"We need to go back to direct instruction"

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Because then school would need to find teachers that can teach. Sure a number of good teachers exist but most of them coming out of school and heading into teaching are just glorified day care professionals.

This is not the issue stop speaking like you're an expert. We have enough "expert" parents. This is a county/state created issue. Do your research.

[Anonymous]

It's rare that a student doesn't need direct instruction. One year DD had an awful math teacher and DD liked math. But DD previously had many good math teachers, who taught. I imagine that is why DD recognized there was a problem. DD had to teach herself. She stayed one chapter ahead. Any learning in the classroom was an unexpected bonus. DD was extremely conscientious, an outliner. Schools see success, in this case a student they had not identified as gifted and don't recognize how rare it is.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Teachers don’t teach this way by their choice. We have to do what our admin wants. If they want a flipped classroom, that’s what we have to do. I’ve gotten marked down on observations because I talked too much. I’ve always followed I do, we do, you do but some admin like to latch onto whatever fad comes along.

Agree, to many administrators chasing the next great fad in education is a large part of the problem.

[Anonymous]

Yes. We do.

[Anonymous]

Elementary teacher here. I have had both strong and weak kids in math class. The current trend to have kids spend so much time exploring alternate ways of solving problems is crazy. They need to memorize their times tables once they understand how multiplication works, not constantly draw six groups of eight objects. Kids with LD need much direct instruction while the advanced kids need projects. It’s hard to do all at once, and now teachers all have to teach the same way at the same time, without textbooks or workbooks.

In the old days, I’d have a group lesson, then the advanced kids would do the problems or activities in the book, including the challenge stuff, and the other kids would work in small groups or independently on the basic problems. It was quiet and kids could concentrate. This math workshop model has kids constantly moving and talking and getting on and off computers, all of which is so distracting.

Please contact your school board and ask for textbooks.

My own child in high school had another parent who was a high school math teacher, and trying to help her without a textbook was so hard, because my child was not strong in math and could not explain what strategy she was supposed to use.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Elementary teacher here. I have had both strong and weak kids in math class. The current trend to have kids spend so much time exploring alternate ways of solving problems is crazy. They need to memorize their times tables once they understand how multiplication works, not constantly draw six groups of eight objects. Kids with LD need much direct instruction while the advanced kids need projects. It’s hard to do all at once, and now teachers all have to teach the same way at the same time, without textbooks or workbooks.

In the old days, I’d have a group lesson, then the advanced kids would do the problems or activities in the book, including the challenge stuff, and the other kids would work in small groups or independently on the basic problems. It was quiet and kids could concentrate. This math workshop model has kids constantly moving and talking and getting on and off computers, all of which is so distracting.

Please contact your school board and ask for textbooks.

My own child in high school had another parent who was a high school math teacher, and trying to help her without a textbook was so hard, because my child was not strong in math and could not explain what strategy she was supposed to use.

I agree with you. And modern textbooks when they exist are often all chopped up to to tie to the Internet or to allow teachers to hop around.

When my child was struggling in 7th grade Spanish, even sitting with the textbook didn't allow me to review his curriculum. He had covered random half page units scattered throughout the first 100 pages of the text. I had him do ixl.com Spanish for 6 hours and a bit of Duolingo.

In 6 hours of self-study, he was able to go from a C-minus/failing student to a B+ student. That was remediation for 4.5 months of class learning. I was appalled that it took so little time and also that I couldn't use his textbook to accomplish it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Because then school would need to find teachers that can teach. Sure a number of good teachers exist but most of them coming out of school and heading into teaching are just glorified day care professionals.

This is not the issue stop speaking like you're an expert. We have enough "expert" parents. This is a county/state created issue. Do your research.

Sorry to have triggered you but what passes for teaching in many, but not all, US school systems is a warm body serving as a guide/proctor for kids using the latest fad software chosen by school administrators looking for a job down the line with an educational services company.

[Anonymous]

This is why we switched to a Catholic K-8 and I love it so much.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Teachers don’t teach this way by their choice. We have to do what our admin wants. If they want a flipped classroom, that’s what we have to do. I’ve gotten marked down on observations because I talked too much. I’ve always followed I do, we do, you do but some admin like to latch onto whatever fad comes along.

Agree, to many administrators chasing the next great fad in education is a large part of the problem.

+1
-victim of “new math” curriculum

[Anonymous]

It took thousands of years of inquiry by millions of people, including the most brilliant minds ever to walk the earth, to develop mathematics, but we expect an average child to replicate that achievement. The idea is not only inefficient, it’s preposterous.

Students need direct instruction from people who have already mastered the content and have a deep understanding of how the particular concept fits into the broader field in general. They need someone who can use their current knowledge level to help them understand the new topic and make sure it’ll provide the foundation they need for future study.

Direct instruction doesn’t simply mean students are passively sitting in their desk while being lectured to. Direct instruction can involve any number of activities that a teacher uses to generate interest and/or reinforce learning. These activities, however, become more effective when the students understand what is going on and aren’t just flailing. For example, labs are an integral component of a Chemistry class. However, the labs are done after the underlying concept has been taught, and with specific instructions. No Chem teacher would hand their students a tray of chemicals, tell them to play around with them to see what happens, and expect they would be able to rediscover whatever concept the experiment was supposed to illustrate.

