Discussion in 'General Education' started by Ms.Holyoke, Sep 2, 2018.
Sep 3, 2018
I think the majority of teachers are.
I’m not saying all public school teachers are not able to, but I’ve read about a fair few school districts that require their teachers to use guided curriculum (prepared lesson plans) and specific materials provided by a publisher. If I wanted to order an entirely new textbook of my choosing my admin would permit it, so long as I provided a valid explanation, and would purchase them without a second thought. I also am free to not even use the textbook at all if I want because my notes and problem sets are better than the textbook problems, according to my students. It’s totally up to the teacher and I like that approach to education.
I'm in a public school. We follow our state standards, but beyond that we're free to teacher however and whatever we want. I don't use a textbook at all and pick all of our short stories, novels, etc... I have complete autonomy over my curriculum. There are so many different ways and different works I can use to teach them to do things like cite textual evidence or provide a thorough and accurate summary. I like having that freedom and could never teach somewhere where I didn't.
If you are using California State Standards, then you are using standards. You made it sound like standards were nonsense and your school didn’t use them, so you were just making things up as you wished.
So you pick and choose which CA common core state standards you want to teach—as long as they’re not “stupid”?
No, I teach the standards, but not the methods that go with them. There is a difference.
To put it in football terms, futuremathsprof is still aiming for the endzone every time, for every standard, like every single other person should be, but is able to "play action" in each play, rather than having to have the play called from the sidelines from each play.
No, we teach all of the standards, but we use traditional methods of teaching math that aren’t moronic.
Examples of things we don’t do:
My colleagues and I always get a good laugh of when I find Common Core Math memes.
And don’t get me started on Integrated Math. Lol, Integrated “Math”.
I love this!
This digresses far from the initial topic, but remember that you're teaching high school math, not elementary math. These "memes" are taken out of context, and don't illustrate the importance/reasoning of certain strategies, not to mention they're often bad examples of teaching (being too absolutely strict). For example, the standard algorithm for multiplication is a standard, but is a fifth grade standard. In the years before that, the goal is building conceptual understanding (that actually will apply more broadly, that way, to future math they'll encounter). That doesn't mean I tell them they can never use the standard algorithm, but rather, looking at varieties of strategies. Naturally, my end goal is that they see the need for efficiency and thus the use of the standard algorithm.
What I always point to with my kids is illustrating how I can do 99999x7 (or something wild like that) in my head...not because I'm doing all the algorithmic steps, but because I know that that's just one 7 less than 700,000, which I know immediately is 699,993.
(And, as always, common core is a set of standards. Some curriculum / stuff within that curriculum is silly, certainly, but that's the publishers, not the set of standards.)
Meanwhile I'm playing hockey and wondering where everyone's sticks are
I agree with this for the most part. I don’t might having elementary students be taught using manipulatives to represent place value. But when the entire algorithm is built around that and you have to spend a significant amount of time doing one problem and it takes an entire page practically, it’s unnecessary and stupid. Math has worked the same way for centuries and now all of a sudden you’re telling me it’s too “hard”?
Hahahahaha! I just spit my drink everywhere. Gosh darn you!
I don't necessarily support these algorithms either, but I don't teach elementary so I don't really know a ton about them.
That said, it was you who stated earlier:
"Don’t discount some things because it requires you to do a little more work."
By your own philosophy, if some students need a different method because the standard one is not clicking for them, shouldn't they be given that tool?
I'm sure you could find research showing how the Common Core approach helps some students just like you found research showing that posting standards helps some students. I'm just reflecting your own philosophy back to you .
Can you give me an example? In ELA we teach so many different strategies to read, etc. . , which are covered in the standards. That's why I never know what to post.
He used the words "moronic" and "stupid" in two separate posts to describe the Common Core approach to math. Let's be a little more open-minded, @futuremathsprof
Math still works the same way. However, the difference is that, now, we try to help students understand why it works. We help them to develop number sense and reasoning skills rather than simply telling them to follow a series of steps to get an answer. It is necessary for elementary students. If you don't understand that and you're interested in forming an educated opinion (rather than just spewing out an antagonistic point of view), you might consider doing some research about elementary math instruction. Otherwise, please stick to advanced high school math and spare us your opinion of elementary math (It's not Common Core; it's just good math instruction. Even the states that have opted out of Common Core have standards requiring similar strategies be taught.).
I agree. I feel like I am teaching some elementary math in the beginning of 6th grade (long division, decimal compuation, etc.) I love the new direction that math instruction is going in. When I learned to multiply decimals, I was just told to move the decimal place over and multiply "normally". Now, in a lot of the lessons I've seen, students are taught to make estimates and understand the algorithm by connecting it to fractions. In my opinion, it's much harder to teach but it's better for students to develop a conceptual understanding and number sense.
No one is saying that math is too "hard" for kids. I would argue that we are making it MORE rigorous by asking kids to understand each process.
That’s funny, this kind of stuff wasn’t taught when I was in elementary school and my STEM friends and I did just fine in college without knowing that rubbish. Employers and people outside of public schools don’t take Common Core Math seriously, my colleagues and I included, and for good reason.
The Common Core Standards by themselves are great. Their implementation, as suggested in Common Core elementary math texts, is complete bull crap.
If these “methods” were so effective than math scores would be much higher than they are.
I "learned" math by memorizing formulas ans algorithms. I was able to remember the procedures and whar numbers to put where. I didn't understand the 'why" of much of what I was doing until I began teaching it.
In Ontario, our math standards all mention, "using a variety of methods or strategies". Most students will identify the methods that are most efficient and use those exclusively. Some will move between methods depending on the situation. Having more than one tool in the tool box is never a bad thing, Creative thinking is one quality that effective mathematicians (and students of all subjects) possess.
Separate names with a comma.