ST Math

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes - ST math will adjust. It was also written by people who have a learning disability and it was made to support all learners which is why there are no written directions.

LOL. That tells me everything I need to know about this program, and why my kid kept saying it's stupid, easy, and boring.

I have one kid with learning disabilities and one that’s a genius like your little snowflake and if the level is adjusted correctly, it can be helpful for both.

Not sure why you're getting hurt here, I truly think it explains a lot. I have absolutely nothing against SN, or any kid with any kind of disability. I'm just pointing out the stupidity of forcing this program down everyone's throat, especially in an AAP class, where I'm seeing more than half of the kids bored to tears (so definitely not just my kid). Cmon FCPS... use the right tool for the job! This is fine for some kids, but it clearly isn't going to work for others. In any case, now I definitely have no say when my kid is telling the truth. At least now at home he can read on the computer or do something productive while he's waiting for the teacher to finish explaining how to click and drag pictures to make place values. And the teacher can't see and scold them because they're not "paying attention" to the nonsense.

COVID is definitely exposing the internals of what kind of learning is taking place in school, and it's definitely sad. So far, it's about 1 hour worth of real honest learning, and the rest a bunch of fluff, repetition, and following directions. I don't think this will change too much for the rest of the year, and I don't think this would have been much different even in a live class. Even in an AAP class, which was also sadly predictable.

DP. You're not understanding. It was written by someone with dyslexia who wrote a math focused math app, not a writing focused math app.

That's not bad for any kids, AAP or not.

Of course I get that. It's just that it really doesn't really cater to all the kids. It just can't, by design. And the data and numerous posts here show that it is painful and largely a waste of time. There are many other programs, including lots of free ones such as KA that are perfectly fine and straightforward. But as usual, it's another misguided attempt by FCPS to spend $$ to farm math learning away from the teachers hands and into the corporations pockets.

No, people are complaining because some teachers have not yet assigned units or set the correct grade. It's working for those students who have it set properly. It teaches spatial perception, which some children have an easier time with (one of my kids) and some kids struggle with (another of my kids).

Latching on to the "it's designed for SN kids" is insulting and inaccurate.

Exactly, it is designed by someone with a learning disability, but the system is for ALL students, to help ALL students practice/learn using a new methodology.

but the only research they have published allegedly shows it helping with kids with SNs. I haven't seen any actual research on how it helps grade level or advanced kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Its poorly designed. A so-called adaptive program wouldn't keep kids clicking endlessly and correctly on the same types of problems. A 6th grader should be flying thru the first grade levels. They aren't.

If he's not progressing past first grade then he is not trying to think critically on how to solve the problem - case closed.

Nope. Wrong. You don't know what you are talking about. My fourth grader was getting every Q right and he still had to work thru each module starting in first grade. He is still on first grade level material after ten hours of work.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Its poorly designed. A so-called adaptive program wouldn't keep kids clicking endlessly and correctly on the same types of problems. A 6th grader should be flying thru the first grade levels. They aren't.

If he's not progressing past first grade then he is not trying to think critically on how to solve the problem - case closed.

Have you not read the whole thread? Even if the kids get the questions right, they don't advance to more difficult material. The program is based on insane levels of repetition.

[Anonymous]

When will all the petal counting go away?? My kid did about 100 today without almost no mistakes and they're bored to tears. I was watching and can confirm I'm seriously concerned this is going to kill their love for math, and I'm about to stop it unless there's a way to move to the next level. This is absolutely ridiculous, especially in a 3rd grade AAP class!

Can someone confirm if the teachers can actually change the level? I assume it HAS to be the case, but why are they making them go through this every week? This program is infinitely worse than Dreambox, and it's a shame watching my kid not learning any math in their AAP class. They did this type of counting two years ago in Dreambox, for god's sake!

[Anonymous]

Read the thread. My child did petals or some version of petals for FIVE HOURS and then I told him, no more ST Math this year. He's in 6th grade. So its at least six hours, with them getting everything right.

[Anonymous]

I've followed this thread put of curiosity and I have an actual 1st grader. DC's ST math is finding or estimating points on a number line. I don't recall seeing any petal stuff. Is my kid stuck on kindergarten level? I do see the insane repetition and my kid doesn't seem to get any real knowledge out of it but likes the clicking so I allow 15 min or less if other work (including our own actual math workbooks) are done, so I'd say maybe 2 hrs total done so far. There was a pretest kid got all right with petals but none since then.

[Anonymous]

Is this program part of FCPS's general agenda of implementing equity by regressing everyone to be on level? Because it certainly seems to be repetition on steroids, aimed at preventing kids from learning at their own pace.

"What's that Sonny? You're in 3rd grade and already know how to count with place value? Too bad, you'll have to wait until everyone gets there."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Is this program part of FCPS's general agenda of implementing equity by regressing everyone to be on level? Because it certainly seems to be repetition on steroids, aimed at preventing kids from learning at their own pace.

"What's that Sonny? You're in 3rd grade and already know how to count with place value? Too bad, you'll have to wait until everyone gets there."

I’m making myself sit and watch my third grader do this right now. Wow this is slow.

[Anonymous]

Anyone else have a desire to punch the penguin? I am a gentle person. I value teachers. I know they are forced to do this and I am wondering what bribes or kickbacks happened or special relationships to get FCPS to buy this crap. Die penguin....die!

[Anonymous]

If we cross the bridge does this get better?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If we cross the bridge does this get better?

No. Quit now, call your kid's teacher, offer literally anything as a substitute.

[Anonymous]

Is it slow for everyone? My child picks an answer and the there’s thirty seconds of garbage before the next question? This just wastes his time and is useless extra screen time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If we cross the bridge does this get better?

Oh honey. No. My dc got across the bridge and then there were more petals.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Is it slow for everyone? My child picks an answer and the there’s thirty seconds of garbage before the next question? This just wastes his time and is useless extra screen time.

Yes. It seems designed to waste as much time as possible?

[Anonymous]

Was that part of it's appeal? IT was supposed to be for the asynchronous hybrid days, so maybe FCPS liked that it was a huge time suck.