FYI: Indiana withdrawing from Common Core standards
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}
Anonymous
How do you propose that a public school system individualize curriculum for thousands of students. Go-ahead, I'm waiting. See, it's this kind of thinking that leads us to the conclusion that we need to throw up our hands and take the easy route. I don't think it is feasible or desirable to a public school system to individualize curriculum for thousands of students. Besides, we aren't talking about curriculum, we're talking about benchmarks and how progress is measured to determine whether or not our public school system is educating our kids in an effective and useful way. I think that teachers who are effective and given the flexibility in their classrooms already individualize their instruction according to their students' personal learning styles. I don't think the curriculum needs to be individualized, but it does need to be focused on giving our kids the tools they will need to be successful. Reading, writing, math are all important to be sure. But so our critical thinking, communication, soft skills, and leadership. What does Common Core do to advance any of these? Perhaps the reputation of the Common Core is getting a raw deal with the terrible job MCPS is doing in its attempt to come up with a curriculum to meet the new standards. What parents care about most, is whether or not my child is learning what they need to learn to be productive and successful throughout their lives. I see major changes in the new curriculum that makes me doubtful the new crop of graduates that will be churned out with the new curriculum will be any better off than those under the old curriculum. The math worksheet discussed is similar to many of the homework examples that have come home with my child for 2 years. For two years, he has been either bored because he has advance math calculating skills and cannot move forward onto new math skills and concepts but frustrated when the teaching falls short of explaining what exactly he is expected to do for written explanations (as in the previous math worksheet example). Under the old curriculum, children could chose to prove their answer in mathematical terms (showing their work) OR describing with words what they did. Now, getting the correct calculation is a fraction of the grade. If a child has difficulty explaining the math with words, that child will struggle in the course. Likewise, a child that has poor math calculation skills and cannot arrive to the correct mathematical answer, he will get partial credit for a verbal explanation that uses specific buzz words from class. I am highly concerned that basic math skills are being glossed over and this new experiment in education will be a complete flop due to the lack of emphasis on basic math calculation skills. As far as the language arts curriculum, very little has been sent home as homework or an example of his work that I cannot comment if the new curriculum is improving basic writing skills. The lack of information however is a concern. The main piece of information (the report card) has been washed down to mean very little. My kid has never been at risk for not meeting State standards, so a P means very little. I would like to know how much my child skills has improved for the year as well as his particular strengths and weakness. This information used to be provided with teacher comments and the regular A,B, C, D ,E report cards. I agree the particular problems plaguing MCPS might not be specifically a Common Core issue, but the Common Core was the snow ball that started rolling and caused the avalanche. |
Anonymous
Memorization of basic math facts IS a requirement of the Common Core objectives.
http://www.corestandards.org/Math/Content/4/NBT Any worksheet, teacher, school district, or website that tells you "Common Core" doesn't require fluency in basic math facts, or the ability to use "Standard algorithms" to solve problems efficiently, is incorrect. Or, deliberately lying. |
Anonymous
|
, 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.
As a teacher, this is the number one area in which I run into conflict with parents. The parents at my school are well-educated and successful in their respective fields. Yet, somehow, they are afraid that their kids will think they are stupid or useless if they do not know what to do when it is time to work on homework or a project. On BTSN, we show the parents examples of tasks that MCPS includes on unit tests so that they are prepared for what we ask of the kids, but most are too busy chatting with other parents or trying to get us to reconsider Janey's C grade on the first quiz. I've actually started a file of stock answers about MCPS curriculum that I can plop into emails. Not because I am lazy, but because I want to better use my time at lunch or after school planning lessons, helping students study, and corresponding with parents who have legitimate concerns not just knee-jerk reactions to something unfamiliar. |
Anonymous
Amen! signed a parent |
Anonymous
| Common core is everyday math 2.0. |
Anonymous
The Common Core standards are not the cure for all of our educational problems. That doesn't mean they're useless. It just means that we have to do other things in addition to the Common Core standards. |
Anonymous
Which Common Core math standards, specifically, do you consider "Everyday Math"? Please cite specific standards from here: http://www.corestandards.org/wp-content/uploads/Math_Standards.pdf |
Anonymous
One problem with kids who onlye know the "algorithm" for subtraction (Start at the right in the ones column, borrow one from the tens column, cross out the 5, make it a 15, now subtract) is that they are so busy just applying the algorithm that they don't stop to think what those numbers really represent. So if they make a computational error, they don't recognize that their answer is wrong, even off by an order of magnitude. For an absurdly easy example, say a child is asked to solve: 300 - 201 _______ Really should be able to just do that in her head. She shouldn't need to cross out the 3, make it a 2, cross out 0, make it a 10. Now cross out the 10, make it a 9, cross out the 0, make it a 10. Now, subtract. Kids who only know this way, and NO OTHER, for subtraction, become the store clerks who are completely unable to make change if the cash register is "down". You hand them a $20.00 bill and try to buy a 4.99 item, and they have NO CLUE how to make change, because they can't do all that crossing out in their head. Use a mental number line, and go back $10 from $20 to $10, then go back $5 to $5 and then go back one cent. Your change is $15.01 -- a 10, a 5 and a penny. |
Anonymous
So, here is the complete list of Common Core Standards for 3rd Grade Math. Which ones do you think are not appropriate for kids to know by the end of 3rd grade? Specifically -- name the standards you think are inappropriate for end of 3rd grade, and why? (Also -- please note for me the standard that says children must subtract using a number line.)
