patrick.net

TwoScoopsPlissken says

That was the opening of the thread.

And I pointed out in post 22:
FNWGMOBDVZXDNW says

I agree that one has to learn what 8+5 is out of memory. On the other hand, they are not teaching what 8+5 is here. They are teaching a method with a simple example, to make it easy to learn the method. The method can then be applied to more complicated examples later. Using simple examples to teach a concept and then building up to more complicated cases is a very common way of teaching anything. I'm guessing that is the philosophy behind choosing this example, but it's a safe and logical bet.

You acknowledged this in post 25.

You may have a valid point about the age that kids can learn things. I have no doubt that brain development varies from individual to individual, especially when you account for the different ages of kids in a particular class. However, there ought to be loads of evidence that the vast majority of kids are not learning this math, if you are correct. If it's just a matter of development, these kids who fail and are held back should excel the following year when they are ready for the material. Where is that evidence? I'm not talking about a comedian making jokes or some youtuber ranting. The number of kids failing math should have increased drastically on introduction of common core. Grades should have plummeted. Where is that data? I'm open to learning.
Finally, if that is the case, maybe the lessons should just be delayed. It would not be a shock if a new change had to be adjusted on implementation.
Why attack the whole program?

FNWGMOBDVZXDNW says

The number of kids failing math should have increased drastically on introduction of common core. Grades should have plummeted. Where is that data? I'm open to learning.

Results are in:

In Fall 2015 the NAEP tested a representative sample of high school seniors in the 2016 graduating class. After seven years of Common Core curriculum and assessment, the NAEP tests showed:

The average performance of high school seniors dropped in math and failed to improve in reading from 2013 to 2015. Performance was also down on both tests from 1992, the first year that similar tests were used.

There was a decline in the percentage of students in both public and private schools that are rated as prepared for college-level work in reading and math. In 2013, 39% of students were considered ready for college math and 38% were prepared for college-level reading. But in 2015, only 37% were prepared for college.

Worse, while scores improved for students in the highest percentile group in reading, they dropped in reading and math for students in the lower percentiles. The number of students scoring below “basic” in both subjects also increased from 2013. These were the students that Common Core and the high-stakes testing regime were supposedly designed to support the most.

Test scores for students in 4th and 8th grade who have been trapped in Common Core classrooms with Common Core curriculum for pretty much their entire school careers showed a similar decline in math.

Terry Mazany, the chairman of the governing board for the test, called these results “worrisome.”

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/alan-singer/results-are-in--common-co_b_9819736.html

What's wrong with these answers? Nothing. Why the "-1"?

Notice that in the first one, 5x3 has to be 5 groups of 3, but in the next question, 4x6 has to be 4 groups of 6. Que?!?!

According to Common Core, or at least their teaching of teachers, it's wrong.

Again, we see method pushed over completely correct and valid answers.

Not necessarily common core, but here is a grading fail:



Kid is right, very observant. Should have gotten extra credit for those answers.

While some of the stats in the article are troubling, it falls short of compelling. It cites things like a year over year drop of 1% of students at some specified level. It discusses a drop in performance over time, but does not mention any control. The article does mention that states have adopted common core at different times. How have the early adopters changes over time compare to late adopters or states that never adopted common core. That would be a nice control group. That's a pretty big problem with the article.
The article mentions that the test that is being used as a yardstick was developed in 1992. Is that the right yardstick to be using? I'm not saying the answer is no. I'm just pointing out another potential issue.
Finally, you made the assertion that common core standards are not developmentally appropriate. I made the comment that failure rates would have gone through the roof if that were true. I don't see any evidence of that.
TwoScoopsPlissken says

Worse, while scores improved for students in the highest percentile group in reading, they dropped in reading and math for students in the lower percentiles. The number of students scoring below “basic” in both subjects also increased from 2013. These were the students that Common Core and the high-stakes testing regime were supposedly designed to support the most.

The difference between the highest and median income in our country has gone through the roof over those years. Suicide rates and drug abuse rates have also gone through the roof. It's not surprising that these things would have a deleterious impact on the difference in achievement between groups of students. These just two examples of many other variables that could easily affect student testing rates. That is why you really need a control to figure out what the impact of common core has been.

Making orange juice by processing oranges in some way, and grilling steaks over a fire in some way have both been around for centuries, why has grilling steaks dominated ?

Stupid question, these are two eniterely different things !


TwoScoopsPlissken says

Why all over the world, at all times, has the traditional subtraction method of "Carrying the 1" dominated?

The reason is you are talking about different things. Using the method described to confirm in your mind that 8 + 5 = 13, is simple and it's a pattern that can be expanded to understand that 59 + 43 = 102 (in your head instantly) . So it's a basic pattern for mental arithmetic. It's not being taught as a substitute for the traditional method, but it is being taught first.

Why ? Many reasons, including that some students would rather reason such simple things as 8 + 5 = 13 rather than memorize it (save memorization for the things you need to memorize in Math - there will be enough of those.)

