FYI: Indiana withdrawing from Common Core standards

[Anonymous]

Indiana isn't exactly a best practices leader in the field of education, so this doesn't concern me.

What does concern me is that the Tea Party fringe seems to be using the education of our children now as a pawn in their desperate bid for relevance. After realizing they'd lost the fight on the Affordable Care Act, some of the Tea Party leadership began fixating on Common Core, believing it has something to do with Obama (it does not). CC is actually a genuinely grassroots and nonpartisan effort involving governors of both parties in multiple states.

I'm more embarrassed by my liberal friends who have jumped on the bandwagon, ironically without giving it very much critical thought. They're fixating on the wrong things like this idiotic woman who sent that letter to "Jack" and the equally stupid woman who testified, tearfully, before the Arkansas Board of Education, and are, frankly, just scared because kids aren't being taught things the same way they were. Admittedly, this makes it a little harder to help with homework, but it doesn't make the pedagogy unsound.

I'm so over the rose-colored images of our childhoods in the 70s and 80s. Supposedly we had better educations, all played in the streets unsupervised. What next: Better drugs? Things were not better then. They were just different. People really need to stop being so afraid of things they do not understand like Common Core, and be willing to know what they don't know.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
Dear Jack,

What you did right was subtract the hundreds on the number line. What you did wrong was subtract seven tens instead of one ten and six ones. To fix your mistake, you should subtract one ten and six ones.

Sincerely,

Student

I agree that is what "Jack" was supposed to do. I saw this worksheet on Facebook last week and figured it out.

However, the number line doesn't seem to match the the one 10 and 6 ones approach after the mark for 127. There are only 6 "tick marks" total (I assume they're supposed to represent 117, 116, 115, 114, 113, 112). So why does it stop at 112? Yet the last mark is labeled 121 - not the correct answer either. I am clueless on what that means. It looks like the student subtracted 20 and then five 10s.

It'd be nice to see an original version of this problem and not whatever the father might have filled in.

My child is in 4th grade and the common core math is making more sense this year than in past years. I also think doing subtraction of 3-digit numbers on a number line is silly.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Dear Jack,

What you did right was subtract the hundreds on the number line. What you did wrong was subtract seven tens instead of one ten and six ones. To fix your mistake, you should subtract one ten and six ones.

Sincerely,

Student

I agree that is what "Jack" was supposed to do. I saw this worksheet on Facebook last week and figured it out.

However, the number line doesn't seem to match the the one 10 and 6 ones approach after the mark for 127. There are only 6 "tick marks" total (I assume they're supposed to represent 117, 116, 115, 114, 113, 112). So why does it stop at 112? Yet the last mark is labeled 121 - not the correct answer either. I am clueless on what that means. It looks like the student subtracted 20 and then five 10s.

It'd be nice to see an original version of this problem and not whatever the father might have filled in.

My child is in 4th grade and the common core math is making more sense this year than in past years. I also think doing subtraction of 3-digit numbers on a number line is silly.

See 22:39. W/o the scribbling from the parent it appears its just a case of forgetting to subtract the 10s.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
My child is in 4th grade and the common core math is making more sense this year than in past years. I also think doing subtraction of 3-digit numbers on a number line is silly.

I agree that doing subtraction of 3-digit numbers on a number line is silly. But the worksheet isn't asking you to do that. The worksheet is asking you to see what is wrong about the subtraction problem on the number line on the worksheet -- basically, to explain that when you're subtracting a 3-digit number, you're subtracting hundreds + tens + ones.

(I also agree that it would be helpful to see the original worksheet, before the electrical engineer who doesn't understand number lines or place value wrote on it.)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Dear Jack,

What you did right was subtract the hundreds on the number line. What you did wrong was subtract seven tens instead of one ten and six ones. To fix your mistake, you should subtract one ten and six ones.

Sincerely,

Student

I agree that is what "Jack" was supposed to do. I saw this worksheet on Facebook last week and figured it out.

However, the number line doesn't seem to match the the one 10 and 6 ones approach after the mark for 127. There are only 6 "tick marks" total (I assume they're supposed to represent 117, 116, 115, 114, 113, 112). So why does it stop at 112? Yet the last mark is labeled 121 - not the correct answer either. I am clueless on what that means. It looks like the student subtracted 20 and then five 10s.

It'd be nice to see an original version of this problem and not whatever the father might have filled in.

My child is in 4th grade and the common core math is making more sense this year than in past years. I also think doing subtraction of 3-digit numbers on a number line is silly.

See 22:39. W/o the scribbling from the parent it appears its just a case of forgetting to subtract the 10s.

Thanks.

The parent's handwriting (of numbers) in the paragraph and to the side "427-316=111" doesn't match the scribbling under the number line. Maybe the parent was just being sloppy at the number line, but I really don't know if the parent knows how to use a number line. We don't have a lot of numbers to compare between the 2 sources (just 1, 6, 7).

I don't think the student did the subtracting of 20 and then subtracting of the five 10s. The handwriting doesn't look typical of most 2nd or 3rd graders - or at least, not the ones I know!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Indiana isn't exactly a best practices leader in the field of education, so this doesn't concern me.