|
Anonymous
The above problems with math curriculum are NOT due to Common Core State standards, but appear to be due to MCPS' interpretation of what they need to do to meet the standards. Print out the math standard for your child's grades from the Common Core State Standard website, and take them to your child's teacher, principal, instructional director, or School Board. Ask them to justify what they are assigning and how they are grading. "How do these comments, this worksheet, this assessment relate to the Common Core? Which standard states that students must express their mathematical thinking IN WORDS, in complete sentences?" Whatever nonsense MCPS had brought in for math, it isn't based on Common Core. |
Anonymous
|
And here's a math expert explaining in detail why the Common Core Standards are bad: The Common Core’s Pedagogical Tomfoolery By Ze'ev Wurman Today One frequently hears that the Common Core standards are merely standards and expectations that do not dictate curriculum or pedagogy. Common Core proponents argue that those national standards do not interfere with the ability of teachers to use their preferred pedagogical approaches, and do not further interfere with local autonomy over the curriculum. Here, for example, are Kathleen Porter-Magee and Sol Stern making the case why conservatives should support the Common Core: Here’s what the Common Core State Standards are: They describe what children should know and the skills that they must acquire at each grade level to stay on course toward college- or career-readiness, something that conservatives have long argued for. . . . The Common Core standards are also not a curriculum; it’s up to state and local leaders to choose aligned curricula. ...n mathematics, my own area of expertise, the examples of curriculum and pedagogy are numerous. Look, for example, on a first grade standard: 1.OA.6: Add and subtract within 20, demonstrating fluency for addition and subtraction within 10. Use strategies such as counting on; making ten (e.g., 8 + 6 = 8 + 2 + 4 = 10 + 4 = 14); decomposing a number leading to a ten (e.g., 13 – 4 = 13 – 3 – 1 = 10 – 1 = 9); using the relationship between addition and subtraction (e.g., knowing that 8 + 4 = 12, one knows 12 – 8 = 4); and creating equivalent but easier or known sums (e.g., adding 6 + 7 by creating the known equivalent 6 + 6 + 1 = 12 + 1 = 13). Were this a true content standard, it would have simply stopped after its first sentence: Add and subtract within 20, demonstrating fluency for addition and subtraction within 10. Yet the standard continues and lists at least four different ways students must use to show … what? Can’t they simply show they can add and subtract, correctly and fluently? And lest you think this is just a fluke, here is essentially the same standard in the second and third grades: 2.NBT.5: Fluently add and subtract within 100 using strategies based on place value, properties of operations, and/or the relationship between addition and subtraction. 3.NBT.2: Fluently add and subtract within 1000 using strategies and algorithms based on place value, properties of operations, and/or the relationship between addition and subtraction. In other words, students are not allowed simply to learn how to add and subtract in first grade, in second grade, or in third grade. No, they must use the training wheels that the authors want them to use, whether they can ride without them or not. What is this if not pedagogy, and a wrongheaded one to boot? Young children do not need four different ways to “explain” addition – at best, this could be guidance to teachers how to individualize teaching rather than expect children to know all these ways. One can argue that those are just suggestions. Unfortunately, this is incorrect. The Common Core assessment consortia (PARCC and SBAC) will test these wrong-headed “strategies,” paying attention to the variety of ways problems are answered rather than to correctness of results. |
Anonymous
Anonymous
|
And here's the testimony of a Kindergarten teach in the state senate of Missouri, who says she's been warned by the school district not to to speak about her experiences with Common Core in the classroom. Her job has been threatened. http://missourieducationwatchdog.com/teacher-describes-how-she-has-been-warned-by-school-district-not-to-speak-out-against-common-core/ |
Anonymous
|
Ze'ev Wurman is not a "math expert". He may be a "math education expert".
And as for the standard he's complaining about -- what he's calling "training wheels', I'm calling basic understanding. I'm not the only one either. Singapore Math teaches those same exact things. |
Anonymous
Because depending on the math fact, some strategies are more efficient (use less mental energy) than others. When I was a child, I only learned the "counting on" strategy. I learned it well, and I could do it quickly. But to add 9 + 7, I said the # 9, and then "counted on" 7 more times. That's a lot of things to "say" -- 9 - 10- 11-12-13-14-15-16. It would have been much better for me to have learned that I should just move a one from the 7 to make a 10 with the 9, and then quickly say "16". It uses up much less mental energy, leaving more working memory for performing other mental computation tasks. The above ways of adding and subtracting are very good mathematical instruction, for the early years.
Those are very good standards. Using place value to add 76 and 52, for example, means you don't use the "counting on" strategy. You don't say the number 76, and then count on 52 times. You use place value. You add 6 ones and 2 ones, and get 8 ones. You add 7 10s and 5 tens, and get 12 tens, or 120. You add 120 and 8 to get 128. Are you saying you think place value is a BAD way to add??? |