topic Re: Wait, what? in Community Chat

Wait, what?

MomOf4 — Sat, 19 Apr 2014 20:18:50 GMT

Did my thread on the new math get nasty or what?

Re: Wait, what?

Disneylandfan — Sat, 19 Apr 2014 20:19:44 GMT

Not that I saw.

Re: Wait, what?

kdgn — Sat, 19 Apr 2014 20:20:06 GMT

Not sure, I wrote a reply and Poof, it was gone. But I figured it wouldn't last so I made a copy of my post. Please indulge me:

The problem with kids and math is that they don't necessarily understand the concepts behind what they are doing. They can do the math but can't tell you why it works.

Like "borrowing". No one is borrowing a thing-it will never be returned. Kids do need to understand that there is more than one way to determine an answer. As the article stated, Common Core doesn't emphasize the method to be used.

Common Core Standards are nothing more than breaking down what students need to know in order to pass on to the next grade level. We were using these Standards in California over ten years ago in math and reading. I've seen the new Standards for kindergarten and not a lot has changed in the last ten years. What did change was the name given these standards.

Posters with children should really look up the Common Core Standards and see that they actually make a lot of sense. It becomes so much easier on students, especially those who may face a move in the elementary years. Military children, job relocation-those things affect the children in schools across the nation. Heck, they used to affect children between schools in a district or within districts in the same city!

That's all Common Core does. State exactly what a child should know by the end of the year. I think it's very reasonable and that the parents would welcome that information. If your child is in kindergarten and hasn't learned to read yet then you would know that either your child is behind or it hasn't been taught----and yes, kindergarteners read by the end of the year.

Re: Wait, what?

MomOf4 — Sat, 19 Apr 2014 20:23:20 GMT

Thanks for your post kdgn. I appreciate your explanation.

Re: Wait, what?

azterry! — Sat, 19 Apr 2014 20:23:57 GMT

I was surprised to see the thread disappear too.

Who went rogue?

Re: Wait, what?

MomOf4 — Sat, 19 Apr 2014 20:27:56 GMT

4/19/2014 azterry! said:
I was surprised to see the thread disappear too.

Who went rogue?

Nobody did Terry. Maybe webbie thought ""Common Core"" was controversial but it was an intelligent conversation and nobody was upset with anybody.

Re: Wait, what?

azterry! — Sat, 19 Apr 2014 20:33:42 GMT

On 4/19/2014 MomOf4 said:
4/19/2014 azterry! said:
I was surprised to see the thread disappear too.

Who went rogue?

Nobody did Terry. Maybe webbie thought "Common Core" was controversial but it was an intelligent conversation and nobody was upset with anybody.

I was just kidding, MomOf4.

I thought the entire discussion was really interesting.

Re: Wait, what?

kdgn — Sat, 19 Apr 2014 20:37:50 GMT

It really is important that parents understand what Common Core is and isn't. Common Core makes complete sense. Some of the problems that are rising are from misunderstandings and some of the available adopted texts. The texts are supposed to align with the Standards but how they get there can be questionable.

It's not like when whole language was taught and phonics went out the window. I taught whole language for all of two days in kindergarten. I spoke with my principal, told him this wasn't going to work, that I wished to incorporate phonics back into the program. I was told as long as I kept the teacher's manual on my desk, in plain sight, do what I thought was best. I did. It was soon shown that thinking exposure was going to teach, that if a child didn't grasp a concept in first grade they'd get it in second grade, didn't work. All that happened is that children in trouble got further behind.

Phonics is back, good and strong, as it should be. Other methods are included though because not all children are phonetic readers.

edited to change a word.

Re: Wait, what?

NoelSeven — Sat, 19 Apr 2014 20:40:28 GMT

That's just ridiculous, a thread about math taken down.

Intelligent comments and information on alternative math.

Re: Wait, what?

tansy — Sat, 19 Apr 2014 20:41:13 GMT

So bear with me, kdgn, the subtraction method shown in the original example is not connected to common core then?

