# Posting the standard every day

Discussion in 'General Education' started by Ms.Holyoke, Sep 2, 2018.

Not open for further replies.

Joined:
Jul 20, 2012
Messages:
3,251
1,219

Sep 3, 2018

Let me repeat: It’s not Common Core. It’s just good math instruction. If there are specific textbooks or published programs that you have a problem with, that’s different. But do not confuse teaching students number sense and reasoning skills with those items. And, please, do your research. You’re better than that.

mathmagic likes this.

Joined:
Jun 27, 2014
Messages:
3,636
981

Sep 3, 2018

I’m not trying to make this in a public versus private debate, but what I’ve noticed when public middle schoolers come to my high school is that they have a huge deficit in basic math skills that they should have mastered earlier on. The common spread is that they took Integrated Math or did Common Core and they basically learned nothing from it. And this isn’t just in the subject of math.

ALL incoming students to my private school take a diagnostic test for each subject and quite a few of the students from public schools score abysmally. For example, we recently had some 11th graders tested for Spanish and some of the students got 0% on the diagnostic, meaning they got every single question wrong. The foreign language teachers were shocked as said students couldn’t write the opposite of “malo,” which is bueno, and the instructions were written in English. And here’s the scary part: They got A’s in Spanish 1 and 2 and the Spanish 2 teacher wrote great job on their progress report.

It’s ridiculous and it happens more and more every year. These incoming students barely know anything and it makes our jobs more difficult when I have to teach a student how to use order of operations and their multiplication tables in high school. Let’s stop making multiplication, for instance, out to be more difficult than it is. Products are commutative so the ordering doesn’t matter — the end result is the same, so A times B equals B times A. Take 5x3, for instance. You have five groups of three, or three groups of five. This gives us 3+3+3+3+3 or 5+5+5, which gives us 15 when summed or added together. Students quickly see that multiplication is really just repeated addition. Then, students begin to see that is more expeditious to use the standard algorithm.

I tutor students from their elementary years all the way up to the collegiate level for math and science. Every single time I see them doing Common Core “Math” I shake my head and show them the proper way — not just making them memorize things as I stress understanding and not just memorization. I’ve been very successful at helping students who struggle at math or don’t have an aptitude for math. And I *never* use Common Core “Math” as it is not used in the real world and would result in your termination if used in the workplace.

If your methods were as effective as declared, then students would be at least proficient in arithmetic. They’re not, so...

Last edited: Sep 3, 2018

Joined:
Jun 27, 2014
Messages:
3,636
981

Sep 3, 2018

I have no problem with teaching students number sense and reasoning skills. I also private tutor elementary students and middle school students in small to large groups and they seem to understand the material and I don’t use the aforementioned methods. And these students are by no means “good” at math.

4. ### Ima TeacherMaven

Joined:
Oct 25, 2005
Messages:
5,346
842

Sep 3, 2018

Our state standards are based on common core. For ELA standards, they are still ONE basic standard. I base my learning target from that standard.

mathmagic likes this.

Joined:
Jun 27, 2014
Messages:
3,636
981

Sep 3, 2018

And said texts just so happen to all be labeled Common Core. I use a few texts and they say “adapted to Common Core standards.” The texts without that label and just say Common Core utilize the methods I’ve discussed previously. That’s why I think what I do.

6. ### Ima TeacherMaven

Joined:
Oct 25, 2005
Messages:
5,346
842

Sep 3, 2018

Common Core is a set of standards. It is not an instructional method.

Joined:
Jun 27, 2014
Messages:
3,636
981

Sep 3, 2018

I agree with you. I’ve said that many times now — are you all reading what I’m posting?

The instructional methods as outlined in Common Core Math texts are ludicrous. The standards themselves are great.

Joined:
Jul 20, 2012
Messages:
3,251
1,219

Sep 3, 2018

I don’t know what you think “Common Core ‘Math’” is... All of these texts you’re complaining about don’t teach things the exact same way. There are many ways to teach the CCSS. And, since it’s just math, it is, in fact, used in the real world. I don’t know about you, but, in my experience, my employer doesn’t watch how I solve math problems.

The way you described multiplication is pretty similar to how it’s taught in my school. We do t use CCSS, but ours are similar. I still think you have a lot to learn about elementary math if you want others to take you seriously.

Ms.Holyoke likes this.
9. ### mathmagicEnthusiast

Joined:
Nov 20, 2012
Messages:
2,407
1,154

Sep 3, 2018

I'm honestly a bit surprised, as is bella, with this coming from you; you're usually pretty on top of these things.

Common Core State Standards, are, as they say, standards. Those are the expectations we want the kids to achieve.

