Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My 3rd grader is good in math but she has never done any addition or subtraction drills and I see her counting on her hands. My older child, in 5/6 compacted, did have math drills.

Not so in my dc's case. Did multiplication drills in 3rd last year. Teacher sent home flash cards to practice at home. They did these multiplication games in class where you had to be quick to answer to win the game, basically, math drills. My 1st grader does addition and subtraction worksheets, and each week they take a little quiz on these worksheets. Dc doesn't use fingers. Hasn't done that since K. I'm thinking your 3rd grader is not as good in math as you think.

Hey genius, do you think it's possible your child does better in math because he/she was properly taught via drills and rote memorization? Telling someone their child is not as smart as they think is unneccessary and makes you look like an ass.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
First, MCPS teaching methods in elementary school is are ridiculous - it's the mile-wide, inch-deep curriculum which really doesn't help the children retain much.

Second, the math curriculum progressed extremely slowly in early elementary but speeds up later.

Third, teach your child the important stuff at home. It's the only way without paying for private. Some teachers don't like this, but... it's not their kid.

This is totally the opposite of what I have read on previous posts in the MD school forum, prior to 2.0. People were complaining that the math curriculum pre 2.0 was a mile wide and an inch deep. 2.0 math is supposed to be the opposite -- a mile deep and an inch wide, particularly for the early years.

I'm not comparing it to pre-2.0, which we did not experience, but to schools in Europe and Asia, where DH and I come from. Math here is a joke, and so is pretty much everything at the primary level. Not surprising, given the US academic ranking.

+1000


Yes, but most parents here don't force their ES kids to go to afterschool tutoring everyday for several hours, or to Saturday schools, like they do in a lot of the Asian countries

And most of the Asian countries teach math by rote. In the long term, that's not the best way to learn math.

Point taken, PP, but Europeans don't do after-school prep schools and they're still better than the US. That's because rote learning at the elementary school level is the BEST way to teach math to young kids, actually, when used as the primary tool alongside more creative methods. Here it's the reverse, creative methods are used primarily and rote takes a back seat. My husband is a mathematician/statistician and has seen how in young children mathematical understanding develops concomitantly and even after the memorization of math techniques. It may seem counter-intuitive to you - however it works. First teach a reliable method (instead of counting pasta like in MCPS), then the child will gradually understand why they're using it.
And all this "explain your answer in words" thing is a huge waste of time in the lower grades, because most kids' brains aren't developed enough to verbalize their mathematical thought process. It's akin to that effort on learning to read in K - not developmentally appropriate for the majority of children.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My 3rd grader is good in math but she has never done any addition or subtraction drills and I see her counting on her hands. My older child, in 5/6 compacted, did have math drills.

Not so in my dc's case. Did multiplication drills in 3rd last year. Teacher sent home flash cards to practice at home. They did these multiplication games in class where you had to be quick to answer to win the game, basically, math drills. My 1st grader does addition and subtraction worksheets, and each week they take a little quiz on these worksheets. Dc doesn't use fingers. Hasn't done that since K. I'm thinking your 3rd grader is not as good in math as you think.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Kind of weird that people are suggesting that a 3rd grader at the top of her math class needs to be doing additional math work at home. Wouldn't the teacher have noticed a problem?

If the third-grader is doing addition and subtraction ON HER FINGERS, then yes, she needs to do additional math work.

Maybe there is a problem with the curriculum if she is talented in math and hasn't been taught basic math facts.

No, it's not a problem with the curriculum, because my third-grader has done math facts drills in class since first grade.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Kind of weird that people are suggesting that a 3rd grader at the top of her math class needs to be doing additional math work at home. Wouldn't the teacher have noticed a problem?

If the third-grader is doing addition and subtraction ON HER FINGERS, then yes, she needs to do additional math work.

Maybe there is a problem with the curriculum if she is talented in math and hasn't been taught basic math facts.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
First, MCPS teaching methods in elementary school is are ridiculous - it's the mile-wide, inch-deep curriculum which really doesn't help the children retain much.

Second, the math curriculum progressed extremely slowly in early elementary but speeds up later.

Third, teach your child the important stuff at home. It's the only way without paying for private. Some teachers don't like this, but... it's not their kid.

This is totally the opposite of what I have read on previous posts in the MD school forum, prior to 2.0. People were complaining that the math curriculum pre 2.0 was a mile wide and an inch deep. 2.0 math is supposed to be the opposite -- a mile deep and an inch wide, particularly for the early years.

I'm not comparing it to pre-2.0, which we did not experience, but to schools in Europe and Asia, where DH and I come from. Math here is a joke, and so is pretty much everything at the primary level. Not surprising, given the US academic ranking.

Yes, but most parents here don't force their ES kids to go to afterschool tutoring everyday for several hours, or to Saturday schools, like they do in a lot of the Asian countries.

