# How do you interpret this objective?

Discussion in 'Kindergarten' started by Lanie, Jan 14, 2010.

1. ### LanieCohort

Joined:
Mar 21, 2003
Messages:
624
0

Jan 14, 2010

One of our Missouri Grade Level Expectations reads: connect number words (orally) and quantities they represent.

Which do you think it means? We have called and emailed the state dept. for clarification because we've had mixed interpretations from teachers, but we haven't received a response yet. I just thought I'd see what others think.

1. The child reads the word seven orally and counts out seven objects.

or

2. The student looks at the number 7, says the number and counts out 7 objects.

3. ### AliceaccMultitudinous

Joined:
Apr 12, 2006
Messages:
27,534
6

Jan 14, 2010

I'm not a Kindergarten teacher, but I would say he should associate the number word (seven) with 7 objects. I'm assuming that somewhere there's also an objective asking the child to associate the numeral (7) with 7 objects.

4. ### LanieCohort

Joined:
Mar 21, 2003
Messages:
624
0

Jan 14, 2010

Actually, there isn't another Kdg. objective like that and that is what made us start questioning the one above more. The next closest objective is: use concrete objects to compose and decompose values up to 10--and we teach addition and subtraction for that one.

5. ### AliceaccMultitudinous

Joined:
Apr 12, 2006
Messages:
27,534
6

Jan 14, 2010

Then I would overshoot and ensure that the kids knew that "five" meant the same thing as "5" which means the same thing as the number of fingers you have on one hand.

If you're teaching addition and subtraction, it sounds like you have the objective covered regardless of how it's meant.

6. ### LanieCohort

Joined:
Mar 21, 2003
Messages:
624
0

Jan 14, 2010

That's a very good point. We hadn't thought of that. We were just concerned that our group is having such a hard time catching on this year and number words aren't easy to sound out phonetically for Kdg. kiddos.

7. ### sevenplusConnoisseur

Joined:
Aug 3, 2006
Messages:
1,719
105

Jan 14, 2010

The word "orally" makes me think that they are not expected to read the word. It sure is an odd way to phrase it, though.

8. ### halpey1Groupie

Joined:
May 14, 2006
Messages:
1,217
0

Jan 16, 2010

I agree with sevenplus... It sounds to me like they are supposed to understand the 'concept' of 7 and associate with 7 objects - not be able to actually read the number 7.

9. ### KLSSwimmerHabitué

Joined:
Jul 1, 2008
Messages:
960
0

Jan 16, 2010

I think that it is where the child reads word seven and counts out seven objects or finds a picture with seven objects.

10. ### jeiferRookie

Joined:
Jul 20, 2005
Messages:
63
0

Jan 17, 2010

I think because it has the word "(orally)" in it, means that they hear the word orally and make a set not that they have to know the spelling of the number word.

11. ### clarnet73Moderator

Joined:
Apr 4, 2002
Messages:
6,123
0

Jan 19, 2010

I would vote for hearing "seven" and knowing how many that actually is (being able ot give or taek 7 of something)

12. ### tracykaliskiConnoisseur

Joined:
Jul 16, 2008
Messages:
1,927
1

Jan 19, 2010

That's what I would interpret it to mean as well.

Joined:
May 19, 2005
Messages:
339
0

Jan 19, 2010

Lanie, have you had a response yet from the state? Just curious. I agree that since it specifies "orally", the child should hear the numeral then be able to quantify it.

14. ### LanieCohort

Joined:
Mar 21, 2003
Messages:
624
0

Jan 20, 2010

I just got a response from the state dept. yesterday and here is what they said,

"In regards to GLE N3BK, it is referring to the student being able to say the correct number for the actual number of items/objects. The number of objects should not exceed 10 as kindergarten students are only expected to compose and decompose values up to 10 (GLE N1CK)."

I think it is definitely a strange way of wording it. We would have probably continued thinking it was the actual number words though if we hadn't really started noticing there wasn't a separate objective for identifying the number and the number of objects, specifically.

Thank you to everyone for your interpretations. We got the same varied responses from other teachers in our building. Obviously, it may need to be rewritten so that it's easily understood by everyone reading it.