This video is generating a lot of buzz on my facebook and twitter feeds. Thoughts? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wZEGijN_8R0

I love how condescending she was when presenting the problem to the board and how her voice was "trembling" at the end...

I found the video completely unconvincing. Her entire argument was that "showing your work" means the entire common core is unhelpful or wrong. CCSS does not advocate that one should always have to "show your work," but that showing your work is a valid method of assessment of initial assessment of the concept behind a math problem.

I wonder what other information she has. Since she was only allotted a very short time and told her time was up before she was finished, I really wonder what she would have said if she had time.

That's what I'm wondering. Since she gave a math example and I don't teach math, I honestly don't know if her complaint is legitimate or not.

I don't think you need to be a math teacher to understand her complaint. Her example illustrates the continually decreasing emphasis on "pragmatism" in education, and the growing importance of strict adherence to hollow policies, procedures, and standards. That's what I got from it, anyway. It's not necessarily about what's best for the student -- it's about falling into line. I doubt her example is the best one -- there actually may be legitimacy in drawing those circles out at a young age -- or maybe not, I'm sure it would depend on context -- but the idea behind it is true. Even if it weren't the best thing for the students in the situation, it would still be mandated. And people somewhere would be making money off it.

Decreasing emphasis on pragmatism and growing in importance of strict adherence to hollow policies, procedures, & standards? If anything, it's opposite - "showing your work" is actually moving beyond rote, hollow policies and focusing on meaning and comprehension behind expected tasks.

I've seen this and didn't find her all that convincing. We take common core state math tests and yes students have to "show their work" but it doesn't require them to draw it out in a picture like that. Writing down the equation or using another more efficient strategy is acceptable. For example, for 9 x 6 my students might write (5 x 6) + (4 x 6) to solve. As I've stated many times, I like common core, I just don't like the way it's being implemented.

If someone can more quickly find an answer by using a different (simpler) method, I don't see that as a problem? I actually see a problem if that is marked "wrong."

I understand her complaint. What I said was that I didn't know if her complaint was legit. In other words, I don't know if common core math actually mandates the process she described.

What I didn't catch is what common core standard she was making reference to. Only something about 4th grade. I didn't see a 4th grade standard that said you "have to" solve a problem a certain way.

It depends on the stage of learning and what you're trying to assess. If you're trying to assess knowledge of underlying ideas of multiplication, for example, simply looking at the end result won't give you any information. So, if the goal is to measure the outcome of the multiplication process, I'm with you. But, I don't see measuring process/knowledge of underlying constructs to be inherently bad.

And they'd be wrong. Unfortunately, this is the bane of mathematicians everywhere: that multiplication is taught as the concept of repeated addition. Multiplication is not, never has been, and never will be repeated addition. It is it's own operation and it's a scaling operation, which happens to be a handy tool for computing repeated addition.

This is what I found. CCSS.Math.Content.4.OA.A.2 Multiply or divide to solve word problems involving multiplicative comparison, e.g., by using drawings and equations with a symbol for the unknown number to represent the problem, distinguishing multiplicative comparison from additive comparison. This to me just says they need to be able to use models to solve problems, not that they have to solve them that way given they don't need them.

While I know nothing about common core, nor do I teach math, the above seems to contradict. Writing down a multiple step equation is not efficient, a child should simply know what 9X6 is. If this is common core in math, then i don't want it. Rote is not a dirty word, it is the foundation for higher thinking.

But it's not actually the distributive property either. Again, if you look at it just the right way, and skip a few steps, you could call it an application of the distributive property. The problem comes in, however, when students get the idea that an application of a concept is the definition of the concept, then later encounter a topic where that "definition" doesn't work. At this point mass confusion reigns and many students are unable to reconcile the new information and failure is almost inevitable for those students.