Anonymous wrote:
So, in other words, the Common Core standards are bad because they're brand-new and untested, plus also they're unnecessary because they're nothing new.
Why are they good? Please clarify and explain. And, by the way, place value has always been taught. It is just that now, they are demanding that it be taught in a confusing manner.
NP.
Then they were not being taught well in MCPS because some of the upper grade (MS, HS) math teachers were saying that some of the kids that were in advanced math were missing some basics, like place value. This was part of the reason they stopped advancing kids so quickly in math - they were missing basics.
2.0 math is confusing to some people, including some adults (most of which is I think because adults are not used to doing math this way). But those that are good at math will always be good at math no matter how it is taught. It certainly won't make them dumb. For those that aren't as good at math, 2.0 math will explain math concepts better; for others, it may make it more confusing. But then again, the old way of teaching math wasn't meeting everyone's needs either.
I agree, for some kids that are advanced in math, 2.0 math the way it is being taught can be frustrating because of the repetition, spending days if not weeks on some particular concept. But in public school, with class sizes as big as they are (see the other thread about K class sizes which applies across the board to all ES grades), I can understand why the curriculum requires something to be reviewed for a long time and not just a few days - to make sure all kids get it (although I'm sure there will be some that don't get it).