2.0 1st grade curriculum: Carbon Dioxide? Yes! Telling time? No!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's all those stupid worksheets. They need BOOKS that they can refer to, flip back to previous concepts and say, "Oh, NOW i get it!" Instead it's these absurd exercises with nothing of substance written on them to help them learn. It's just crazy.

They didn't used to have BOOKS, either. Except for maybe a math textbook, which wasn't bad but also wasn't good, and weighed a ton, and I don't think that there were many third-graders referring to them.

There are so many on-line resources that I can not agree on the need for a book. My kids have books (HS) and never use them. They like the variety of choices on line so they can find something that makes sense to them...and pre-2.0 there were no books either.

I believe that if they stick with this awful common core that most parents don't even understand, they would benefit from having math workbooks that progress thru the grade like it was planned to do so. I rather my kids have workbooks than the promethium boards.

I think it's a problem that most parents don't understand CC, not CC itself. I have no problem understanding CC. Some of the worksheets in the 2.0 curriculum are bad, however, but the math under 2.0 isn't hard to understand if you have any number sense. Whether 2.0 math is a good way to learn math is a different argument, but it's not hard to understand if you have any number sense. I guess the problem is that some parents don't have a good number sense. I think it's good 2.0 math is trying to fix that issue, whether this is exactly achieved or not remains to be seen. Anecdotally, both my kids under 2.0 math seem to have a good number sense so seems to be working ok for now.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's all those stupid worksheets. They need BOOKS that they can refer to, flip back to previous concepts and say, "Oh, NOW i get it!" Instead it's these absurd exercises with nothing of substance written on them to help them learn. It's just crazy.

They didn't used to have BOOKS, either. Except for maybe a math textbook, which wasn't bad but also wasn't good, and weighed a ton, and I don't think that there were many third-graders referring to them.

There are so many on-line resources that I can not agree on the need for a book. My kids have books (HS) and never use them. They like the variety of choices on line so they can find something that makes sense to them...and pre-2.0 there were no books either.

I believe that if they stick with this awful common core that most parents don't even understand, they would benefit from having math workbooks that progress thru the grade like it was planned to do so. I rather my kids have workbooks than the promethium boards.

Which "awful Common Core that most parents don't even understand"? The thinking here seems to be that if I didn't learn it that way in school, it must be awful.

Also, what is the difference between having worksheets that are collected in a workbook and worksheets that are loose?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's all those stupid worksheets. They need BOOKS that they can refer to, flip back to previous concepts and say, "Oh, NOW i get it!" Instead it's these absurd exercises with nothing of substance written on them to help them learn. It's just crazy.

They didn't used to have BOOKS, either. Except for maybe a math textbook, which wasn't bad but also wasn't good, and weighed a ton, and I don't think that there were many third-graders referring to them.

There are so many on-line resources that I can not agree on the need for a book. My kids have books (HS) and never use them. They like the variety of choices on line so they can find something that makes sense to them...and pre-2.0 there were no books either.

I believe that if they stick with this awful common core that most parents don't even understand, they would benefit from having math workbooks that progress thru the grade like it was planned to do so. I rather my kids have workbooks than the promethium boards.

I think it's a problem that most parents don't understand CC, not CC itself. I have no problem understanding CC. Some of the worksheets in the 2.0 curriculum are bad, however, but the math under 2.0 isn't hard to understand if you have any number sense. Whether 2.0 math is a good way to learn math is a different argument, but it's not hard to understand if you have any number sense. I guess the problem is that some parents don't have a good number sense. I think it's good 2.0 math is trying to fix that issue, whether this is exactly achieved or not remains to be seen. Anecdotally, both my kids under 2.0 math seem to have a good number sense so seems to be working ok for now.

I have a good number sense. The entire approach to math in CC, as far as I can tell, is learning how to do the math in their heads by chunks rather than doing it the exact way, with pencil and paper or a calculator. This to me is what you do AFTER you already know the exact science of math. Seems especially odd, since this is probably the first generation who will never ever be without a calculator. (They are in every phone.) They don't do any "real" math as far as I can see from the worksheets.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's all those stupid worksheets. They need BOOKS that they can refer to, flip back to previous concepts and say, "Oh, NOW i get it!" Instead it's these absurd exercises with nothing of substance written on them to help them learn. It's just crazy.

