math curriculum 2.0 -- explaining math strategies

[Anonymous]

My daughter, who's in 4th grade, is expected to explain her process either orally or in written form.

one example - http://www.ccsstoolbox.com/parcc/PARCCPrototype_main.html
If this estimate is correct, how many total deer are in the park? Explain your answer using numbers, symbols, and words.

Do all the test questions ask for a written response? no

But the likelihood of stumbling across quite a few that do is high.

I don't understand why this is such a major shift in thinking for some of you. In any report, essay or presentation, you're asked to provide evidence to support your points. Why should math be any different?

Isn't it more important for students to metacognitively become aware of their own thinking - especially in mathematics where the focus has always been on the right answer?

So if an answer is incorrect, through an explanation, a teacher can figure out where the child went wrong. Process is just as important as the answer.

This is why it's so important to hire the best and the brightest in education. But so many of you think that anyone can teach, which is not the case.

So when the CC standards were developed, they were created to help students develop critical thinking skills starting in K. I can say that the standards for ELA - K through 12 - while very similar become more and more complex each year.

bottom line - You can't be dumb when you're dealing with these standards. So teachers need more training and practice.

Rome wasn't built in a day, people. So I certainly hope you don't expect a resident to perform heart surgery on her first day.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

And CPM math is the only math that didn't have to be re-written to be Common Core aligned. It's been a failure at most schools that have used it. It was popular in California in the 90s, but they abandoned it after test scores plummeted. IT was recently thrown out of a Connecticut school district when parents rebelled, and some parents in a school in Oregon have started pulling out their kids for math because their former A students started failing math -- they simply had no idea what they are doing.

OK -- so you have established that the problem is with CPM, not with any particular common core standard, then?

What school district is using CPM?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:


Here's a great article explaining the problems with the Common Core math standards:

http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2012/11/a-new-kind-of-problem-the-common-core-math-standards/265444/
A New Kind of Problem: The Common Core Math Standards

Just one paragraph from that article:

But what does this mean in practice? Another recent article explains, "This curriculum puts an emphasis on critical thinking, rather than memorization, and collaborative learning." In other words, instead of simply teaching multiplication tables, schools are adopting "an 'inquiry method' of learning, in which children are supposed to discover the knowledge for themselves." An educator quoted in the article admits that this approach could be frustrating for students: "Yes. Solving a problem is not easy. Learning is not easy."

The Common Core standards do NOT require teachers to discover knowledge for themselves, and they DO require memorization of basic facts.

Here is a list of the fluency standards, and a definition of fluency.

http://tncore.org/sites/www/Uploads/2.25.13Additions/fluency%20documents%20final.pdf

By third grade students should be able to "quickly and accurately" (i.e. on timed tests) be able to:

Multiply/Divide within 100
(Know single digit products from memory)
Add/Subtract within 1000

The know single digit products from memory standards is a big one. Up till now, it was perfectly acceptable for a child to solve 6x7 by making 6 rows of 7 circles, and then COUNT them. That's fine for learning the concept of multiplication, but at some point kids actually have to just memorize their times tables. Common Core Objectives state that the times tables to 10 should be mastered by the end of 3rd grade. By EVERYONE.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My daughter, who's in 4th grade, is expected to explain her process either orally or in written form.

one example - http://www.ccsstoolbox.com/parcc/PARCCPrototype_main.html
If this estimate is correct, how many total deer are in the park? Explain your answer using numbers, symbols, and words.

Do all the test questions ask for a written response? no

But the likelihood of stumbling across quite a few that do is high.

I don't understand why this is such a major shift in thinking for some of you. In any report, essay or presentation, you're asked to provide evidence to support your points. Why should math be any different?

Isn't it more important for students to metacognitively become aware of their own thinking - especially in mathematics where the focus has always been on the right answer?

So if an answer is incorrect, through an explanation, a teacher can figure out where the child went wrong. Process is just as important as the answer.

This is why it's so important to hire the best and the brightest in education. But so many of you think that anyone can teach, which is not the case.

So when the CC standards were developed, they were created to help students develop critical thinking skills starting in K. I can say that the standards for ELA - K through 12 - while very similar become more and more complex each year.

bottom line - You can't be dumb when you're dealing with these standards. So teachers need more training and practice.

Rome wasn't built in a day, people. So I certainly hope you don't expect a resident to perform heart surgery on her first day.

The question referenced above showed a rectangular map, with a side of 8 miles, and a total perimeter stated as 42. A ranger says there are 9 deer per square mile. Students need to use decide how many deer are in the park using "numbers, symbols, and words"

I'd be happier if the requirement was to use "number, symbols and/or words."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
I don't understand why this is such a major shift in thinking for some of you. In any report, essay or presentation, you're asked to provide evidence to support your points. Why should math be any different?

I think the biggest problem is in the earliest grades, and among really overzealous teachers, who are requiring kids who may not be strong writers, to write grammatically correct sentence, elaborate ones, for questions that don't really require much in the way of evidence or support.

As in "Write a paragraph explaining how you know that 2x6 is the same as 3x4"

When it is perfectly mathmatically correct to show the same thing, using pictures.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My daughter, who's in 4th grade, is expected to explain her process either orally or in written form.

one example - http://www.ccsstoolbox.com/parcc/PARCCPrototype_main.html
If this estimate is correct, how many total deer are in the park? Explain your answer using numbers, symbols, and words.

Do all the test questions ask for a written response? no

But the likelihood of stumbling across quite a few that do is high.

I don't understand why this is such a major shift in thinking for some of you. In any report, essay or presentation, you're asked to provide evidence to support your points. Why should math be any different?