BUT ALSO BECAUSE WHEN YOU USE THE TRADITIONAL METHOD YOU WILL BE REQUIRED TO KNOW THAT 8 + 5 = 13 ! Shouldn't the students that would prefer to choose whether to know 8 + 5 = 13 be allowed to choose whether they prefer to know that only from memory versus knowing it another way (that I personally have always used ), be given the choice, before they move on to the traditional method ?

Isn't giving students a choice in the methods they use something you argued in favor of earlier ?

Adding 8 + 5 or 7 + 6, etc. are subroutines in the traditional method. I say show them different ways of doing these subroutines and let them choose.

But I will add, that in my substantial experience teaching Math, I've learned that students that want to always rely on memory, don't do well in Math, because eventually there are just two many things to remember. (somewhere between algebra and pre-calculus thse students usually get overwhelmed). When possible you need to use reasoning and patterns. And reserve memorization for things you must memorize (which there are plenty of in Math).

This starts early.

Durrr (referring to my typos)

FNWGMOBDVZXDNW says

Finally, you made the assertion that common core standards are not developmentally appropriate. I made the comment that failure rates would have gone through the roof if that were true. I don't see any evidence of that.

The numbers are from 2016, Common Core began around 2008, and it's far from fully implemented yet, but the numbers are not encouraging.

In context, the numbers in the 2000s increased across the board in 4th Grade mathematics - before Common Core was implemented.
The "Aughties" had the biggest gains among 4th Graders for Math Proficiency. When "New Math" was dumped, the Old Method returned, but before Common Core started to be introduced.
https://www.nationsreportcard.gov/reading_math_2017_highlights/

marcus says

Making orange juice by processing oranges in some way, and grilling steaks over a fire in some way have both been around for centuries, why has grilling steaks dominated ?

So squeezing oranges and grilling steaks are both... uh... food preparation? A better example might be grilling vs. frying steaks, or maybe using propane vs. charcoal grills to cook steak.

"Charcoal is better tasting, but in the beginning let's teach kids to use propane because it's easier to get the grilling process started. Rather than getting a chimney, stuffing it with paper, lighting the paper under the chimney, waiting for the coals to get hot, spreading them on the grill, etc. etc. vs. turning a knob on the propane grill."

Simple is better than Complex. Complexity might deepen understanding but if you can't do the basic operation, nor have the capacity for the understanding behind the complexity, it's just a time wasting, frustration inducing garbage.

What may take months to teach in 1st grade might be taught in a few days in the 4th grade due to the average cognitive ability of 9 year olds being vastly better developed. With less frustration and wasted time all around.

marcus says

The reason is you are talking about different things. Using the method described to confirm in your mind that 8 + 5 = 13, is simple and it's a pattern that can be expanded to understand that 59 + 43 = 102 (in your head instantly) . So it's a basic pattern for mental arithmetic. It's not being taught as a substitute for the traditional method, but it is being taught first.

It's more complicated, involving more steps. The goal is to push a math-thinking process, but the problem is 6 year olds don't have the cognitive development to benefit from such a method.

Teaching the old method gives an instant ready tool that can be deployed now, while the "Math Thinking" can come later when the grey matter is actually wired to comprehend it.

Surprise! More complex methods hurt well-of kids less than poor kids, because the former's parents will teach them the time-tested method of memorization and "Borrowing" method after school.

marcus says

Isn't giving students a choice in the methods they use something you argued in favor of earlier ?

The image at: http://patrick.net/post/1315428/?c=1501089

My god Marcus, reading comprehension?!

The examples above, the kid did not get a choice, he got penalized for grouping the numbers in a way the teacher didn't prefer. Although what that method is, is beyond my understanding since either order he grouped the numbers in, he got points off.

This isn't choice, this is my way or the highway, where "my way" seems to be entirely arbitrary.

TwoScoopsPlissken says

My god Marcus, reading comprehension?!

As if you've taken the time to comprehend anything I've said.

I've had better arguments with a wall.

TwoScoopsPlissken says

This isn't choice, this is my way or the highway, where "my way" seems to be entirely arbitrary.

"It's about different methods."

"Here is a concrete example of a kid using the teacher's 'array' method twice and she marks each one off, even though he alternates the larger and smaller number to make the groups. It's like she's just being an arbitrary asshole using some cloudy cuckoo rules she invents on the fly."

"Ugh, it's Like talking to a wall."

The Common Core standards designers included not a single person except one who was a Math PhD who taught college students in engineering, physics, and well math. This former NASA Consultant and current Sanford Professor was outvoted by Ed.D theory mongers pushing the same collaborative "facilitator" student guided bullshit they've been harping on for 30 years. So what if it works for Asians, what are the Koreans, Japanese and Chinese up to now, 4 hours a night of Math Cram School (rote memorization).

The bizzarre grading of one stupid teacher is not an indictment of the curriculum. There have always been elementary school teachers that do a bad job with Math. This is no different with common core curriculum. This has nothing to do with what I've been arguing, which is the value of decomposing small number for adding small numbers such as
7 + 6. IF a kid doesn't remember, they could use their fingers, but the patterns are nice and are not new. Years ago I'm sure many good teachers taught the same thing using a number line. It's a visualization thing. Maybe its more for visual learners, many of whom are going to be good at Math in the long run becasue of the visual aspects of a lot of higher Math.