Re: Wait, what?

MomOf4 — Sat, 19 Apr 2014 20:43:06 GMT

On 4/19/2014 azterry! said:
On 4/19/2014 MomOf4 said:
4/19/2014 azterry! said:
I was surprised to see the thread disappear too.

Who went rogue?

Nobody did Terry. Maybe webbie thought "Common Core" was controversial but it was an intelligent conversation and nobody was upset with anybody.

I was just kidding, MomOf4.

I thought the entire discussion was really interesting.

I know Terry. I was really trying to understand what the heck could have caused it to be poofed.

There wasn't one "edit" so it had to be a decision by webbie. Go figure!!

Re: Wait, what?

kdgn — Sat, 19 Apr 2014 20:44:39 GMT

Tansy, from the article I read it is one method used to show the kids the concept behind subtraction but it is not the only method. And it does not have to be the only method. The "old" way is also used.

I've been out of the loop where other grade levels are concerned and without speaking to a teacher at that grade level, or seeing the teacher's manual to determine what led up to that formula, I can only speculate. What's really funny is that a kid would probably be able to explain to an adult exactly what was going on. And that is the whole point....

Re: Wait, what?

NoelSeven — Sat, 19 Apr 2014 20:48:01 GMT

It bothers me that they said "Old Fashion".

Sure, it could be used correctly, but I'm so used to the "old fashioned" way.

Re: Wait, what?

dooBdoo — Sat, 19 Apr 2014 20:49:05 GMT

I didn't save my response on the other thread, but here's the math teacher's article again:

About That ‘Common Core’ Math Problem Making the Rounds on Facebook…

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2014/03/07/about-that-common-core-math-problem-making-the-rounds-on-facebook/

Re: Wait, what?

dooBdoo — Sat, 19 Apr 2014 20:50:35 GMT

kdgn, Excellent posts! Thanks for your clear explanations.

Re: Wait, what?

MomOf4 — Sat, 19 Apr 2014 20:50:45 GMT

Thanks again dooBdoo!!

Re: Wait, what?

kdgn — Sat, 19 Apr 2014 21:04:40 GMT

dooBdoo- I worked on those Standards as the kdgn rep for my district years and years ago. This is honestly nothing new if districts adopted them as they were supposed to do in my State. But I also know not all districts participated or got all teachers on board. I volunteered in a kindergarten classroom the first year after retirement. Different district, different city. The teacher I was assigned had previously taught first grade and had no idea what was expected of the kids. It didn't help that no classroom had a particular set of texts either. I asked her where her copy of the standards were. She had no idea what I was talking about. Her school/district was a little behind I'd say. I didn't last long....

You know, not only is it a boon for the parents (and students) to know exactly what they are expected to learn that year, it's a definite bonus for teachers who are teaching a grade level for the first time.

Re: Wait, what?

garmer — Sat, 19 Apr 2014 21:22:05 GMT

Does anybody know what the ""criss cross method"" of multiplication is? Can't find it anywhere. (third grade homework)

Re: Wait, what?

tansy — Sat, 19 Apr 2014 21:26:47 GMT

Try google, gamer. Several sites pop up, including videos.

Re: Wait, what?

Disneylandfan — Sat, 19 Apr 2014 21:37:43 GMT

The idea behind Common Core is that all states would have the same standards so when district/school comparisons are made they are based on the same criteria.

For example, in past years California and New York had some of the most difficult standards. So when test scores were compared to other states it wasn't an equal comparison.

Now theoretically all states would be teaching the same set of standards so everyone is on the same playing field.

As I stated on the other thread if students are learning what the representation of addition and subtraction mean then the way it's been done for forever is perfectly acceptable. The link that was posted focused on mental math,as stated on how to figure out change, which is different. Can mental math procedures be used on a written math problem, of course, but it usually isn't the most efficient way to arrive at the correct answer.