They didn't used to have BOOKS, either. Except for maybe a math textbook, which wasn't bad but also wasn't good, and weighed a ton, and I don't think that there were many third-graders referring to them.

There are so many on-line resources that I can not agree on the need for a book. My kids have books (HS) and never use them. They like the variety of choices on line so they can find something that makes sense to them...and pre-2.0 there were no books either.

I believe that if they stick with this awful common core that most parents don't even understand, they would benefit from having math workbooks that progress thru the grade like it was planned to do so. I rather my kids have workbooks than the promethium boards.

Which "awful Common Core that most parents don't even understand"? The thinking here seems to be that if I didn't learn it that way in school, it must be awful.

Also, what is the difference between having worksheets that are collected in a workbook and worksheets that are loose?

A book generally outlines the concepts behind the worksheets. There are none. A book builds one idea upon another. Worksheets are random. They may be taught in a linear fashion in school, but most people need to refer back to something, sometimes again and again, before they learn it. There is nothing to refer back to.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Tracking is done in many places all over the country. Sorry, it does not deny anyone an education. Many non-english speakers of asian decent are in the highest tracked classes. No one is segregating here so go away with your nonsense. All kids that go to public school get an education.

Yes, it does. This is an established fact. You are saying that something that is a fact is not a fact.

Also a fact: segregation.

And yes, all kids who go to public school get an education, insofar as they are going to school. But some get a good education, some get a bad education, and some get a very bad education.

If tracking is segregation than so is ability groups. So is getting pulled out for ESOL. Lady, you are nuts.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's all those stupid worksheets. They need BOOKS that they can refer to, flip back to previous concepts and say, "Oh, NOW i get it!" Instead it's these absurd exercises with nothing of substance written on them to help them learn. It's just crazy.

They didn't used to have BOOKS, either. Except for maybe a math textbook, which wasn't bad but also wasn't good, and weighed a ton, and I don't think that there were many third-graders referring to them.

There are so many on-line resources that I can not agree on the need for a book. My kids have books (HS) and never use them. They like the variety of choices on line so they can find something that makes sense to them...and pre-2.0 there were no books either.

I believe that if they stick with this awful common core that most parents don't even understand, they would benefit from having math workbooks that progress thru the grade like it was planned to do so. I rather my kids have workbooks than the promethium boards.

I think it's a problem that most parents don't understand CC, not CC itself. I have no problem understanding CC. Some of the worksheets in the 2.0 curriculum are bad, however, but the math under 2.0 isn't hard to understand if you have any number sense. Whether 2.0 math is a good way to learn math is a different argument, but it's not hard to understand if you have any number sense. I guess the problem is that some parents don't have a good number sense. I think it's good 2.0 math is trying to fix that issue, whether this is exactly achieved or not remains to be seen. Anecdotally, both my kids under 2.0 math seem to have a good number sense so seems to be working ok for now.

I have a good number sense. The entire approach to math in CC, as far as I can tell, is learning how to do the math in their heads by chunks rather than doing it the exact way, with pencil and paper or a calculator. This to me is what you do AFTER you already know the exact science of math. Seems especially odd, since this is probably the first generation who will never ever be without a calculator. (They are in every phone.) They don't do any "real" math as far as I can see from the worksheets.

What grade are we referring to? My 2nd grader never uses a calculator. My 5th grader in compacted math is allowed to use calculators sometimes, but not always. 5th grader had to work out the problems in earlier grades. There is a lot more "working out" the math problem now than when I was younger. They spend *a lot* of time working out the math problems in various ways rather than doing it all in their heads. I think this is what annoys some parents -- all the working out a problem in different ways. So, I don't know how your kids are learning 2.0 math, but mine seem to be doing a lot of pencil to paper math.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's all those stupid worksheets. They need BOOKS that they can refer to, flip back to previous concepts and say, "Oh, NOW i get it!" Instead it's these absurd exercises with nothing of substance written on them to help them learn. It's just crazy.

They didn't used to have BOOKS, either. Except for maybe a math textbook, which wasn't bad but also wasn't good, and weighed a ton, and I don't think that there were many third-graders referring to them.

There are so many on-line resources that I can not agree on the need for a book. My kids have books (HS) and never use them. They like the variety of choices on line so they can find something that makes sense to them...and pre-2.0 there were no books either.

I believe that if they stick with this awful common core that most parents don't even understand, they would benefit from having math workbooks that progress thru the grade like it was planned to do so. I rather my kids have workbooks than the promethium boards.