Too much of modern education is spent on “teaching students how to think” without giving them the content they need to have something to think about. They need facts (yes - this may mean some rote memorization) and skills. Those provide the foundation, framework, and toolset that will enable them to make independent inquiries. In the meantime, let’s lift them to stand on the shoulders of giants rather than having them fumble and flounder in the dark.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It took thousands of years of inquiry by millions of people, including the most brilliant minds ever to walk the earth, to develop mathematics, but we expect an average child to replicate that achievement. The idea is not only inefficient, it’s preposterous.

Students need direct instruction from people who have already mastered the content and have a deep understanding of how the particular concept fits into the broader field in general. They need someone who can use their current knowledge level to help them understand the new topic and make sure it’ll provide the foundation they need for future study.

Direct instruction doesn’t simply mean students are passively sitting in their desk while being lectured to. Direct instruction can involve any number of activities that a teacher uses to generate interest and/or reinforce learning. These activities, however, become more effective when the students understand what is going on and aren’t just flailing. For example, labs are an integral component of a Chemistry class. However, the labs are done after the underlying concept has been taught, and with specific instructions. No Chem teacher would hand their students a tray of chemicals, tell them to play around with them to see what happens, and expect they would be able to rediscover whatever concept the experiment was supposed to illustrate.

Too much of modern education is spent on “teaching students how to think” without giving them the content they need to have something to think about. They need facts (yes - this may mean some rote memorization) and skills. Those provide the foundation, framework, and toolset that will enable them to make independent inquiries. In the meantime, let’s lift them to stand on the shoulders of giants rather than having them fumble and flounder in the dark.

Yes! Yes! A thousand times yes!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Because then school would need to find teachers that can teach. Sure a number of good teachers exist but most of them coming out of school and heading into teaching are just glorified day care professionals.

This is not the issue stop speaking like you're an expert. We have enough "expert" parents. This is a county/state created issue. Do your research.

Sorry to have triggered you but what passes for teaching in many, but not all, US school systems is a warm body serving as a guide/proctor for kids using the latest fad software chosen by school administrators looking for a job down the line with an educational services company.

Yup....the good teachers are burnt out. Enjoy the shortage now it's warm body "trainees". Sorry the truth triggers you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It took thousands of years of inquiry by millions of people, including the most brilliant minds ever to walk the earth, to develop mathematics, but we expect an average child to replicate that achievement. The idea is not only inefficient, it’s preposterous.

Students need direct instruction from people who have already mastered the content and have a deep understanding of how the particular concept fits into the broader field in general. They need someone who can use their current knowledge level to help them understand the new topic and make sure it’ll provide the foundation they need for future study.

Direct instruction doesn’t simply mean students are passively sitting in their desk while being lectured to. Direct instruction can involve any number of activities that a teacher uses to generate interest and/or reinforce learning. These activities, however, become more effective when the students understand what is going on and aren’t just flailing. For example, labs are an integral component of a Chemistry class. However, the labs are done after the underlying concept has been taught, and with specific instructions. No Chem teacher would hand their students a tray of chemicals, tell them to play around with them to see what happens, and expect they would be able to rediscover whatever concept the experiment was supposed to illustrate.

Too much of modern education is spent on “teaching students how to think” without giving them the content they need to have something to think about. They need facts (yes - this may mean some rote memorization) and skills. Those provide the foundation, framework, and toolset that will enable them to make independent inquiries. In the meantime, let’s lift them to stand on the shoulders of giants rather than having them fumble and flounder in the dark.

Yes! Yes! A thousand times yes!

Ditto. Agree completely.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This is why we switched to a Catholic K-8 and I love it so much.

+1

It also helps a lot that most Catholic schools (a) do not chase educational fads and also (b) use classic paper textbooks.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Elementary teacher here. I have had both strong and weak kids in math class. The current trend to have kids spend so much time exploring alternate ways of solving problems is crazy. They need to memorize their times tables once they understand how multiplication works, not constantly draw six groups of eight objects. Kids with LD need much direct instruction while the advanced kids need projects. It’s hard to do all at once, and now teachers all have to teach the same way at the same time, without textbooks or workbooks.

In the old days, I’d have a group lesson, then the advanced kids would do the problems or activities in the book, including the challenge stuff, and the other kids would work in small groups or independently on the basic problems. It was quiet and kids could concentrate. This math workshop model has kids constantly moving and talking and getting on and off computers, all of which is so distracting.

Please contact your school board and ask for textbooks.

My own child in high school had another parent who was a high school math teacher, and trying to help her without a textbook was so hard, because my child was not strong in math and could not explain what strategy she was supposed to use.

+1 on the workshop model. In general, I think some classrooms actually give kids too much movement and breaks to the point where they can never actually settle in for learning. Most kids need calm and quiet to actually work and we aren’t giving that to them.