And most of the Asian countries teach math by rote. In the long term, that's not the best way to learn math.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Kind of weird that people are suggesting that a 3rd grader at the top of her math class needs to be doing additional math work at home. Wouldn't the teacher have noticed a problem?

If the third-grader is doing addition and subtraction ON HER FINGERS, then yes, she needs to do additional math work.

Anonymous wrote:

Point taken, PP, but Europeans don't do after-school prep schools and they're still better than the US. That's because rote learning at the elementary school level is the BEST way to teach math to young kids, actually, when used as the primary tool alongside more creative methods. Here it's the reverse, creative methods are used primarily and rote takes a back seat. My husband is a mathematician/statistician and has seen how in young children mathematical understanding develops concomitantly and even after the memorization of math techniques. It may seem counter-intuitive to you - however it works. First teach a reliable method (instead of counting pasta like in MCPS), then the child will gradually understand why they're using it.
And all this "explain your answer in words" thing is a huge waste of time in the lower grades, because most kids' brains aren't developed enough to verbalize their mathematical thought process. It's akin to that effort on learning to read in K - not developmentally appropriate for the majority of children.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
First, MCPS teaching methods in elementary school is are ridiculous - it's the mile-wide, inch-deep curriculum which really doesn't help the children retain much.

Second, the math curriculum progressed extremely slowly in early elementary but speeds up later.

Third, teach your child the important stuff at home. It's the only way without paying for private. Some teachers don't like this, but... it's not their kid.

This is totally the opposite of what I have read on previous posts in the MD school forum, prior to 2.0. People were complaining that the math curriculum pre 2.0 was a mile wide and an inch deep. 2.0 math is supposed to be the opposite -- a mile deep and an inch wide, particularly for the early years.

I'm not comparing it to pre-2.0, which we did not experience, but to schools in Europe and Asia, where DH and I come from. Math here is a joke, and so is pretty much everything at the primary level. Not surprising, given the US academic ranking.

Yes, but most parents here don't force their ES kids to go to afterschool tutoring everyday for several hours, or to Saturday schools, like they do in a lot of the Asian countries

And most of the Asian countries teach math by rote. In the long term, that's not the best way to learn math.

Point taken, PP, but Europeans don't do after-school prep schools and they're still better than the US. That's because rote learning at the elementary school level is the BEST way to teach math to young kids, actually, when used as the primary tool alongside more creative methods. Here it's the reverse, creative methods are used primarily and rote takes a back seat. My husband is a mathematician/statistician and has seen how in young children mathematical understanding develops concomitantly and even after the memorization of math techniques. It may seem counter-intuitive to you - however it works. First teach a reliable method (instead of counting pasta like in MCPS), then the child will gradually understand why they're using it.
And all this "explain your answer in words" thing is a huge waste of time in the lower grades, because most kids' brains aren't developed enough to verbalize their mathematical thought process. It's akin to that effort on learning to read in K - not developmentally appropriate for the majority of children.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
First, MCPS teaching methods in elementary school is are ridiculous - it's the mile-wide, inch-deep curriculum which really doesn't help the children retain much.

Second, the math curriculum progressed extremely slowly in early elementary but speeds up later.

Third, teach your child the important stuff at home. It's the only way without paying for private. Some teachers don't like this, but... it's not their kid.

This is totally the opposite of what I have read on previous posts in the MD school forum, prior to 2.0. People were complaining that the math curriculum pre 2.0 was a mile wide and an inch deep. 2.0 math is supposed to be the opposite -- a mile deep and an inch wide, particularly for the early years.

I'm not comparing it to pre-2.0, which we did not experience, but to schools in Europe and Asia, where DH and I come from. Math here is a joke, and so is pretty much everything at the primary level. Not surprising, given the US academic ranking.

Yes, but most parents here don't force their ES kids to go to afterschool tutoring everyday for several hours, or to Saturday schools, like they do in a lot of the Asian countries

And most of the Asian countries teach math by rote. In the long term, that's not the best way to learn math.

Anonymous wrote:Kind of weird that people are suggesting that a 3rd grader at the top of her math class needs to be doing additional math work at home. Wouldn't the teacher have noticed a problem?

Anonymous wrote:If all 3rd graders get "P" on their report cards, and if all of them will be slated to either do 4th grade Math or 4/5 compacted Math, then how do you explain the fact that the kids who get into HGC are heads and shoulders ahead of them? Even when they have got the same "P" on their report card?

Anonymous wrote:Kind of weird that people are suggesting that a 3rd grader at the top of her math class needs to be doing additional math work at home. Wouldn't the teacher have noticed a problem?

Anonymous wrote:If all 3rd graders get "P" on their report cards, and if all of them will be slated to either do 4th grade Math or 4/5 compacted Math, then how do you explain the fact that the kids who get into HGC are heads and shoulders ahead of them? Even when they have got the same "P" on their report card?