Isn't it more important for students to metacognitively become aware of their own thinking - especially in mathematics where the focus has always been on the right answer?

So if an answer is incorrect, through an explanation, a teacher can figure out where the child went wrong. Process is just as important as the answer.

This is why it's so important to hire the best and the brightest in education. But so many of you think that anyone can teach, which is not the case.

So when the CC standards were developed, they were created to help students develop critical thinking skills starting in K. I can say that the standards for ELA - K through 12 - while very similar become more and more complex each year.

bottom line - You can't be dumb when you're dealing with these standards. So teachers need more training and practice.

Rome wasn't built in a day, people. So I certainly hope you don't expect a resident to perform heart surgery on her first day.

It's unproven junk, and developmentally inappropriate.

But you'll figure that out next year when your child fails the national testing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
I don't understand why this is such a major shift in thinking for some of you. In any report, essay or presentation, you're asked to provide evidence to support your points. Why should math be any different?

I think the biggest problem is in the earliest grades, and among really overzealous teachers, who are requiring kids who may not be strong writers, to write grammatically correct sentence, elaborate ones, for questions that don't really require much in the way of evidence or support.

As in "Write a paragraph explaining how you know that 2x6 is the same as 3x4"

When it is perfectly mathmatically correct to show the same thing, using pictures.

Agreed - in early grades there are children who may have stronger math skills than reading or writing skills and this is a disadvantage to those students. Does a reading assingment ask a child to write a written mathematical equation for how many pages they read in an assignment, or count the number of letters used on a page, give the number of 5 letter words per line?

Granted, it is important to hone both skills - but there are different parts of the brain being used for reading/writing vs math. These sorts of writing requirements early on, for young children who may otherwise excell at math makes them highly frustrated.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My daughter, who's in 4th grade, is expected to explain her process either orally or in written form.

one example - http://www.ccsstoolbox.com/parcc/PARCCPrototype_main.html
If this estimate is correct, how many total deer are in the park? Explain your answer using numbers, symbols, and words.

Do all the test questions ask for a written response? no

But the likelihood of stumbling across quite a few that do is high.

I don't understand why this is such a major shift in thinking for some of you. In any report, essay or presentation, you're asked to provide evidence to support your points. Why should math be any different?

Isn't it more important for students to metacognitively become aware of their own thinking - especially in mathematics where the focus has always been on the right answer?

So if an answer is incorrect, through an explanation, a teacher can figure out where the child went wrong. Process is just as important as the answer.

This is why it's so important to hire the best and the brightest in education. But so many of you think that anyone can teach, which is not the case.

So when the CC standards were developed, they were created to help students develop critical thinking skills starting in K. I can say that the standards for ELA - K through 12 - while very similar become more and more complex each year.

bottom line - You can't be dumb when you're dealing with these standards. So teachers need more training and practice.

Rome wasn't built in a day, people. So I certainly hope you don't expect a resident to perform heart surgery on her first day.

The question referenced above showed a rectangular map, with a side of 8 miles, and a total perimeter stated as 42. A ranger says there are 9 deer per square mile. Students need to use decide how many deer are in the park using "numbers, symbols, and words"

I'd be happier if the requirement was to use "number, symbols and/or words."

Great problem. A fractional deer. Confusing and/or disturbing.

[Anonymous]

Oops misread it. Thought it said 9 sq mi / deer. Never mind.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Do they accept "I know that 8+2=10 because I have memorized my math facts

Do you still draw circles whenever you need add 2 to 8 ? Or do you just know the answer because at some point you have memorized the answer?

Its useful to teach preschoolers or kindergartners the concept of quantity to understand a numerical symbol. Its also useful to teach then how to visually move these quantities back and forth for addition and subtraction. However, once they have this they will end up memorizing the math facts anyway.

There is little value in making a child who understands the concept of addition and subtraction and has already memorized the math facts keep drawing darn circles everywhere. This is boring and repetitive and not deeper. It also does nothing to strengthen the understanding of using that "strategy". The kid is smarter than you and knows its stupid but they have to do it. They are simply executing an assignment in instruction following.

IMO, MCPS is missing the "fluency" aspect that Common Core demands. You are correct that eventually one is supposed to "know" or "memorize" certain steps. Every time we do long division, we don't justify via place value concepts each move; we just use the algorithm without thinking about why it works.

As a parent, I am extremely concerned that MCPS is focusing on this "deeper understanding" in a way that denies the development of fluency. It would be OK if they emphasized both. That this is a problem will become more apparent when kids move on to higher math and take the SATs, etc. They will simply not be able to do the calculations quickly and easily, they will increasingly dislike math and have to spend much more time than is necessary to study/achieve in the upper level subjects.

YES! Teachers and students are wasting their time on verbal explanations that many simply can't do even though they can do that math. Why torture children like this? They know how to solve the problem! We have had two teachers, on in gr. 4 and one in gr. 6 tell us to practice rote math facts AT HOME because they DON'T HAVE TIME. That is what is wrong with this picture. You simply cannot do math without a great deal of frustration if you don't have the math facts down. In countries where children are actually proficient at math there is a lot more drill. I guarantee you, drill is far less tedious and less frustrating than having to make up reasons why you know something to be true. People who can really do math, or at least arithmetic, do it almost at an unconscious level. To solve problems quickly on standardized tests or simply to get through homework or tackle the actual problem solving you have to be able to do the arithmetic on auto pilot. There can be great enjoyment in doing math but the verbal explanations make it torturous. And if a kid who CAN solve the problem has a hard time with it, how is a child who can't solve the problem supposed to answer these verbal questions? We are teaching kids to lie and make things up and BS their way through their education. Very sad and damaging. Parents should be fighting this very hard.