92% in 4 to 5 in Algebra 1 - teacher attributes success to "old-fashioned" algebra

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Sad that this same data for my child's middle school in PG county (85% scoring 4 in Algebra 1) isn't highlighted in the media.

Robbert Goddard French Immersion? 95% Algebra I scored 4 or 5. Nice! (Although I wonder about the regular Math 8 students --- only 60% scored 4 or 5.)

http://reportcard.msde.maryland.gov/PARCC/PerformanceSummary/2015_PARCC_Performance_Summary_161416.pdf

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sad that this same data for my child's middle school in PG county (85% scoring 4 in Algebra 1) isn't highlighted in the media.

Robbert Goddard French Immersion? 95% Algebra I scored 4 or 5. Nice! (Although I wonder about the regular Math 8 students --- only 60% scored 4 or 5.)

http://reportcard.msde.maryland.gov/PARCC/PerformanceSummary/2015_PARCC_Performance_Summary_161416.pdf

Exactly, you have to look at the scores of the entire grade level to get a number worth comparing.

If your Algebra 1 scores are high because you're turning away most of the kids, then that's not success.

Bates had more 8th graders failing the 8th grade math exam, then they had attempting the Algebra 1 exam. It's not that hard to create high scores if you're allowed to limit who takes the test as a strategy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am wondering what "old-fashioned algebra" is.

I'm not exactly sure, but I think it means they didn't rely on subpar teachers who were recruited by their friends at the main office to draft a new curriculum that utilizes made up words and employs 29 steps instead of the most direct route to solving the problem. In short: it means the way all of us learned math prior to 2.0.

+1000 !!!!!

My child came home and said his teacher requested they ask their parents how two negative numbers multiplied form a positive product. I told him you just memorize it, you get into math theorems and proofs using properties and identities later. He said he was supposed to use "algebra tiles" I was like WTF are algebra tiles?

Me: "did the teacher explain what you were supposed to do",
Him: "no, I think she couldn't figure it out, we talked about it with partners and just got confused"

So all this crap to develop a :deeper understanding" just confuses the kids.

It's working well for my two kids - one in 1st, the other in 6th. My son (1st) is showing me he knows how to multiply 10s, which is true. And he could explain the reasoning behind it.

can't say I'm unhappy - nor can I say they aren't learning

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am wondering what "old-fashioned algebra" is.

I'm not exactly sure, but I think it means they didn't rely on subpar teachers who were recruited by their friends at the main office to draft a new curriculum that utilizes made up words and employs 29 steps instead of the most direct route to solving the problem. In short: it means the way all of us learned math prior to 2.0.

+1000 !!!!!

My child came home and said his teacher requested they ask their parents how two negative numbers multiplied form a positive product. I told him you just memorize it, you get into math theorems and proofs using properties and identities later. He said he was supposed to use "algebra tiles" I was like WTF are algebra tiles?

Me: "did the teacher explain what you were supposed to do",
Him: "no, I think she couldn't figure it out, we talked about it with partners and just got confused"

So all this crap to develop a :deeper understanding" just confuses the kids.

That just tells me your son has a crap math teacher. Just because there are crap math teachers doesn't mean we should only have curriculums that these crap math teachers can teach. The solution is train the crap math teachers or fire them or move them to a different subject.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am wondering what "old-fashioned algebra" is.

I'm not exactly sure, but I think it means they didn't rely on subpar teachers who were recruited by their friends at the main office to draft a new curriculum that utilizes made up words and employs 29 steps instead of the most direct route to solving the problem. In short: it means the way all of us learned math prior to 2.0.

+1000 !!!!!

My child came home and said his teacher requested they ask their parents how two negative numbers multiplied form a positive product. I told him you just memorize it, you get into math theorems and proofs using properties and identities later. He said he was supposed to use "algebra tiles" I was like WTF are algebra tiles?

Me: "did the teacher explain what you were supposed to do",
Him: "no, I think she couldn't figure it out, we talked about it with partners and just got confused"

So all this crap to develop a :deeper understanding" just confuses the kids.

That just tells me your son has a crap math teacher. Just because there are crap math teachers doesn't mean we should only have curriculums that these crap math teachers can teach. The solution is train the crap math teachers or fire them or move them to a different subject.

