Learning to read analog clock in 3rd grade

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I agree -- the analog clock stuff in third grade math is not the same as the analog clock stuff in first grade math. The curriculum guides say that concepts in first grade are "time on analog and digital clocks: hours and half hours", and the concepts in third grade are "estimate and determine elapsed time using clocks and calendars."

But come on! So many of these precious snowflakes have already mastered elapsed time using clocks and calendars when they were in preschool! They completely have understood that concept before they even started school. 2.0 is holding them back! Pre 2.0 they would have been studying algebra by now! 2.0 sucks and it's only used so MCPS can dumb down our brilliant snowflakes and close the achievement gap!

No they haven't. They learned to mimic and memorize answers but the majority of the kids really don't master the concept adequately enough to relibably tell time on analog clock until 3rd grade. I recall learning this in 3rd grade way, way back in the day in my Catholic school.

[Anonymous]

How many preschoolers can tell you that between 9:15 and 12:00 is 2 hours and 45 mins?? That is calculating elapsed time...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:How many preschoolers can tell you that between 9:15 and 12:00 is 2 hours and 45 mins?? That is calculating elapsed time...

Calculating elapsed time has nothing to do with reading analog clock. It is a different skill.

[Anonymous]

Who cares.

I'd be more concerned with the fact that in third grade in European, Korean, Russian, chinese, and japanese schools they are learning, or shall we say "mastering", much higher level maths, grammar and sciences than MoCo ever will.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Who cares.

I'd be more concerned with the fact that in third grade in European, Korean, Russian, chinese, and japanese schools they are learning, or shall we say "mastering", much higher level maths, grammar and sciences than MoCo ever will.

PP, suppose you find some sample third-grade curricula from Europe (actually a continent, not a country), Korea, Russia, China, and Japan, and post them here? Then we can compare them to Montgomery County.

[Anonymous]

Pp. I think she is being sarcastic. Notice she keeps putting mastering in quotation marks. Yes, some preschoolers do read analog clocks. I know at least two of them. You got a problem with that?

[Anonymous]

Sadly, the US is 31st in Math and 23rd in Science. Our kids are behind other countries at every grade in math and science. We should care that they are not being given an opportunity to learn these subjects. In Montgomery County, we pay pretty high taxes for our school system and its a crime that they are offering such a poor math program.

[Anonymous]

DS is in first grade and has difficulty telling time. I'm sure a reminder in grade 2 and 3 will come in useful...
OTOH, he knows most of his multiplication tables.

I'm learning that no educational program is perfectly tailored to one's child. Unless you want to bring back 19th century tutors and governesses. Which for my child wouldn't be such a bad idea!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who cares.

I'd be more concerned with the fact that in third grade in European, Korean, Russian, chinese, and japanese schools they are learning, or shall we say "mastering", much higher level maths, grammar and sciences than MoCo ever will.

PP, suppose you find some sample third-grade curricula from Europe (actually a continent, not a country), Korea, Russia, China, and Japan, and post them here? Then we can compare them to Montgomery County.

Actually I'm British and have lived in Japan and France, thanks. And yes, most of Europe has a more rigorous and accelerated curricula than Core 2.0 in America. Especially the track countries like Germany where as a teenager you are tested and allowed access to certain professions' majors as a 15 yo. Don't get me started on cram school and testing in Korea or Japan. And as you know, in England if you do not test well after year 2 of "high school" you stop, no additional two years of A levels for you.

Anyhow, in my firsthand experience, it is amazing what children can learn and accomplish when challenged. That is the goal for all of my children: reach full potential. Not full proficiency as defined by my county that wants fed funds for 2.0 and higher average test scores to get it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Actually I'm British and have lived in Japan and France, thanks. And yes, most of Europe has a more rigorous and accelerated curricula than Core 2.0 in America. Especially the track countries like Germany where as a teenager you are tested and allowed access to certain professions' majors as a 15 yo. Don't get me started on cram school and testing in Korea or Japan. And as you know, in England if you do not test well after year 2 of "high school" you stop, no additional two years of A levels for you.

Anyhow, in my firsthand experience, it is amazing what children can learn and accomplish when challenged. That is the goal for all of my children: reach full potential. Not full proficiency as defined by my county that wants fed funds for 2.0 and higher average test scores to get it.

Terrific! So, do you have a reference to a typical curriculum for third-graders in Great Britain? Then we can compare.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Actually I'm British and have lived in Japan and France, thanks. And yes, most of Europe has a more rigorous and accelerated curricula than Core 2.0 in America. Especially the track countries like Germany where as a teenager you are tested and allowed access to certain professions' majors as a 15 yo. Don't get me started on cram school and testing in Korea or Japan. And as you know, in England if you do not test well after year 2 of "high school" you stop, no additional two years of A levels for you.

Anyhow, in my firsthand experience, it is amazing what children can learn and accomplish when challenged. That is the goal for all of my children: reach full potential. Not full proficiency as defined by my county that wants fed funds for 2.0 and higher average test scores to get it.

Terrific! So, do you have a reference to a typical curriculum for third-graders in Great Britain? Then we can compare.

You lost...

[Anonymous]

I lost what? Somebody provided a third grade curriculum in one of these other countries, and I missed it?

If everybody knows that (for example) most of Europe has more rigorous and accelerated curricula than 2.0, then it shouldn't be hard to find evidence for it. The MCPS elementary school curriculum is available on line. Presumably curricula for elementary schools (or their equivalents) in other countries are too.

[Anonymous]

I am not the pp who has experience in other countries. But I found this post by out in the left field that compares the popular Everyday math with Singapore math. I think this is a fairly representative post. The problems in these other countries are just a bit harder even if they are covering similar stuff. Advanced does not always mean faster. Understanding certainly does not mean explaining math using English.

Thursday, January 8, 2009
Math problems of the week: 3rd grade Everyday Math vs. Singapore Math
1. From the very end of the 3rd grade Everyday Math curriculum, Student Math Journal, volume 2, p. 316:

Solve:
2,384 + 1 = ________
2,384 + 10 = ________
2,384 + 100 = ________
2,384 + 1,000 = ________
2,384 + 10,000 = ________

2. From the very beginning of the 3rd grade Singapore Math curriculum, Primary Mathematics 3A, p. 15:

Fill in the blanks:
5409 + ________ = 5419
5409 + ________ = 6409
5409 + ________ = 5410
5409 + ________ = 5509
5409 + ________ = 7008
5409 + ________ = 7098
5409 + ________ = 7998
5409 + ________ = 6999

Posted by Katharine Beals at 11:02 AM 7 comments
Labels: math, Reform Math, Singapore Math

[Anonymous]

But MCPS is not using Everyday Math, which I am very grateful for. And the Singapore Primary Math books, which I am generally a fan of, are not necessarily what they actually use in Singapore, as I understand it.

[Anonymous]

2.0 is not Everyday Math, likely better, but it is still very much in the same reform math flavor.

Singapore Primary Math books are published by an American company Singapore Math, Inc. Their goal was to bring the singapore mathematics books into the American market. Modified but I assume still very similar to the books used in Singapore.
http://www.singaporemath.com/aboutus.asp
See their history here:
http://www.singaporemath.com/Singapore_Math_Story_s/10.htm