Common core is a list of standards. It is not a bad way of teaching math.

You all want to complain about Everyday Math from the University of Chicago and especially complain about poor implementations of it, like this one.

Common core is a list of standards. It is not a bad way of teaching math.

You all want to complain about Everyday Math from the University of Chicago and especially complain about poor implementations of it, like this one.

9 Likes

I wish I could say that I knew this was fake.

I mean, itâs *probably* fake, since thereâs essentially a cottage industry of faking this sort of thing to protest Common Core.

But I have had interactions with my kidsâ teachers that were at least this stupid, so I canât really know for sure

11 Likes

In art class, that might be justified. Yellow-orange has more yellow. Orange-yellow has more orange.

Edit: Reverse that. As Hanglyman pointed out, the first word performs an adjective function.

Busted on one of my usual mistakes from art school. I never could verbalize what I knew to be correct in my head, and was able to properly demonstrate on canvas. Maybe Iâve some sort of language/visual disconnect?

3 Likes

Indeed. Thereâs a bit of intellectual shorthand to describe this in our family due to a cross note a teacher put on a piece of perfectly-done colouring in by my little brother when he was in nursery class: âDonkeys are not red Jonnyâ. This is Red Donkey-level teaching, right here.

20 Likes

Isnât it an axiom that if you can intuit transative properties you get **more** points, not less?

Nothinâ wrong with teaching a method, but if you canât explain why it is wrong beyond I Said So then youâre teaching the method wrong.

17 Likes

My son is a college freshman now , so you do the math, but around 10 years ago they began teaching the kids to divide using the lattice method. I had already taught him how to divide the regular way, which I still think is easier, and yeah, we are math geeks, and this is what we do in our spare time. On his first division test he got them all right except that he did not use the lattice method, so this was a problem. They called me in to explain that the lattice method was what they were teaching, and he had to learn it. I asked why did he have to learn it if he showed his work in the older format. I was told his answers would be marked as half credit if he did not use the lattice method. I always wondered if it was because the teachers did not know how to divide in the classical way. Do they still teach the lattice Method?

5 Likes

Hereâs a pretty good post by a math teacher explaining the reasoning behind the ânew mathâ and what they are trying to teach kids:

8 Likes

Wow, mushrooms suck at math.

2 Likes

âŚI guess it would be wrong to let her stay up all night on a school night and force the teacher to deal with her grumpy ass the next day. Wrong but fitting.

8 Likes

Â

this is a teacher throwing away a chance to teach.

bears repeating.

19 Likes

Except not really. All the student did was put down an answer that worked. As the previous poster observes, the presumption that the student knew what he or she was doing isnât necessarily true. The student may have arrived at the answer by accident. Agreed that the student shouldnât be docked points for this, but you canât infer the student knows what he or she is doing.

EDIT: Also, teacher could have, and probably should have, requested additional explanation to confirm that the kid knew what he or she was doing.

2 Likes

So just looking at it the lattice method would need more paper and take longer for the initial layout.

Progress.

2 Likes

How about, âI memorized that 5 * 3 = 15, because itâs trivial. Thereâs one step from the problem to the answer, this isnât quadratic equationsâ

10 Likes

Yes they do. But good math teachers also teach the âclassicâ way as well.

certainly a reasonable explanation. the two quibbles i have are:

- 5 x 3. use the smallest âbucketâ available to hold the biggest number. three sets of five (yes, going in reverse) is easier than five sets of three.
- the matrix. if they were teaching matrices i wouldnât bat an eye. and even an explanation on the test that the first is one axis and the second is another would be fine. but that wasnât the question as presented.

iâm a hack so i always look at problems from different angles, and it gives me a sad that a more efficient solution and an ill defined solution were marked down.

p.s. i donât use the word âquibbleâ nearly enough.

8 Likes

Yeah, I think the majority of us agree that the teacher is being rational, but blind. The student should be encouraged to think about problems in different ways and explain how they are related (or be given ways to learn about how they are).

If you start playing with IPv6 address allocation youâll get to use âquibbleâ a LOT.

3 Likes

One of my kids survived the ordeal, another is just starting High School. I already had to deal with her getting a zero on a test because she got all the answers right, and was presumed to have cheated. We have been dealing with the oddball math crap for a couple of years now. Lots of strange, counter intuitive ways to take 10 times as long to solve a problem. I get the impression that these methods are being taught only because they are new, and therefore must be better. It is going to be pretty depressing when we find out that a whole generation lacks the math skills to do advanced engineering. If I was a conspiracy minded person, I would think it was a plot to get more students to get liberal arts and grievance studies degrees.

3 Likes

6 Likes

I didnât honestly know that.

I still think instead of IPv4âs octect, IPv6 should have used RockTet.

My brother had an *asshole* biology teacher in high school who was colorblind and insisted that students write in the answer for color change in an indicator test the color *he* saw.

4 Likes