4 ms·
When I was learning math in public school, my family couldn't make heads or tails of my homework. Even in Kindergarden we learned that '2 = 1 + 1' was the same
by ravi-delia 4y ago
When I was learning math in public school, my family couldn't make heads or tails of my homework. Even in Kindergarden we learned that '2 = 1 + 1' was the same as '1 + 1 = 2', and we got started with '1 + ? = 3' even in first grade. A focus was put on mental math, teaching techniques to break two digit numbers up, before we did pencil-and-paper work. Whenever possible there would be more than one technique, and the class would discuss which one we liked the most. Once we all got to high school, our teachers kept remarking on how much quicker our year picked up the new subjects than previous years (we were one of the first crops of kids taught in this way).
My little cousin goes to the same elementary school as I did. When I looked over his homework, I saw none of what I was taught. A glance at his textbook showed they had switched back to the old method of teaching by rote. Apparently school board members who had run in part based on their skepticism of the new techniques had voted in a change in curriculum. One funeral at a time indeed.
- deelowe 4y agoCommon core. It's become a taboo term in certain circles.
- dhosek 4y agoArrrgggghhh! I was getting my math teaching credential when common core was getting its start and what I want to shout from the rooftops is: COMMON CORE DOES NOT SPECIFY PEDAGOGICAL METHODS! It is, essentially. a list of topics that should be mastered at each grade level.
- jsmith45 4y agoSeeing what people complaining about "common core" mathematics are complaining about, and it is understandable that they are complaining. At some point the idea came about that for things like addition, subtraction or multiplication, we should teach multiple different ways of viewing the same concept (like addition) in the hopes that even if students don't really understand the classic approach one of the other approaches makes sense. So perhaps the classic explanation of borrowing in subtraction does not make sense to some students, but one of a few other equivalent ways of handling it does make sense. But then it got turned into a system where all students need to learn all these different different methods, and apply them in both homework and on tests. Which totally defeats the point. The who idea was that some students may find some methods useful and intuitive, and others find different methods useful and intuitive, and as long as every student finds some method can can work with we are better off than only teaching the classic method of the concept.