It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Common Core Is Like A Hangover

page: 2
15
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 5 2014 @ 01:12 AM
link   
a reply to: Kangaruex4Ewe

I took all my math classes backwards. In h.s. I switched to business math and accounting math, so in college and University I had to take Calculus ans Statistics. It was odd. Idnk I took them backwards.

One of my math classes had a class of adults before that had problems like 34+97 on the board all the time. It made me certain my kids wouldn't have that problem!




posted on Sep, 5 2014 @ 01:36 AM
link   

originally posted by: Iamthatbish
a reply to: Kangaruex4Ewe

I took all my math classes backwards. In h.s. I switched to business math and accounting math, so in college and University I had to take Calculus ans Statistics. It was odd. Idnk I took them backwards.

One of my math classes had a class of adults before that had problems like 34+97 on the board all the time. It made me certain my kids wouldn't have that problem!



You must be good at math to be able to do it backwards like that. Seriously... Because you usually need to build up to learn how to do the newer things.

When I was in high school the highest math I could take was algebra. My daughter took that in 6th or 7th grade. I can't recall which at the moment. She has since done geometry and trigonometry. I was absolutely no help there. At all.
edit on 9/5/2014 by Kangaruex4Ewe because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 5 2014 @ 01:47 AM
link   
I can be. I really believe its because all the memorization we did. So when I did testing for math levels I had formulas memorized. I was also lucky enough the my first college math professor rocked.

She didn't just teach math, she gave the history to go with it and it was a little summer class. It was soooo much fun. That was my first continuing ed experience. Now I see how lucky that was.



posted on Sep, 5 2014 @ 01:49 AM
link   

originally posted by: Kangaruex4Ewe
Thank you for your input. I do appreciate it and I do think you are mildly insane for loving numbers the way you do.


But seriously... I can tell you love it and it sounds like you would be a great teacher. My daughter had a math teacher last year that would show a problem once and get pissed when someone didn't get it. My daughter would come home and need more help because she was scared.... YES SCARED to ask the teacher because the teacher went into dumbassery mode on anyone who didn't just get it.

I absolutely HATE when a teacher gets angry at a student when they aren't grasping a concept. I am a teacher, of sorts. For the last 10 years or so I have been giving guitar lessons to students with all levels of ability. From "I just got a guitar yesterday" to "I've been playing for 10 years but need to step up my game" and beyond. Everyone is going to understand the same concept in a different way, sometimes it's as simple as rearranging the words in your description to see that lightbulb go off in their heads! I had many teachers that were too 'busy' to give the proper effort to the kids who were struggling, but I was an ass back then and had no interest in helping (or really interacting with) my fellow students...if only I could go back in time and slap some sense into myself...


We need more teachers that care. You couldn't pay me enough to put up with the kids they have to these days, so at times I understand why you don't have more that care. Parents get mad at the teachers for trying to teach. They get mad when their children are corrected, made to behave, etc. it's a damned hard job to be sure. I empathize with many of them. But I am saddened that this has caused a drop in the number of people that really have a love for the job. Most deal with way more than they get paid for.

I know all that is off topic. I couldn't resist even in my own thread. ISS for me I suppose.

Exactly. Teachers are met with all kinds of bad attitudes from their students and the parents, and I think many of them give up after a while. I think my highschool called it I.C.E. Internal Class Expulsion? Should have been realistic and just called it N.A.P.T.I.M.E.


I do think it helps when the teacher has a genuine love for what they do. They work hard to help kids have a love for it too,minstead of just waiting for the last bell to ring.

In the end... I agree with you. I think this makes it more complicated than it has to be. I don't know enough about common core to be rabid for or against it, this just didn't seem quite right to me so I thought I'd bring it up.

I too know little about this common core, but if it is replacing the old method of teaching kids the many tools they need to solve a variety of problems with this "solve it this way" method in the video...then I don't think it is a good thing at all. If it is doing anything besides introducing a skill, perfecting the skill, then building on the skill, it is useless in my opinion.

