Starting pay, $43.00 an hour or about $130,000 a year. They can't arrest anyone and only work during school hours and events. Average teacher salary in the same district, $43,000 a year. That's average not starting.
It would save the school accounts if the PTA/O would assign volunteer parents and teachers to provide security according to a schedule. It seems to me that people who have a child in a school can be motivated by a structured, systematic approach. For the kids this could be a way to hang on to a few more years of childhood. I'm speaking across the surface with this and trying to consider it without the usual political/emotional "my point is more relevant than your point" kind of discussion. I'm Quixotic for the moment, perhaps it's the buds (plural)!
My 11 year old nephew has had issues with some of the Common Core math questions. He's excellent at math mind you, both of his parents have masters degrees in math, but he's autistic and one of the things he hates is approximating anything. One of the questions he was asked was something like 'name a number that is close to 100' and his dad had a hell of a time trying to explain what the question even meant. My brother said he finally answered '99.999', but he was gritting his teeth while he answered.
i remember i argue with the maths teacher one day he asks me, jocelyn, if there's a 3/10 chance of rain today, what's the percentage? 50% No, he says Yeah it is, it either does, or it doesn't. He wasn't impressed with me.
I write for a living and yet, my penmanship is the worst. Sometimes I can't even read my own notes which is maddening. Part of the problem was learning shorthand, I still throw code into my regular scribbling. As for script/cursive, it's actually easier on your hands that writing in print. But not for everybody. My father was a draftsman and wrote exclusively in print, every letter looked exactly the same (these days he'd be accused of "yelling" by some turds for writing in all caps). Constantly lifting the pen and pressing it back down puts stress on the fingers and wrist that adds up. I worked in a restaurant in high school and my manager had the most amazing handwriting I've ever seen. It was as if she spent her evenings writing wedding invitations by hand. It's an art form that regular people can aspire to. If they desire. What I wonder is how employers will deal with folks who print their signature and can't write in cursive at all. I just don't see people making executive careers without it. But that's just my opinion on the prejudices of some employers. I'm sure Home Depot and Chik Fil A don't give a flying crap about cursive.
I'm impressed! The answer is absolutely correct in terms of pure logic. Even Schrodinger would agree.