You can't fire a Montgomery County teacher, nor can you do much more training with a teacher that has been teaching for 10 years.

A textbook is a great equalizer, even if you have a crap teacher the child has a reference to use, even if the family is ESOL.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am wondering what "old-fashioned algebra" is.

I'm not exactly sure, but I think it means they didn't rely on subpar teachers who were recruited by their friends at the main office to draft a new curriculum that utilizes made up words and employs 29 steps instead of the most direct route to solving the problem. In short: it means the way all of us learned math prior to 2.0.

+1000 !!!!!

My child came home and said his teacher requested they ask their parents how two negative numbers multiplied form a positive product. I told him you just memorize it, you get into math theorems and proofs using properties and identities later. He said he was supposed to use "algebra tiles" I was like WTF are algebra tiles?

Me: "did the teacher explain what you were supposed to do",
Him: "no, I think she couldn't figure it out, we talked about it with partners and just got confused"

So all this crap to develop a :deeper understanding" just confuses the kids.

It's working well for my two kids - one in 1st, the other in 6th. My son (1st) is showing me he knows how to multiply 10s, which is true. And he could explain the reasoning behind it.

can't say I'm unhappy - nor can I say they aren't learning

No offense intended, but multiplying by 10 is perhaps the easiest concept, after multiplying by 0 and 1 to comprehend and explain. If that is your benchmark you need to raise your expectations.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am wondering what "old-fashioned algebra" is.

I'm not exactly sure, but I think it means they didn't rely on subpar teachers who were recruited by their friends at the main office to draft a new curriculum that utilizes made up words and employs 29 steps instead of the most direct route to solving the problem. In short: it means the way all of us learned math prior to 2.0.

+1000 !!!!!

My child came home and said his teacher requested they ask their parents how two negative numbers multiplied form a positive product. I told him you just memorize it, you get into math theorems and proofs using properties and identities later. He said he was supposed to use "algebra tiles" I was like WTF are algebra tiles?

Me: "did the teacher explain what you were supposed to do",
Him: "no, I think she couldn't figure it out, we talked about it with partners and just got confused"

So all this crap to develop a :deeper understanding" just confuses the kids.

That just tells me your son has a crap math teacher. Just because there are crap math teachers doesn't mean we should only have curriculums that these crap math teachers can teach. The solution is train the crap math teachers or fire them or move them to a different subject.

Oh! Great! We should have a curriculum that can only be taught effectively by great math teachers! No problem! It's so easy to get rid of crappy teachers, you know.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am wondering what "old-fashioned algebra" is.

I'm not exactly sure, but I think it means they didn't rely on subpar teachers who were recruited by their friends at the main office to draft a new curriculum that utilizes made up words and employs 29 steps instead of the most direct route to solving the problem. In short: it means the way all of us learned math prior to 2.0.

+1000 !!!!!

My child came home and said his teacher requested they ask their parents how two negative numbers multiplied form a positive product. I told him you just memorize it, you get into math theorems and proofs using properties and identities later. He said he was supposed to use "algebra tiles" I was like WTF are algebra tiles?

Me: "did the teacher explain what you were supposed to do",
Him: "no, I think she couldn't figure it out, we talked about it with partners and just got confused"

So all this crap to develop a :deeper understanding" just confuses the kids.

It's working well for my two kids - one in 1st, the other in 6th. My son (1st) is showing me he knows how to multiply 10s, which is true. And he could explain the reasoning behind it.

can't say I'm unhappy - nor can I say they aren't learning

No offense intended, but multiplying by 10 is perhaps the easiest concept, after multiplying by 0 and 1 to comprehend and explain. If that is your benchmark you need to raise your expectations.

He's in first grade, and not only did he explain it orally, he diagrammed it. This is not part of the curriculum and we don't "enrich" at home.

I'm proud of the fact my "dumb" kid is learning - and not just memorizing numbers. Multiplication isn't covered in full until third grade - even in 2.0, which does progress at a slower

You intended to offend, by the way, which is fine b/c I'm still VERY happy with my children's progress. not an insecure parent - just pleased that my kids are progressing