The bottom line is that the educational system in the USA is flawed on such a fundamental level (with or without this common core) that stories like this boggle my brain and send me into rant mode



posted on Sep, 5 2014 @ 01:55 AM
link   
a reply to: Kangaruex4Ewe

Most people will only ever do math in base-10 so it makes perfect sense to "anchor to the 10's" or however you choose to phrase it.

Consider the multiplication of two numbers, such as 213 x 12, done in your head. Traditional long form multiplication teaches us to start with the numbers in the 1's place and work up, carrying digits which is a pretty crappy way to do math mentally. The way I intuitively learned to do multiplication mentally was what I believe is called the "break apart method." It's much easier and imo natural, to work it out in your head by breaking it down into 3 multiplication problems and adding the results:

200 x 12 = 2400
10 x 12 = 120 (2400 + 120 = 2520)
3 x 12 = 36 (2520 + 36 = 2556)

Enter the box/grid/area method:



Gutfeld is trying to politicize the topic because he associates it with Common Core and therefore the Evil Liberal Agenda but I know my niece was being taught the Lattice method 8-10 years ago and it actually dates back to the 13th century. The Lattice method is yet another way of doing multiplication which involves a grid except the cells are then separated by diagonal lines (10's/1's) and everything is totaled diagonally across the cells.

When I first encountered the Lattice method while helping my niece with her math homework, I demonstrated the long form (standard algorithm) method and ironically, she preferred the Lattice. I don't favor it personally but I can see the area method being very useful for helping children conceptualize what multiplication IS and I think that's what it all boils down to.

a reply to: ChaosComplex

You got the wrong answer! 96 + 43 = 139

I think what you were trying to do was take 4 from the 43 to make 100 out of the 96 which is similar to a shortcut I've also been using since I was a kid to do multiplication in my head, when one of the numbers is close to a product of 10. Like if I was going to multiple 96 x 43, I might do 100 x 43 = 4300 and 43 x 4 = 172 so the answer is 4300 - 172 which is 4128. Different tools for different situations I guess but likely not a very good idea for a standard curriculum.

It also seems to be how most people probably figure out change. If you're paying for something that costs $18.73 with a $20 bill, it's easier to to add up to $20 from $18.73 in your head. That is 27 cents to get to $19 and another dollar to get to $20.

edit on 2014-9-5 by theantediluvian because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 5 2014 @ 02:02 AM
link   

originally posted by: theantediluvian

You got the wrong answer! 96 + 43 = 139

I think what you were trying to do was take 4 from the 43 to make 100 out of the 96 which is similar to a shortcut I've also been using since I was a kid to do multiplication in my head, when one of the numbers is close to a product of 10. Like if I was going to multiple 96 x 43, I might do 100 x 43 = 4300 and 43 x 4 = 172 so the answer is 4300 - 172 which is 4128. Different tools for different situations I guess but likely not a very good idea for a standard curriculum.


Nah, didn't get the wrong answer just didn't complete my ramblings lol...I put bold markers around the good stuff. Good eye though!

From the original post:

You have 96 + 43 = x
I would make it 100 + 43, and make note that I did a +4, making it 100 + 43 = x + 4.
100 + 43 = 143
143 - 4 = 96 + 43
^^This should have read 143 - 4 = 96 + 43 = 139
and the original post said 100 + 40 = x + 4, 40 should have been 43.

I use that same method you described in multiplication.

I also make phone numbers into math problems...I think there is something wrong with me!!!

edit on 9/5/2014 by ChaosComplex because: (no reason given)

edit on 9/5/2014 by ChaosComplex because: (no reason given)

edit on 9/5/2014 by ChaosComplex because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 5 2014 @ 02:05 AM
link   
a reply to: ChaosComplex

I wish I could give you more than one star for this post. I couldn't agree with everything in it more if I tried.

N.A.P.T.I.M.E was dead on the money. It was always like sending kids to their rooms where all of the toys were. It's where I spent almost my entire junior year simply because I couldn't stand most everybody there. It was a way for me to get away from the drama in the halls but get my work done and usually a nap to boot. It was win/win for me at that time.

I am also glad that you are using your teaching skills for anything at all. It's clear you have the patience for it and also the love for it just from the fact that you are aware of and appreciate the fact that everyone can and usually does learn differently from everyone else.

Much respect to you.



edit on 9/5/2014 by Kangaruex4Ewe because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 5 2014 @ 02:15 AM
link   
While I understand the idea that we should have a certain standard of minimal knowledge kids should have, I admit this particular sort of operation illustrated twisted my mind in knots. This was the kind of stuff that I think made math seem so impossible to me when I was young.

I am currently of the opinion that simple memorization was not emphasized enough in my own education.

I did not memorize the multiplication tables, for example, and that caused havoc for me. I had all sorts of complicated ways of finding the answers, but they took so much mental energy and time, I could never get far with the rest.

In all subjects, emphasis was on personal expression- I did not memorize the poetry of others, or the facts of history, I was asked to go straight to writing my own poetry from the start, or to understand basic movements and meanings of the past.

I learned to come up with my own formulas for simple multiplication, which turned out to be unreliable outside of the specific problem I created them with.

I learned to be creative, I learned to spend time in my own head, to know my own perceptions and conclusions, but much of that became useless in the outside world.

Perhaps the intent to teach kids to concentrate and use a string of operations in their head? Instead of trying to come up with my own methods, perhaps it would have been useful if I had some tried and tested ones fed to me instead.

What I find myself doing with the problem instead, is a sort of vague representation of "almost ten" objects, with a set of six objects, and I see them clicking together, and dropping one of the "almost ten" side. I almost see a line of beads, and that one falling off is in the middle- the number ten one. The solution comes as 10 + 6 -1 = 15. -But that is me writing it out, translating it for you in symbols, what I see in my head is objects.

My point there being- I am thinking in terms of objects, which becomes impossible as the math becomes more complex.

This method pulls the mind away from that internal representation of objects, and forces one to look at the paper and follow formulas instead. A process of abstraction that might be necessary for higher levels of math.
That might be beneficial in the long run? (as hard as it seems for me, perhaps I would have done better if I had been taught that way). I don't know. I am just flowing with my first reactions here.
edit on 5-9-2014 by Bluesma because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 5 2014 @ 02:27 AM
link   
I used to work for an educational software company and when CCSS came into being we had to retool all our software and processes to be aligned with the common core. I understand why they created it. The facts are that American students are failing miserably in comparison to the rest of the world academically. In math, reading, science, everything. So the NGA and CCSSO took a look at countries who ranked high in education like Japan, Finland, etc and what they were doing with their students to achieve such great results. And they put those things in the Common Core State Standards. Will they work? Who knows, but I definitely think it's worth a shot. We've got to do something or Idiocracy will just keep becoming a reality.



posted on Sep, 5 2014 @ 02:31 AM
link   

originally posted by: Malynn
I used to work for an educational software company and when CCSS came into being we had to retool all our software and processes to be aligned with the common core. I understand why they created it. The facts are that American students are failing miserably in comparison to the rest of the world academically. In math, reading, science, everything. So the NGA and CCSSO took a look at countries who ranked high in education like Japan, Finland, etc and what they were doing with their students to achieve such great results. And they put those things in the Common Core State Standards. Will they work? Who knows, but I definitely think it's worth a shot. We've got to do something or Idiocracy will just keep becoming a reality.


Oh, I can absolutely agree that education has steadily gown down the crapper for more than a few years. To be as advanced as we are as a nation, and to have the numbers we have in relation to education.... It's appalling to say the very least. I'm not sure if this is the answer or not, but I do know that we are failing to educate our children to the same standards as other nations and that absolutely shouldn't be happening.


edit on 9/5/2014 by Kangaruex4Ewe because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 5 2014 @ 02:57 AM
link   
-I just a had an associated thought about other subjects we learn as a child. The movement when I was a kid was all about trying new methods, that encourage individual expression, instead of conformity. (the opposite of this Common Core theory).

Instead of learning to read music (solfege), for example, we went straight to learning to play an instrument.
Now I can play the saxophone, but do not know the names of notes, or any way to speak of them to others, to translate what I can play to another instrument, or paper. I am limited now- I cannot expand my musical education.

This is another example of where I think that experimentation of the '70's went haywire.

I now feel that imprinting the base methods and theory of any subject is important before moving on to individual expression.
That requires a certain conformity for the whole, in base. I am not completely against this method, as much as my X Gen tendancies want to rebel against conforming and what seems like unecessary complications.



posted on Sep, 5 2014 @ 06:40 AM
link   
a reply to: Bluesma

You couldbe right, I don't know. and I do thank you for your time in posting though. I was a 70's kid and we didn't learn that way. Maybe more complicated is better in the long term. But to an aging mind it just seems unnecessary. I'm not a professional so there is that it just seems wrong right off the bat. I don't suppose we will know until it's out into action for a few years to see.



posted on Sep, 5 2014 @ 07:05 AM
link   
a reply to: Kangaruex4Ewe

This is odd but that is exactly how I did my math my whole life...self taught! I had a problem with memorization so I naturally started breaking the numbers down to equal 5 or 10. With practice it becomes pretty dang fast with any number using addition/subtraction...I even do a multiplication like this ...if you 368 x 12....id times 368 by 10 then times 382 by 2 and add them.

This is great for yahtzee games when you can add up everyones score before them to make sure they aint cheating!



posted on Sep, 5 2014 @ 07:10 AM
link   
a reply to: Kangaruex4Ewe

That is using algebra to solve a problem. Breaking the number into pieces that are easier to add. It is a great way to think about math and I do it all the time in my head. It is easier to add 5 + 10 than 9 + 6. So if you subtract 1 from the 6 and add 1 to the 9 (which looks like this: 1 + 9 + 6 - 1 = x), you have the same problem and it is easier to solve. This is a very basic way of looking at the numbers as variables and understanding how variables work is KEY in doing advanced mathematics.

This sounds like a great way to instill advanced math basics at a young age. I don't have a problem with it, but then again I LOVE math.
edit on 5-9-2014 by Krazysh0t because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 5 2014 @ 07:20 AM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

See... I think that is where the problem will arise. The people with no issues with math find this fascinating and maybe even a little fun (you bunch of sickos), but when I watch it with all the difficulties I had... it just seems to make it so much harder in my mind. My daughter watches it (who always struggled with math as well) and her reaction is the same.

But like I said... Maybe when you are started off being taught this way, it will be like second nature. To introduce it after you've already learned to just simply add 9+6 many are going to be wondering wth is going on lol.



posted on Sep, 5 2014 @ 07:38 AM
link   
a reply to: Kangaruex4Ewe

It's frustrating because it is a new way to think about it. But if you were to just practice using it in your daily life then it isn't so hard. It starts with rounding. Do you ever look at a price tag (say $3.99) and just round it up ($4)? Then use that when you need to add a bunch of prices to make it a bit easier? This is the same concept. Since adding 5 and 10 is naturally the easiest for us (given our base 10 system), then try to get your numbers to 5's and 10's, by subtracting or adding 1's from your number (since it is always easy to add + 1). And again this instills basic skills that make algebra and later math classes intuitively easier. My cousins (currently in 7th and 6th grades) learned algebra in elementary school (5th grade I think). I can see this technique being a reason for that. From what I understand they have a different way to do long division and multi-digit multiplication as well, but I haven't sat down and tried to learn it (I don't waste time on that stuff in my math when I can just use a calculator).