IF you know where 8 is on the number line relative to 10, then it's obvious that 8 + 4 is 12. It's possible to "know" this, without memorizing it, and without counting on your fingers. It's really the same as the method at the top of this thread.

Everyone is going to know 8 + 4 is eventually anyway (YOU WOULD THINK) but in this calculator age, it is actually possible for a kid to never learn it. I've seen this happen, A LOT !! Or they sort of know, but want to confirm it with their calculator instead of their mind.

And since you have gone on to other arguments, without conceding anything, I will repeat, adding 8 + 5, or 7 + 6, or 8 + 6 are actually subroutines in the traditional method.

66
+88

To do this using the traditional method, you must know that 6 plus 8 is 14 and that 7 + 8 is fifteen.

It's not steak or orange juice. You can have both. Although red wine sounds like a better combo for steak.

Here you go again. Get a taste of reality.

https://www.engageny.org/resource/grade-1-mathematics-module-1-topic

Again. Reality. That is if you want to know what first grade curriculum is actually like these days,

I'm not totally a fan of everything about common core. But what it's about more than anything is standardizing, at a reasonable level so that all states are doing more or less the same thing. IF it goes away, which might be good, some good will have come from getting mediocre and weak teachers focused more on concepts and problem solving. Not that there isn't a place for drills.

The truth is that MAth scores haven't gone down significantly in the US over the decades. And I take some of the claims above about children being less prepared for kindergarten above with a grain of salt. If true it may be due to parenting. A lot of kids used to not even go to preschool. Myself included. So if a kid isn't prepared for kindergarten, isn't that becasue the parents don't read to them and interact with them enough ? Or perhaps too many children are under nourished ? Or otherwise picking up on the stress that comes with poverty ?

marcus says

It's not steak or orange juice. You can have both.

But not when you lack the cognitive development at 6 years old. Until then, you're better off with Concrete Methods like memorization and simple visual/manipulative counting.

Marcus, I don't know how many ways I can say this.

The teachers are insisting on the number bond method, not saying "Whatever works for you". Again, the example I gave of the kid being right, and even using an array as was asked, but for some reason the teacher is marking both answers off, even though the answers are absolutely correct. If number bonds are a method, then stop insisting kids only use that method. Either it's a free choice to use whatever works for the kid or not. There's tons of evidence put out by angry parents on the Inter Tubes that teachers are pushing the Number Bond woo woo to the exclusion of everything else.

I even saw a kid's specifically correct answer marked "wrong" and the teacher demanding he estimate it with round numbers. The instruction was to get as close to the correct answer as possible, and the kid got the exact answer (using the time tested old fart methods). Who knew it was a key point in STEM where approximate answers are superior to exactly correct results. Sure is training kids to be great at STEM.

The reason we hold off on algebra and other shit until around age 10 or 11 is the same reason Irony and Sarcasm begin to make their appearance in English Books around that age. Kids have an almost non-existent ability to grasp that kind of thinking until just before puberty.

The hardcoded, biological fact is that any sort of beyond basic abstract reasoning doesn't begin until about 10 years old. Until then it's all concrete-based tasks.

If human psychology/neuroscience knows anything, it's the stages of childhood development. It's too bad NCTM thinks they can front-load "Mathematical Thinking" on 1st and 2nd Graders. Or that Asian Group Work is compatible with Western Culture despite decades of rejection by American Society. It's not gonna happen, give it up already and stop torturing parents and kids with the Facilitator/Group Work Extreme Constructivism.

Facilitators are for HS/College/Beyond level work. When you're old enough to think abstractly and create and pursue own goals. Not for kids. Young Children mimic adults. Learning Base10 is not the same as learning to walk.

Finnish teachers are stumped by Common Core 1st Grade Questions, such as the legendary "Pucks? Pennies? in a Teacup" question (Copyright PearsonTM Education). Kids are being asked to read questions that are light years ahead of what they read for reading class. And Finland beats the shit out of the US in Math.
http://taughtbyfinland.com/first-grade-math-tests-in-american-and-finnish-classrooms/

We'll be the only nation in the world that has a standard that has kids in the 1st Grade counting to 100. Straight from horses mou---
http://www.corestandards.org/Math/Content/K/CC/A/1/

Shit, that's the KINDERGARTEN standard. Holy Fuck Me.

The problem with US Education isn't K-6, it's 6-12. HS students in most states can get away with just one or two math classes, a far cry from Elementary where they have math regularly.

TwoScoopsPlissken says

The teachers are insisting on the number bond method, not saying "Whatever works for you"

OH noes !

Don't tell me they are actually forcing 6 year olds to know that 5 can be thought of as 4 + 1, or 3 + 2,

THE HORROR !!!!

OH my god ! What are they doing to the children !! Tell me they aren't actually forcing young kids to contemplate that 7 is 5 + 2, and yet it's also 4 + 3, or even 6 + 1 !!

What the FUCK. Don't they know that the children aren't ready for that level of abstraction ?

TwoScoopsPlissken says

HS students in most states can get away with just one or two math classes

Wrong. Not these days. Years ago yes.