Like you said - you prefer to go your own way to those standards. The curriculum that you're mentioning certainly says CCSS on it...why? Because advertising that it aligns means they can pull in more money. But as teachers, again, like you said (though not specifically this - but alluding to it), should be utilizing that as a tool, not word-for-word.

Go back to a previous analogy: CCSS is the endzone. (or the net, if we're thinking hockey...ha) Envision, and the other curriculum, are one set of plays that could be called from the sideline (or in the huddle/bench). That said, there are other possible plays that could be called.

In the end, there's always been plenty of people that struggle when you get to middle/high school math. And there have been plenty of teachers in elementary who probably need additional training in math ed. But that doesn't mean that these set of standards led us to death and destruction or anything...

YoungTeacherGuy and bella84 like this.

Joined:
Jun 27, 2014
Messages:
3,636
981

Sep 3, 2018

This just proves that no one is reading my posts or only the parts thy want to read. I just addressed this very comment in a previous post.

11. ### mathmagicEnthusiast

Joined:
Nov 20, 2012
Messages:
2,407
1,154

Sep 3, 2018

So your issue is with Pearson, Houghton Mifflin (or whatever it was), etc... - the core (no pun intended...ha) companies that develop these, not "common core". It's a distinct difference that, along with the rise of social media, has led to many protesting "common core", when really, those standards are virtually the same and/or better (or more applicable to modern times).

futuremathsprof likes this.

Joined:
Jun 27, 2014
Messages:
3,636
981

Sep 3, 2018

I know they don’t teach these methods the same way. I never said that, nor did I imply that. Show me the quotation where I said that.

What I said are the “instructional methods in Common Core Math texts... are ludicrous.”

Joined:
Jun 27, 2014
Messages:
3,636
981

Sep 3, 2018

Yes! You are correct.

I just say “Common Core Math” because it is an umbrella term and it is easier to lump all of the texts together instead of calling out individual publishers.

As aforementioned, I teach using a book that says adapted to Common Core Standards and it’s a great textbook, IMO. However, the publisher still uses traditional methods for solving math problems. The elementary and middle schools texts that I’ve seen, which say Common Core Math, use the methods that I strongly disagree with. They confuse students more than help them.

Joined:
Jul 20, 2012
Messages:
3,251
1,219

Sep 3, 2018

You said it (again) right here in the post. In one sentence, you say they don’t all teach math the same way. In the next sentence, you say that the methods are ludicrous. Seems contradictory to me. Are you really saying the every single method of teaching math is one of these texts is ludicrous simply because the book has a a CCSS label on it? I would think you’d look at each text individually rather than assuming them to all be equally bad.

Mathmagic was correct. This is not what I’d expect coming from you.

Joined:
Jun 27, 2014
Messages:
3,636
981

Sep 3, 2018

Your logic is invalid. Saying a series of texts are ludicrous does not equate to saying they all use the same methods. Really now?

Joined:
Jul 20, 2012
Messages:
3,251
1,219

Sep 3, 2018

But I see the elementary books and resources as beneficial as you see the high school texts. I don’t claim to know anything about high school and wouldn’t dare to claim that I know what instructional methods are best for high school. Can’t you accept that your qualifications as a high school math teacher may not make you the best judge of elementary math resources? Those who teach it are in a better position to judge it than you.

17. ### Camel13Rookie

Joined:
Dec 31, 2013
Messages:
95
18

Sep 3, 2018

I have laminated bright colored card stock which I velcroed to the wall beside my whiteboard. Since I have five separate classes, I need five separate Objectives per day. I use every surface in my whiteboard so I didn’t want them on there. Frankly, I find having to write them irritating, but for the frequent students that walk up to my desk every day before class to ask “what are we doing today?”, I remind them to read the objectives!

mathmagic likes this.
18. ### mathmagicEnthusiast

Joined:
Nov 20, 2012
Messages:
2,407
1,154

Sep 3, 2018

Well, this circles back around then, because then this implies a dislike of the standards, because this is exactly what the standards ask for: multiple methods that utilize place value meaning to approach problems, with the eventual push for more efficient/algorithmic strategies. I won't rehash everything I've said, as it'd be repetitious, but the companies purposefully put those strategies in there (i.e. box method, expanded algorithm, breaking apart - all for the eventual multiplication algorithm), as that's what the CCSS ask for. *sigh* Moving on...

Joined:
Jul 20, 2012
Messages:
3,251
1,219

Sep 3, 2018

I didn’t ask a second question.

20. ### Ima TeacherMaven

Joined:
Oct 25, 2005
Messages:
5,346
842

Sep 3, 2018

Here are two instances in the same post where you mention students who “did Common Core math”. And that you never use Common Core math.

I don’t see how I’m misinterpreting that.