Reply to Excellent summary about what is so wrong about the MCPS math curriculum

Forum Index » Montgomery County Public Schools (MCPS)

Reply to "Excellent summary about what is so wrong about the MCPS math curriculum"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous

Nope, I should have said algorithmic fluency.  To multiply three-digit numbers takes understanding but it also takes a bunch of single-digit calculations.  Nine multiplication and six additions before carries (I could program a computer to do it).  Mess up any of those and the answer is wrong.  That may happen because basic facts are weak (or just slow enough that concentration falters) or because there hasn't been enough practice executing the chosen method, [i]lack of fluency[/i].  I was referring to the latter.  Yes, all the methods work and they aren't even very different.  But the time spent wading through methods actually comes at the expense of practice.  This same meticulousness is needed for Algebra just as much as the understanding is.[/quote]

It may come at the expense of practice but it comes at the benefit of understanding.

For what it's worth, I haven't noticed any weakness in basic facts under Curriculum 2.0. On the contrary, in fact. For my pre-2.0 kid, the principal and teachers explicitly told the parents that it was the parents' responsibility to make sure that the kid learned their math facts. For my 2.0 kid, there was lots and lots and lots of repetition in class. In fact, this is one of the things that people specifically complain about on DCUM.[/quote][/quote]

Well, what I'm noticing is my DS, too, has understanding, but he was never tripped up by this stuff, so I expect that.  However, his ability to execute a longer calculation without error is kinda craptastic.  It's the algorithmic fluency bit.  He understands multiplication, he does know the algorithm, but every time he was asked to use it was on a page of two word problems and if he made an error he would get partial credit for setting up the problem and his [i]understanding[/i].  Sometimes he would get a note: [i]you have a calculator![/i].  He is not at the stage where a calculator is justified.  And jumping straight to word problems may sound like sophistication, but he would be better served by a page of 30 multiplication problems (he'll thank me later I'm sure).  Just to be clear 31*12 is algorithmically equivalent to (3x+1)(x+2).  Anyone who can't do the first by hand with accuracy is no more ready to deal with the second expression than someone who truly doesn't believe in multiplication.  2.0 pays way to much lip service to the un-measurable concept of understanding but has no real appreciation of where any of this is leading.[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics