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.

 

School principal commits suicide amid Common Core cheating allegations.

page: 2
11
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 27 2015 @ 11:44 AM
link   
All I see in my mind when I see a video of a common core classroom is a large public square with people in gray coveralls in line like soldiers and an overseer on a megaphone saying "Workers Workers!!!" and them answering "YES YES!!!" and then being fed their job for the day and shuffled off to their handlers.

Our kids will be so unable to think imaginatively and will be so trained to answer "authority" immediately and with no questioning and be so undereducated, that they will be doomed, and so will everyone else (if we're still alive).


When they use methods for teaching kids with learning disabilities to ALL kids.... there is a serious issue. What happens to the kids who are uber smart and get bored or just laugh at that crap?

My entire family all live together, 4 generations, and we have kids in 1st, 2nd, 3rd, and 9th grades at the moment and the ones exposed this method are the little ones. They figured out fast the older kids wouldn't conform to this, but by the time the 1st grader is in high school it'll be normal so they won't argue. I about had a coronary when our little ones came home spouting "Class Class!!" "YES YES!!".

I'm just grateful our local teachers think it sucks too and quit doing it after the first month or so. I also think the parents frothing at the mouth and storming the gates got it stopped, but the teachers almost all agreed with us that it was bad. That's when we learned that these methods (rote leaning) are for kids with pretty serious learning disabilities.

Humanity is seriously doomed... I just don't understand it anymore.

Lil

ETA: I do think this is all a culmination of no child left behind and everyone gets a trophy. They have marginalized the way our kids think and want them to believe the "deserve" this or that. When in reality it all takes hard work and striving to better yourself and never quitting, so you can accomplish and receive what you EARN not what's handed to you.

We'd never have Olympic athletes if they followed those rules. We'll never have researchers or scientists or pilots or...you get the idea, if people don't strive to be BETTER at something than everyone else. And all around us I see these values being destroyed, scrubbed from history and no longer encouraged in our youngsters.

It's a sad commentary when parents are reluctant to say "no" because they feel guilty for working too much to own that million dollar house and 70k car. Why not live within your means, so one parent can stay home or if both need to work, do it on alternate schedules so one is always home? Instead we get children who are basically sociopaths, narcissistic monsters who believe everything revolves around them because they are not taught differently by guilt ridden parents.
edit on 7/27/2015 by Lilroanie because: ETA




posted on Jul, 27 2015 @ 12:09 PM
link   
Looks like the Atlanta teachers who got caught doing the same thing.



posted on Jul, 27 2015 @ 12:49 PM
link   
America needs to do something to start regaining our position as a producer of intelligent professionals and leaders. It seems that most of the physicians, tech specialists and spelling-bee winners, are from other countries.



posted on Jul, 27 2015 @ 12:51 PM
link   
Nm
edit on 27-7-2015 by Annee because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 27 2015 @ 02:18 PM
link   
I'd like to look into this. I've always enjoyed math somewhat. I did get a D in algebra once, but didn't happen again. I find myself often going back to elementary things because I don't remember them. Like several years ago I couldn't remember how to do long division by hand. I did figure it out. I also opened up an old algebra book and relearned how to add/subtract/multiply/divide fractions. If I hadn't looked, I wouldn't have remembered.

But something comes to mind regarding these changes they're making to the curriculum--to the way kids are learning the math. Specifically, calculators!!!! We use them so much in the modern era. It used to be most math was done on paper. Businesses did have mechanical calculators, but they weren't exactly something every schoolboy would have. Basically, in those days doing thigns by hand was a necessary skill. But fast forward to today when even our watch has a calculator and suddenly doing things by hand isn't as meaningful. So it makes me ask: Should we change how we teach it or should we try to teach people how to do math in their head?

I think everyone is familiar with trying to do math in their head. For me, it has always been clumsy. It's easy for simple ones like 103 * 6 (100 * 6 + 3 * 6 = 618) but 112 * 36 is harder (100 * 36 + 12 * 30 + 12 * 6 = 4032). In many cases it's much easier if you have a piece of paper and a pen already. For example, the latter problem I did in ~19 seconds--probably can do faster even. But almost always a paper and pen aren't convenient. I usually use a calculator, but sometimes I don't have one. Doing these problems in my head takes much longer than doing it on paper and much much longer than doing it on the calculator. But given my memory isn't the sharpest some people out there might be doing it in their head far faster.

EDIT: I don't train myself to do the harder ones in my head, but honest to god they take MUCH longer... a problem like 347 * 81 took me several minutes to do in my head. I know, I'm retarded, but ti's the truth. If a calculator is immediately handy, I'll do the problem in ~6 seconds.
edit on 27-7-2015 by jonnywhite because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 27 2015 @ 02:25 PM
link   
There are no signs in my kids' classes forbidding them from help from outside the classroom. However, I do struggle with helping them. I'm not fond of it, but my older daughter excels in math, and if she gets a better grasp as a result of a different method, great!



posted on Jul, 27 2015 @ 03:11 PM
link   
a reply to: Lilroanie
Hey who knows maybe you're right. I hear they're taking advice from the chinese school system, since it produces so many star pupils. Problem is, do they take into account all the students who fail to meet he standard?

Do we really want to emulate a system created in a more communist society, especially on which has dramatically lower standards of humane treatment? A place where people are worked so hard they sweat blood.

We probably haven't went to that extreme, but it's a lot of stress on students. Does china accurately account for the students who fail or suicide? China already has a much higher population than the US, so it makes sense they potentially can produce more schooled individuals than the US. If htey pressure them in school more than would be acceptable in the US, maybe they can increase those numbers further.

It's a question in my mind of which becomes most important: sweating blood or gaining personal freedoms and humanity?
edit on 27-7-2015 by jonnywhite because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 27 2015 @ 03:26 PM
link   

originally posted by: greencmp
If we are going to teach a useful new way of doing math, I would suggest this.

01111110*00000010=11111100

Seems more utilitarian than unnecessarily "factoring".



Good old bit shifting. Reducing things to 10's and adding or subtracting zeros is the base 10 version of what you just did.


originally posted by: johnwick
So that very complex bs, is easier than adding 126+126?

Y'all sure it is.


Now do a more complicated one like 43*27. That should take you under 5 seconds to do accurately in your head.


Every extra step exponentially increases the chances of making a mistake and getting the wrong answer.


Incorrect. Reducing to values of 10's and 100's drastically reduces the chances of making a mistake. Using my above example, you want to break 43*27 into 4 parts that can be answered with a times table and some simple multiplication.
40*20 = 800
40*7 = 280
3*20 = 60
3*7 = 21

Then you can further simplify that to 800+300+60+1 for 1161.

When you get really good with this method you actually start doing math from left to right like I do which is much faster (left to right is how all the fast mathematicians do it)



posted on Jul, 27 2015 @ 03:29 PM
link   

originally posted by: carewemust
America needs to do something to start regaining our position as a producer of intelligent professionals and leaders. It seems that most of the physicians, tech specialists and spelling-bee winners, are from other countries.


Common core (atleast for math, I can't speak for other areas) does just that. I can sympathize with parents who don't understand what's going on, but they shouldn't restrict their childrens potential just because they don't understand the math.



posted on Jul, 27 2015 @ 03:35 PM
link   

originally posted by: Aazadan(....)
Incorrect. Reducing to values of 10's and 100's drastically reduces the chances of making a mistake. Using my above example, you want to break 43*27 into 4 parts that can be answered with a times table and some simple multiplication.
40*20 = 800
40*7 = 280
3*20 = 60
3*7 = 21

Then you can further simplify that to 800+300+60+1 for 1161.

When you get really good with this method you actually start doing math from left to right like I do which is much faster (left to right is how all the fast mathematicians do it)

I've never trained myself to do the longer math probelms. It honestly took me several minutes to do the 43*27. Maybe now is a good time to learn a method. Looking at what you wrote here, I can start to see what you're saying.

Problem: 43*27

4*2 = 800
4*7 = 280
3*2 = 60
3*7 = 21

1080 + 81 = 1161

Problem: 43 * 7
4*7 = 280
3*7 = 21

280 + 21 = 301

Problem: 131 * 937

1*9 = 90000
1*3 = 3000
1*7 = 700
3*9 = 27000
3*3 = 900
3*7 = 210
1*9 = 900
1*3 = 30
1*7 = 7

= 122747

Now if I do this over and over and over and over it should be almost automatic for previously hard ones. However, bigger numbers still are just as hard as before. My memory is a limiting constraint on this. Paper remembers better than I do. I have to pause to let my memory absorb.
edit on 27-7-2015 by jonnywhite because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 27 2015 @ 03:47 PM
link   

originally posted by: jonnywhite
But something comes to mind regarding these changes they're making to the curriculum--to the way kids are learning the math. Specifically, calculators!!!! We use them so much in the modern era. It used to be most math was done on paper. Businesses did have mechanical calculators, but they weren't exactly something every schoolboy would have. Basically, in those days doing thigns by hand was a necessary skill. But fast forward to today when even our watch has a calculator and suddenly doing things by hand isn't as meaningful. So it makes me ask: Should we change how we teach it or should we try to teach people how to do math in their head?


It depends on your field, in some you still do a lot of math without a calculator. For example if I'm in a whiteboard session for a programming problem (effectively any CS major type field) I need to do math by hand, I can't be walking back and forth to a calculator on the computer and some math isn't even that simple to do on a calculator. For example, maybe I'm diagramming several virtual objects and I need to determine the distance between them, I need to be able to compute sin, cos, and tan values by hand. Engineers run into the same problem when determining the length of an object. In other cases you need to be able to set the formula up for a spreadsheet, which requires being able to compute quickly and know how to build it. This method is again all about formula construction.


I think everyone is familiar with trying to do math in their head. For me, it has always been clumsy. It's easy for simple ones like 103 * 6 (100 * 6 + 3 * 6 = 618) but 112 * 36 is harder (100 * 36 + 12 * 30 + 12 * 6 = 4032). In many cases it's much easier if you have a piece of paper and a pen already. For example, the latter problem I did in ~19 seconds--probably can do faster even. But almost always a paper and pen aren't convenient. I usually use a calculator, but sometimes I don't have one. Doing these problems in my head takes much longer than doing it on paper and much much longer than doing it on the calculator. But given my memory isn't the sharpest some people out there might be doing it in their head far faster.


Break it into parts. In multiplication and division there is a distributive property. This says that 12*5 is the same as 10*5+2*5. So to take your 112*36 example lets round things off:
112*36 can be stated as 112*30+112*6 but we can go a step further
110*30
2*30
110*6
2*6

Now if you want to, you can go even further here:
100*30 = 3000
10*30 = 300
2*30 = 60
100*6 = 600
10*6 = 60
2*6 = 12

From here it's simply combining terms

3000+900+120+12 = 4032

This probably seems like a lot at first, but in practice you don't need to keep all 6 values in your head, you're never tracking more than 2 or 3 because you can calculate the thousands, then the hundreds and add, and so on. So really the problem in your head goes something like
3360+112*6
3360+100*6+12*6
3960+12*6


EDIT: I don't train myself to do the harder ones in my head, but honest to god they take MUCH longer... a problem like 347 * 81 took me several minutes to do in my head. I know, I'm retarded, but ti's the truth. If a calculator is immediately handy, I'll do the problem in ~6 seconds.


Not to brag, but calculators are slow. I can do most problems faster in my head than the average person can open up a calculator app and put the numbers in. It is 100% due to this method. Calculators are still wonderful tools and they have their place, but they're not an excuse for being unable to do math yourself and this method makes it faster and easier to do math in your head than to use a calculator. I see that as a good thing.



posted on Jul, 27 2015 @ 03:53 PM
link   
a reply to: jonnywhite

This is where doing math left to right comes into play, you never need to remember more than 2 term plus the problem (with the problem usually being written down). Lets use 43*27 again. With practice you don't need to write every term down, you can just factor it for the portion you need as you go. You start with the larger factors and work your way down.

I'm not sure if this part precisely is taught in common core or not, but it's how I do things.

40*20+problem
800+problem
800+40*7+problem
800+280+problem
1080+problem
1080+3*20+problem
1080+60+problem
1140+problem
1140+3*27
1140+21
1161
edit on 27-7-2015 by Aazadan because: (no reason given)

edit on 27-7-2015 by Aazadan because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 27 2015 @ 03:57 PM
link   
a reply to: Aazadan
You mention the distributive property, but all a person has to do is imagine 112 * 6 in their head as a grid. If they do it's easy to understand 100*6 + 12 * 6 is the same thing as 107*6 + 5*6 or 111 * 6 + 1 * 6.

And btw the new method speeds up the multiplication probelms a lot for me. I go from being like five minutes down to about a minute or less for xxx * xx or xx * xx. I was very slow. My memory absorbs like tar--slowly.
edit on 27-7-2015 by jonnywhite because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 27 2015 @ 04:07 PM
link   

originally posted by: jonnywhite
Hey who knows maybe you're right. I hear they're taking advice from the chinese school system, since it produces so many star pupils. Problem is, do they take into account all the students who fail to meet he standard?


The Asian system in general (not just China) is extremely demanding. In the US we can't really seem to figure out what we want to do. A large part of society wants to ratchet up the pressure and emulate them and their very good test scores, but others want to emulate what the Europeans are doing which is lower pressure, and slightly lower scores but has a much higher quality of life.

When it comes to China specifically, there is no valid data for their educational system. The few scores China has submitted have been cherry picked from their very top students. In fact, when you look at the differences in how nations report testing the US has a very good testing system. I won't derail this thread but I went into detail on this very subject in another post not all too long ago. If you're interested in reading about it, here it is:
www.abovetopsecret.com...

If you don't want to read it, the gist of it is that states like Connecticut and Massachusetts are in the top 10 in the world for education quality while Florida is below countries that don't even have a formal schooling process. This gives us a fairly respectable average but creates a situation where there is a huge disparity between our good and bad states. One of the big aims in Common Core is to normalize the quality between states so that a degree from one state is just as good as a degree from another. The data isn't in yet if that's what's happening but it is needed really bad.



posted on Jul, 27 2015 @ 04:09 PM
link   
As someone who does math regularly, I appreciate some of the "new" ways of doing things, however, I have seen a couple of problems pop up:

In some cases (unlike the above example), the CC way prevents you from actually understanding what is going on with the math and is more of a trick. This will bite you later on as you no longer have the ability to determine if the answer is even reasonable. Of course, they already did this to millions of kids who are calculator dependent.

Secondly, I have found extreme resistance to allowing a child who already knows another way (sometimes much better way), to do his/her work the way they already know.

I live in a town which is thick with engineers. They definitely don't like the gov't telling them the "best" way to learn something. The sooner people learn that there is no "best" way for everyone, the better.



posted on Jul, 27 2015 @ 04:10 PM
link   

originally posted by: gladtobehere
Source.


The principal of an innovative West Harlem public school killed herself the day after her students took the state Common Core exams — which were later tossed out because she cheated, The Post has learned.

Theres more info at the link to the news story.

I honestly dont know much about CC but its my impression that there arent really any wrong answers, that if you "try" (or provide some type of response), youre rewarded for your efforts.

I can only imagine how badly the "education" system must be, if the principal felt compelled to cheat on exams that have no wrong answers...

Than again, if the following example is true, it wouldnt surprise me if more people started jumping into traffic.







Ah the "new math," where academia tries to out-clever itself by far.



posted on Jul, 27 2015 @ 04:35 PM
link   

originally posted by: Halfswede
In some cases (unlike the above example), the CC way prevents you from actually understanding what is going on with the math and is more of a trick. This will bite you later on as you no longer have the ability to determine if the answer is even reasonable. Of course, they already did this to millions of kids who are calculator dependent.


Can you elaborate?



posted on Jul, 27 2015 @ 05:01 PM
link   

originally posted by: Aazadan(...)
Not to brag, but calculators are slow. I can do most problems faster in my head than the average person can open up a calculator app and put the numbers in. It is 100% due to this method. Calculators are still wonderful tools and they have their place, but they're not an excuse for being unable to do math yourself and this method makes it faster and easier to do math in your head than to use a calculator. I see that as a good thing.

The method is nice, but it's still wayyyy faster for me to use a calculator if it's convenient. Maybe you've learned the methods so well you can add big numbers faster than opening up a calculator, but if the calculator is already open and a person has a lot of numbers to compute then, odds are they'll use the calculator. You might not, but that's you.

Example: I can't do 1289 * 51 in my head faster than my calculator--even if it's buried in another room. Can you? What about 138326*22783?

There's a reason people did these things on paper and with calculators. You seem to think doing it in the head is faster. Well, I don't think everybody is like you. Am I misinterpreting your statement?
edit on 27-7-2015 by jonnywhite because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 27 2015 @ 05:02 PM
link   
She was embezzling overtime money from the school for her personal projects, and coercing staff to cover it up.

Can you see that it's not common core that made her desperate. For math, you do realize they're teaching the kids a bunch of Arabic, right? First it's numbers, next is surahs, then your kid comes home with a towel on his head. Math teacher was a martyr and secretly working for isis.

That poor woman to jump. Class dismissed.



posted on Jul, 27 2015 @ 05:25 PM
link   

originally posted by: jonnywhite
The method is nice, but it's still wayyyy faster for me to use a calculator if it's convenient. Maybe you've learned the methods so well you can add big numbers faster than opening up a calculator, but if the calculator is already open and a person has a lot of numbers to compute then, odds are they'll use the calculator. You might not, but that's you.

Example: I can't do 1289 * 51 in my head faster than my calculator--even if it's buried in another room. Can you? What about 138326*22783?

There's a reason people did these things on paper and with calculators. You seem to think doing it in the head is faster. Well, I don't think everybody is like you. Am I misinterpreting your statement?


Just like anything in life, it's a matter of practice and circumstance. You've been doing it for a couple hours at this point, I've been doing it for over a decade and I was fast in the first place. That said, when I'm sick of thinking I'll still use a calculator but it's not my default option for this type of stuff (hypergeometric distributions on the other hand, I can't reach for a calculator fast enough)

Edit: Just caught your edit.
The answer to both of your problems is yes, I won't type them both out but here's the first.
1289*51 is the same as 1290*50-50+1289 which I change to 12900*5+1239 and then 64500+1239 and then 65739.

I'm not saying that calculators are bad, and while calculating this stuff comes very naturally to me at this point I see first hand daily that others aren't as fast as me (note that in most cases I prefer to use Fermi estimates than find exact values) but what I am saying is that this type of technique is extremely valuable and is the sort of thing that will push the next generation to the next level in mathematical ability.
edit on 27-7-2015 by Aazadan because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
11
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join