What does concern me is that the Tea Party fringe seems to be using the education of our children now as a pawn in their desperate bid for relevance. After realizing they'd lost the fight on the Affordable Care Act, some of the Tea Party leadership began fixating on Common Core, believing it has something to do with Obama (it does not). CC is actually a genuinely grassroots and nonpartisan effort involving governors of both parties in multiple states.

I'm more embarrassed by my liberal friends who have jumped on the bandwagon, ironically without giving it very much critical thought. They're fixating on the wrong things like this idiotic woman who sent that letter to "Jack" and the equally stupid woman who testified, tearfully, before the Arkansas Board of Education, and are, frankly, just scared because kids aren't being taught things the same way they were. Admittedly, this makes it a little harder to help with homework, but it doesn't make the pedagogy unsound.

I'm so over the rose-colored images of our childhoods in the 70s and 80s. Supposedly we had better educations, all played in the streets unsupervised. What next: Better drugs? Things were not better then. They were just different. People really need to stop being so afraid of things they do not understand like Common Core, and be willing to know what they don't know.

I'm one of those liberal parents, and I've done my homework. Common Core is terrible. It's junk. I see this every day with my son, who begs not to go to school each day. He doesn't understand the math, we don't understand the math, and it's geared for a highly verbal child, and our son has a language disability.

There's also no proof that making math ridiculously hard in K through 3 will lead to better math students in the future. As in NONE. Or that forcing kids to read on grade level - when their actual level is several grades lower -- will help them understand and read better.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
My child is in 4th grade and the common core math is making more sense this year than in past years. I also think doing subtraction of 3-digit numbers on a number line is silly.

I agree that doing subtraction of 3-digit numbers on a number line is silly. But the worksheet isn't asking you to do that. The worksheet is asking you to see what is wrong about the subtraction problem on the number line on the worksheet -- basically, to explain that when you're subtracting a 3-digit number, you're subtracting hundreds + tens + ones.

(I also agree that it would be helpful to see the original worksheet, before the electrical engineer who doesn't understand number lines or place value wrote on it.)

Maybe this kind of number lines should not at all exist for 3 digit computations. Personally, I think that this is the key point.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
My child is in 4th grade and the common core math is making more sense this year than in past years. I also think doing subtraction of 3-digit numbers on a number line is silly.

I agree that doing subtraction of 3-digit numbers on a number line is silly. But the worksheet isn't asking you to do that. The worksheet is asking you to see what is wrong about the subtraction problem on the number line on the worksheet -- basically, to explain that when you're subtracting a 3-digit number, you're subtracting hundreds + tens + ones.

(I also agree that it would be helpful to see the original worksheet, before the electrical engineer who doesn't understand number lines or place value wrote on it.)

Maybe this kind of number lines should not at all exist for 3 digit computations. Personally, I think that this is the key point.

I don't think that makes sense. The number line exists, regardless of how many digits you're doing computations with. It's certainly cumbersome to do three-digit computations with number lines, but that is different.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm one of those liberal parents, and I've done my homework. Common Core is terrible. It's junk. I see this every day with my son, who begs not to go to school each day. He doesn't understand the math, we don't understand the math, and it's geared for a highly verbal child, and our son has a language disability.

There's also no proof that making math ridiculously hard in K through 3 will lead to better math students in the future. As in NONE. Or that forcing kids to read on grade level - when their actual level is several grades lower -- will help them understand and read better.

PP, if you have done your homework, then you know that, while some people (like you) believe that the Common Core standards in K-3 are bad because they're too hard, other people believe that the Common Core standards are bad because they're too easy. What would you say to those people?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:CONMON CORE IS A SET OF STANDARDS IT IS NOT A CURRICULUM !!!!!!!![/quote


But logically, if the school doesn't teach something that's in the common core, then the curriculum must change, or the children will fail the standardized tests.
Drove me crazy when the principle told me that the curriculum wasn't changing.
I' m not pro or anti common core, I think schools should always be changing or moderating. But don't tell me things that just aren't true. Why are you hiding the truth?
Like I could keep my doctor...

[Anonymous]

What school system are you in, where a principal told you that the curriculum isn't changing?

[Anonymous]

Indiana can't figure out daylight savings too so this move is quite in line with their MO.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Indiana can't figure out daylight savings too so this move is quite in line with their MO.

Indiana is just a couple of miles from the Museum of Creation in Petersburg, KY, so there's also that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wow - if that problem on the top of the paper is comon core - we are all in trouble - what the hell is that?

The concept of the question doesn't bother me. It's trying to get the kid to understand that subtracting 316 is the same as subtracting 300, then 10 and then 6. It's trying to teach number sense. Kids can learn to grind through algorithms w/o really understanding what they're doing. This problem clearly shows that the kid forgot to subtract at the 10s place. Doesn't surprise me that an engineer is complaining; all they want is their formulas to crunch.

yes - agree 100%

How many of us simply learned "how to" without understanding the process behind it?

It's really pathetic to read about "educated" parents with no number sense.

And yes, they are STANDARDS. The standards are then turned into instructional frameworks. The frameworks are umbrellas for the curriculum guides, which vary from state to state and from county to county.

20:09, you're an idiot.

Thanks

[Anonymous]

Dear Jack,

If you had just listened to your parents instead of to your teachers you would have known to secretly calculate the answer the sane way, and only afterwards do the goofy common-core hoop-jumping, so you can verify that the answers match.

Sincerely,
Your Dad