I am constantly hearing (through media, friends on facebook, etc.) people complain about Common Core Math. Most of the complaints state that students have to solve problems using certain strategies or tools that are a bit confusing, when there is usually a more simple way to solve the problem. I am only very familiar with the 2nd grade standards, so I'm looking for clarification. Are there some math standards that specifically state exactly how students must solve a problem? I can't think of any examples for 2nd grade. Our standards are pretty basic: Solve story problems involving money, add and subtract fluently within 20, recognize numbers as odd or even... So where are these "odd" strategies coming from? Are the standards more specific in other grades? Or is it just the math curriculum that some schools are choosing to purchase?
I was wondering the same thing! I also teach second grade and it seems that our CC Math standards are pretty basic and understandable....perhaps at the upper grades? Will be checking back to see if anyone responded!
My impression is the content standards are not really very different, though perhaps accelerated, from previous standards. The standards for mathematical practice, however, are requiring, among other things, that we assess how students communicate their mathematical thinking. Many of the worksheets that have been posted on various sites as examples of how "bad" the CCSM are seem to me to be trying to get students to engage in communicating their mathematical process. Some strike me as more effective than others, but personally I applaud efforts to get our students talking and writing about math.
We have some standards that include being familiar with different methods. I can't remember the exact wording, but I know the multiplication one mentions using equal groups, repeated addition, jumps on a number line, arrays, and area models. Some of them do get very specific.
Many of the 5th grade standards state students will solve with models and/or equations. Models for multiplying and dividing fractions confuse parents. Students must know them both though because they could be assessed either way.
I'm looking at the second grade standards now, and it certainly seems to me like they are requiring a few specific methods of solving problems (not that any of those ways are a bad thing, of course).
Really? I can't think of any that are very specific. Maybe these two: Fluently add and subtract within 100 using strategies based on place value, properties of operations, and/or the relationship between addition and subtraction IMO, this simply means being able to add and subtract within 100, though...In order to do so using any strategy, one would have to understand "place value, properties of operations, and/or the relationship between addition and subtraction." Same old... Represent whole numbers as lengths from 0 on a number line diagram with equally spaced points corresponding to the numbers 0, 1, 2, ..., and represent whole-number sums and differences within 100 on a number line diagram. This one is pretty specific about using a number line diagram, but we don't spend very much time on it, and it is not formally assessed. Other than that, they aren't so specific as to telling students exactly how they need to solve a problem. It sounds like older grades may have this issue, though.
I don't have the standards in front of me, but many ask for students to solve it with a base-10 method which definitely takes out some of the "standard" methods.
I found this one: "Add and subtract within 1000, using concrete models or drawings and strategies based on place value, properties of operations, and/or the relationship between addition and subtraction; relate the strategy to a written method. Understand that in adding or subtracting three-digit numbers, one adds or subtracts hundreds and hundreds, tens and tens, ones and ones; and sometimes it is necessary to compose or decompose tens or hundreds." So, doesn't this include the more traditional strategies? It says "Or strategies based on place value." I would think that every strategy can be tied to place value. For example, if a student is solving the problem 92-35, they could take away a ten to make more ones (the traditional algorithm). This would mean that they understand that the 9 represents 9 tens. Or do others interpret the standard as meaning something different? They could draw a picture along with another strategy to show that they understand base 10 notation.
I have been wondering the same thing, so thanks for starting a thread on this. I just saw a news report on this today (a dad posted his son´s problem, or something like that). Honestly, I think it´s outsiders who don´t understand. To me, it sounds like what I do with my students in math: they draw an illustration of their math problem and write a number sentence to go with it. I think the idea is that students are developing deeper number sense, however please correct me if I am wrong.
My district heavily discourages the standard algorithm and regrouping in second grade. It would most likely be assessed with a drawing or students would have to solve it two ways. The CGI method of instruction is expected to be used, so that may be part of why the standard algorithm is discouraged.
Here´s one post on a CC math problem on Yahoo. http://news.yahoo.com/second-grader-revenge-against-common-core-math-day-141806961.html
They simply are rumors and aren't true. Common Core allows the students a lot of freedom on how they solve a problem. Yes, many "Common Core" textbooks show only one or two ways to solve a problem and some are a bit confusing. These are not to be the end all in methods, but to show some possible ways to solve problems. We use to have bad textbooks and we called them that. Now schools get bad textbooks with the words "Common Core" on them and it is said, "Oh, Common Core is bad" instead of saying the textbooks are bad.
We use CGI in my district. I let the kids explore different strategies, and then teach them the standard algorithm. It's usually just an easier way to do what they are already doing. First I make sure they have a thorough understanding of exactly what they are doing as far as base 10 is concerned. I think the ultimate goal is for all students to use the standard algorithm. It's much more efficient, and takes up less space on paper. Most parents and older siblings teach them that way anyway.
DrivingPigeon, I totally agree! As an upper grades math teacher, I really wish my students could come to me knowing how to subtract with the standard algorithm. I get far too many who are still reliant on number lines and counting up (not bad strategies, just extremely time consuming when applied to fractions and decimals).
Though of your post this morning when I read this: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/03/28/viral-common-core-homework_n_5049829.html?&ir=Education&ncid=tweetlnkushpmg00000023 I think that a lot of the controversy comes from people who are just against having a Common Core curriculum in general (the quotes at the bottom of the article are a little scary). So when things like this get posted and go viral it's CC that's to blame not the teacher/textbook who made up the problem.
A fellow teacher friend posted this on facebook last night: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UzwHn-7L4HY&feature=youtube_gdata_player (the complaint) CCSS.MATH.CONTENT.2.NBT.B.6 Add up to four two-digit numbers using strategies based on place value and properties of operations. CCSS.MATH.CONTENT.2.NBT.B.9 Explain why addition and subtraction strategies work, using place value and the properties of operations. (The ACTUAL standards) http://eaglerising.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/CommonCore.jpg (The assigned problem along with parents excuse) ANALYSIS: 1. Common Core Standards are available to everyone online. Before you repost something about them on Facebook, please read the standard: http://www.corestandards.org/read-the-standards/ Please educate yourself. Most methods of solving labeled "common core" that differ from standard algorithms are NOT affiliated with common core at all. They are merely alternative methods to standard algorithms created by textbook companies and research groups. 2. Examine what you want to communicate to children: There is one way of doing it, and that's the way that I learned. Any other method of solving isn't worth your time. You can't figure it out. Give up.