posted on Sep, 5 2014 @ 07:41 AM
link   
a reply to: Kangaruex4Ewe

*sigh* You know, Kanga.. I could not agree more. I am not, and never have been, opposed to new teaching methods. However, the more I read about "common core" and the more I hear parents in this area talk about it I just cannot help but think this is a glaring example of dumming down our education system. Parents in my area (Western NY) have been complaining about this since this was introduced. Many do not want it, have protested against it, have gone to the education department to have it removed... all to no avail. It seems as if this was rammed down their throats... like it or not.

The video you link in you OP is from channel 2 news, Buffalo (WGRZ).. and I had the misfortune of watching it first hand with only a cup and a half of coffee in me. I literally sat here with my mouth open wondering just what the blue blazes we are doing to our kids. The linked vid was actually part of a series channel 2 has done all week called 'Homework Helper', designed to help parents better assist their kids with the homework as it relates to the 'common core'. If anyone is really interested, here is a Link to more "Homework Helper" vids on WGRZ.

My personal opinion here is that this is a bad idea. I think that lowering our standards and expectations in order to create a feeling of achievement is just setting everyone up for failure in the future. This is of course, just my personal opinion. I hope I am wrong and that this really will accomplish what it is intended to do. However, if at sometime in the future I get audited by the IRS and the agent pulls out a mat with a thousand column, hundreds column, tens column and a one's column and color blocks for each... I'll know it's failed.

edit on 5-9-2014 by MyMindIsMyOwn because: spelling



posted on Sep, 5 2014 @ 07:55 AM
link   
I used to have a hard time with the mathematical sciences. One of the biggest problems I had with it was the teachers were boring as hell. Monotone and very dry, they would have made Ben Stein (the teacher from Ferris Buellers Day Off) proud. And they never explained where this type of math applied. It was frustrating. I could do the math in my head, but had a hard time putting it on paper. (I would have received A- or B+ if they would have just let me do it the way I knew how)

When I got older and started reading blueprints and building things and later joined the Military and learned how to do down wind projections, blow up bridges, find river crossings, etc, etc, it came easy as I could see were the numbers were going and how they applied.

I've looked at common core and thank God I received the education I did back in the day. They're just dumbing down students these days.
edit on 5-9-2014 by TDawgRex because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 5 2014 @ 08:02 AM
link   
a reply to: TDawgRex

I find it interesting that all these posters in this thread (such as yourself) who struggled with math as a child are angry that they are making math easier to learn. It's the same concepts, they are still learning how to add operations like 9 + 6, they are just using a trick to make it simpler. It's not like they won't get the same answer or anything. So what's the problem? Do you want your children to struggle just as hard as you to learn (and possibly fail to learn these concepts)? Or wouldn't you agree that if the answer comes out the same, then the procedure (as long as it is valid) is irrelevant? As I outlined, this concept helps instill basics of advanced math topics that kids are being exposed to at younger ages and are being successful at (probably in part because of tricks like this).



posted on Sep, 5 2014 @ 08:14 AM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

I don't like nor support teaching by rote. A cookie cutter approach is bound to fail in my opinion. I excelled in school when the teachers took interest in their students and found ways to teach them as individuals...not a class.

It looks to me as if this approach the teacher uses is geared towards those with learning disabilities...in other words, the "special" kids. That can and hopefully does work for them. But it will alienate the "normal" and brighter students, which will hurt them in the long run.

I'm returning home and will have a hand in teaching my nephews and nieces and will always give an example as to were the numbers apply. Visual, mental and a hands on approach is the best way of teaching kids.

Just look at poverty stricken rural & urban areas, one teacher with a big class, usually doesn't equal a successful student graduation rate.

This is just another "Every one is Special" and gets a trophy approach.



new topics

top topics



 
15
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join