4 ms·

I don't know exactly what the standards are but the assignments and tests for first graders are poorly designed. Emphasizing understanding at the expense of me

I don't know exactly what the standards are but the assignments and tests for first graders are poorly designed. Emphasizing understanding at the expense of mechanics for basic arithmetic skills is a mistake. Especially, for kids at that age who are just beginning to develop these cognitive skills. In addition, like the poster, glesica, mentioned below, the questions are often vague and tricky word problems where most of the work is just guessing what they are asking. My son hasn't actually learned any arithmetic skills beyond what he learned in kindergarten. Maybe it works better as kids get a bit older but I have found it to be a disaster.

TYPE_FASTER 11y ago
That was our experience in first grade as well. It gets better in second grade. Our daughter has two timed tests a week that are just cranking through addition and subtraction. It's most likely in preparation for the first MCAS math tests they'll take next year in third grade, but I like them practicing straight up math problems. There is still the focus on doing the problem just like they were taught, and taking points off for not drawing counters. There is still the work involved in figuring out how the concepts are described so I can help her do the homework. But it did get a little better, at least for us.
- engi_nerd 11y ago
  > There is still the focus on doing the problem just like they were taught, and taking points off for not drawing counters. There is still the work involved in figuring out how the concepts are described so I can help her do the homework. So how is this really better? I'm not getting it.
superuser2 11y ago
My computer can solve an arithmetic expression for me. I can write a parser for arithmetic expressions and will soon be able to prove it correct. The first 12 years of my education actively sabotaged the latter at the expense of the former. That was wrong. Humans are poor symbol-manipulation machines, and I'm ecstatic the math classes aren't treating them as such anymore.
- Jtsummers 11y ago
  > Humans are poor symbol-manipulation machines I have to question this. Humans seem to be natural symbol-manipulation machines. We use this skill all the time in language (spoken early in childhood, written later).
  - bitwize 11y ago
    Within certain constraints. We cannot take arbitrary symbols and apply arbitrary transformations to them without intensive training, whereas that's something computers are built to do. 100 years ago we were probably the best symbol-manipulation machines around. We learned to build better ones than us, and now we're pretty poor when compared to such machines.
- fromMars 11y ago
  I am not sure you can claim with any authority that what you learned in first grade sabotaged your ability to understand abstract concepts. My son has neither developed a solid understanding of the concepts that common core emphasizes nor a more mechanical ability to manipulate arithmetic expressions. My anecdotal observation is that most kids at that age are not quite ready to absorb many of the concepts emphasized. Instead they require gaining some familiarity of the basic elements of arithmetic and what they represent before pulling them apart more.

TYPE_FASTER 11y ago

That was our experience in first grade as well. It gets better in second grade. Our daughter has two timed tests a week that are just cranking through addition and subtraction. It's most likely in preparation for the first MCAS math tests they'll take next year in third grade, but I like them practicing straight up math problems. There is still the focus on doing the problem just like they were taught, and taking points off for not drawing counters. There is still the work involved in figuring out how the concepts are described so I can help her do the homework. But it did get a little better, at least for us.

engi_nerd 11y ago
> There is still the focus on doing the problem just like they were taught, and taking points off for not drawing counters. There is still the work involved in figuring out how the concepts are described so I can help her do the homework. So how is this really better? I'm not getting it.

superuser2 11y ago

My computer can solve an arithmetic expression for me. I can write a parser for arithmetic expressions and will soon be able to prove it correct. The first 12 years of my education actively sabotaged the latter at the expense of the former. That was wrong. Humans are poor symbol-manipulation machines, and I'm ecstatic the math classes aren't treating them as such anymore.

Jtsummers 11y ago
> Humans are poor symbol-manipulation machines I have to question this. Humans seem to be natural symbol-manipulation machines. We use this skill all the time in language (spoken early in childhood, written later).
- bitwize 11y ago
  Within certain constraints. We cannot take arbitrary symbols and apply arbitrary transformations to them without intensive training, whereas that's something computers are built to do. 100 years ago we were probably the best symbol-manipulation machines around. We learned to build better ones than us, and now we're pretty poor when compared to such machines.
fromMars 11y ago
I am not sure you can claim with any authority that what you learned in first grade sabotaged your ability to understand abstract concepts. My son has neither developed a solid understanding of the concepts that common core emphasizes nor a more mechanical ability to manipulate arithmetic expressions. My anecdotal observation is that most kids at that age are not quite ready to absorb many of the concepts emphasized. Instead they require gaining some familiarity of the basic elements of arithmetic and what they represent before pulling them apart more.