I think it's a problem that most parents don't understand CC, not CC itself. I have no problem understanding CC. Some of the worksheets in the 2.0 curriculum are bad, however, but the math under 2.0 isn't hard to understand if you have any number sense. Whether 2.0 math is a good way to learn math is a different argument, but it's not hard to understand if you have any number sense. I guess the problem is that some parents don't have a good number sense. I think it's good 2.0 math is trying to fix that issue, whether this is exactly achieved or not remains to be seen. Anecdotally, both my kids under 2.0 math seem to have a good number sense so seems to be working ok for now.

I have a good number sense. The entire approach to math in CC, as far as I can tell, is learning how to do the math in their heads by chunks rather than doing it the exact way, with pencil and paper or a calculator. This to me is what you do AFTER you already know the exact science of math. Seems especially odd, since this is probably the first generation who will never ever be without a calculator. (They are in every phone.) They don't do any "real" math as far as I can see from the worksheets.

This is a great point that I haven't thought of before. The new math is to help kids spatially understand numbers but many kid, especially boys, do not learn spatially.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Tracking is done in many places all over the country. Sorry, it does not deny anyone an education. Many non-english speakers of asian decent are in the highest tracked classes. No one is segregating here so go away with your nonsense. All kids that go to public school get an education.

Yes, it does. This is an established fact. You are saying that something that is a fact is not a fact.

Also a fact: segregation.

And yes, all kids who go to public school get an education, insofar as they are going to school. But some get a good education, some get a bad education, and some get a very bad education.

If tracking is segregation than so is ability groups. So is getting pulled out for ESOL. Lady, you are nuts.

It's nuts to say that public-school systems in the US are segregated?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's all those stupid worksheets. They need BOOKS that they can refer to, flip back to previous concepts and say, "Oh, NOW i get it!" Instead it's these absurd exercises with nothing of substance written on them to help them learn. It's just crazy.

They didn't used to have BOOKS, either. Except for maybe a math textbook, which wasn't bad but also wasn't good, and weighed a ton, and I don't think that there were many third-graders referring to them.

There are so many on-line resources that I can not agree on the need for a book. My kids have books (HS) and never use them. They like the variety of choices on line so they can find something that makes sense to them...and pre-2.0 there were no books either.

I believe that if they stick with this awful common core that most parents don't even understand, they would benefit from having math workbooks that progress thru the grade like it was planned to do so. I rather my kids have workbooks than the promethium boards.

I think it's a problem that most parents don't understand CC, not CC itself. I have no problem understanding CC. Some of the worksheets in the 2.0 curriculum are bad, however, but the math under 2.0 isn't hard to understand if you have any number sense. Whether 2.0 math is a good way to learn math is a different argument, but it's not hard to understand if you have any number sense. I guess the problem is that some parents don't have a good number sense. I think it's good 2.0 math is trying to fix that issue, whether this is exactly achieved or not remains to be seen. Anecdotally, both my kids under 2.0 math seem to have a good number sense so seems to be working ok for now.

I have a good number sense. The entire approach to math in CC, as far as I can tell, is learning how to do the math in their heads by chunks rather than doing it the exact way, with pencil and paper or a calculator. This to me is what you do AFTER you already know the exact science of math. Seems especially odd, since this is probably the first generation who will never ever be without a calculator. (They are in every phone.) They don't do any "real" math as far as I can see from the worksheets.

What grade are we referring to? My 2nd grader never uses a calculator. My 5th grader in compacted math is allowed to use calculators sometimes, but not always. 5th grader had to work out the problems in earlier grades. There is a lot more "working out" the math problem now than when I was younger. They spend *a lot* of time working out the math problems in various ways rather than doing it all in their heads. I think this is what annoys some parents -- all the working out a problem in different ways. So, I don't know how your kids are learning 2.0 math, but mine seem to be doing a lot of pencil to paper math.

I don't mean they use calculators in school -- I mean why bother teaching them various ways to work it out in their heads when they will have 24/7 access to a calculator? what a waste of time. Just teach them how to do the addition and subtraction and be done with it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's all those stupid worksheets. They need BOOKS that they can refer to, flip back to previous concepts and say, "Oh, NOW i get it!" Instead it's these absurd exercises with nothing of substance written on them to help them learn. It's just crazy.

They didn't used to have BOOKS, either. Except for maybe a math textbook, which wasn't bad but also wasn't good, and weighed a ton, and I don't think that there were many third-graders referring to them.

There are so many on-line resources that I can not agree on the need for a book. My kids have books (HS) and never use them. They like the variety of choices on line so they can find something that makes sense to them...and pre-2.0 there were no books either.

I believe that if they stick with this awful common core that most parents don't even understand, they would benefit from having math workbooks that progress thru the grade like it was planned to do so. I rather my kids have workbooks than the promethium boards.

I think it's a problem that most parents don't understand CC, not CC itself. I have no problem understanding CC. Some of the worksheets in the 2.0 curriculum are bad, however, but the math under 2.0 isn't hard to understand if you have any number sense. Whether 2.0 math is a good way to learn math is a different argument, but it's not hard to understand if you have any number sense. I guess the problem is that some parents don't have a good number sense. I think it's good 2.0 math is trying to fix that issue, whether this is exactly achieved or not remains to be seen. Anecdotally, both my kids under 2.0 math seem to have a good number sense so seems to be working ok for now.

I have a good number sense. The entire approach to math in CC, as far as I can tell, is learning how to do the math in their heads by chunks rather than doing it the exact way, with pencil and paper or a calculator. This to me is what you do AFTER you already know the exact science of math. Seems especially odd, since this is probably the first generation who will never ever be without a calculator. (They are in every phone.) They don't do any "real" math as far as I can see from the worksheets.

This is a great point that I haven't thought of before. The new math is to help kids spatially understand numbers but many kid, especially boys, do not learn spatially.

I don't know where you got either of these ideas from -- either that the purpose of learning to do a math problem several different ways is to help kids spatially understand numbers, or that boys are less good at spatial thinking than girls.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Tracking is done in many places all over the country. Sorry, it does not deny anyone an education. Many non-english speakers of asian decent are in the highest tracked classes. No one is segregating here so go away with your nonsense. All kids that go to public school get an education.

Yes, it does. This is an established fact. You are saying that something that is a fact is not a fact.

Also a fact: segregation.

And yes, all kids who go to public school get an education, insofar as they are going to school. But some get a good education, some get a bad education, and some get a very bad education.

If tracking is segregation than so is ability groups. So is getting pulled out for ESOL. Lady, you are nuts.

+1

She is trying to prove her opinion as fact. Kids are currently put in groups based on levels. If anything, the kids struggling need more than the quick 10 minute lesson.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

I don't mean they use calculators in school -- I mean why bother teaching them various ways to work it out in their heads when they will have 24/7 access to a calculator? what a waste of time. Just teach them how to do the addition and subtraction and be done with it.

Why? Because the purpose of math education is to teach kids to understand math.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Tracking is done in many places all over the country. Sorry, it does not deny anyone an education. Many non-english speakers of asian decent are in the highest tracked classes. No one is segregating here so go away with your nonsense. All kids that go to public school get an education.

Yes, it does. This is an established fact. You are saying that something that is a fact is not a fact.

Also a fact: segregation.

And yes, all kids who go to public school get an education, insofar as they are going to school. But some get a good education, some get a bad education, and some get a very bad education.

If tracking is segregation than so is ability groups. So is getting pulled out for ESOL. Lady, you are nuts.

+1

She is trying to prove her opinion as fact. Kids are currently put in groups based on levels. If anything, the kids struggling need more than the quick 10 minute lesson.

There is an important distinction between within-class ability grouping with frequent reassessment, on the one hand, and tracking, on the other. A lot of people who were in the top track are nostalgic for the days of tracking.

What we have now in MCPS is within-class ability grouping, and DCUM purely hates it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
I don't mean they use calculators in school -- I mean why bother teaching them various ways to work it out in their heads when they will have 24/7 access to a calculator? what a waste of time. Just teach them how to do the addition and subtraction and be done with it.

Oh, lord, this is why americans are terrible at math. This is why so many people don't have a good number sense. Kids need a firm foundation in math, play with numbers to understand the different ways to add/subtract. I'm sooooo glad kids are learning this in the early years.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I don't mean they use calculators in school -- I mean why bother teaching them various ways to work it out in their heads when they will have 24/7 access to a calculator? what a waste of time. Just teach them how to do the addition and subtraction and be done with it.

Why? Because the purpose of math education is to teach kids to understand math.

I thought the purpose of it was to teach them to do math.....