Someone help me understand this, because I am 99.9% sure that it’s bullshit but am not all that knowledgeable of common core.
http://nation.foxnews.com/2014/03/25/peta-propaganda-used-fourth-grade-common-core-assignment
Basically the implication I’m hearing on facebook is that common core has this kind of propaganda built in. Is there any truth to this, or was this just an unwary or biased teacher inserting it into their class?
There is no propaganda in the Common Core. There are no required texts. As a teacher, I get to decide what my students read.
There is so much misinformation out there. Many complaints about the Common Core are misdirected and should be aimed at curriculum companies. In this case it was likely a choice made by the teacher. The teacher was likely looking for a specific type of text and felt that one would be of high interest to the students.
(I only read the first page if the article since my browser froze.)
Thanks for the answer. Also, maybe you can help me understand the other thing that person is blathering on about - they’re talking about how the common core allows for “approximate” answers in math (as if this was a really bad thing); any idea what that’s about?
What it means is that Obama is president and therefore Common Core must be bad.
Probably the Model with mathematics standard, which says that “Mathematically proficient students who can apply what they know are comfortable making assumptions and approximations to simplify a complicated situation, realizing that these may need revision later.”
From what I am seeing around the blogosphere, progressives have at least as many concerns about Common Core as conservatives do. (I will stipulate that the one raised in the OP is BS, though.)
My 4th grade son’s school uses Common Core. He’s pretty good at math and we talk about his homework and extra “math olympiad” work which use CC.
They are definitely not taught that an approximate answer is correct, but “ballpark estimates” and “approximations” are a valuable method for simplifying complicated problems and checking whether an exact answer is reasonable. I don’t have an example handy but stuff like rounding off all the numbers to the nearest ten and then quickly multiplying them out to see roughly what the answer to a complex problem should be; if he can get “8,000” in a minute or two then he can quickly recognize that “1,714” and “3” are both probably way off but “9,013” may be correct.
Same stuff that I did as an engineering student…I was pretty good at mental arithmetic that way. It’s a useful way to approach problems.
This.
Plus students can get partial credit sometimes for approaching the problem with a viable strategy even if there is an arithmetic error. This doesn’t apply in every situation and I don’t think it’s unique to the Common Core.
Out of curiosity, then, what makes this either “Common” or “Core?”
There aren’t specified textbooks, but there are specified skills that students are expected to master. Any textbook that covers those skills is acceptable.
OTOH, I have an effin Bachelors of Science degree in Math and sometimes I have a hard time with my daughters 2nd grade math homework. She’s 8 and should not have to do, for example, 23-11 by making 23 circles and then crossing off 11 and then counting how many are left.
She did that all last year and there’s no effin reason why she shouldn’t be doing regular subtraction yet. A while back I asked the teacher if I could just do it that way and she said it would be marked wrong if she didn’t ‘show her work’. FTR, she said it in a ‘not my idea’ type tone of voice.
That crap at the top of the paper is similar to what my daughter has to do right now. Not exactly the same, but close. At the end of first grade/beginning of second grade the did subtracting with single digit numbers the ‘normal’ way, so why can’t they do 89-45 or 427-316 the way we learned. You don’t have to carry anything, so this would be the next logical step.
Actually, here’s exactly what she’s doing for math. Instead of just putting the two numbers on top of each other and saying ‘add the ones, add the tens, add the hundreds’ they’re breaking them apart, teaching them how to represent the ones, tens, hundreds as different shapes, sorting them out, counting how many of each shape and putting it back together.
It’s freaking stupid.
But, then, I’m not a big fan of intermediate steps where we never needed them before. I don’t like balance bikes and I don’t like puppy pads. This seems like the puppy pad approach. Instead of doing something that’s worked for thousands of years, why stick a step in the middle that both slows it down and makes it more confusing.
Here’s a nice rant about Common Core Math.
Ahhhhh! That’s what I saw my gf’s daughter doing! She was doing her math homework (she’s in 3rd grade) and I looked over at what she was doing and was totally baffled. Is it true that they don’t get credit for a correct answer if it is computed using the ‘old style’ of math? Or did I misunderstand something?
As a Montessori student, I had to work things out in certain ways, too, but once I could do it without the crutch, I was allowed to do so. I also completely maxed out their math program and didn’t encounter anything in school that I hadn’t learned until geometry.
I get the idea of helping kids get an intuitive understanding. That’s what we did in Montessori. I will never get this idea that you need to do something repeatedly once you understand it.
Is that due to Common Core or the local school? My 8 year old daughter is in second grade and doesn’t do any of that nonsense. There are some some things like that in their homework on occasion to help them understand the process but it’s always more sensible and always a small practice section accompanied by a ton of regular addition and subtraction, all with carrying and borrowing.
Thanks for the info! 
As you suspect, I’m sure it’s the school–(or the district, or the teacher, perhaps). Jesus H. Christ, I don’t know why it’s so hard for some people to understand the difference between competencies and curriculum. The districts, schools and teachers shape the curriculum as they always have.
Most of the Common Core isn’t particularly new. Many states already have very similar standards.
The name comes from the fact that the 45 states have agreed to align and coordinate the documentation of these standards, so that there’s consistency from one state to another on these very basic expectations. I suppose in some (backwards) states the standards might be totally new, but in 2014, I doubt it.
Common core’s great benefit is that it provides a focus for people to complain about every little annoyance that shows up in the education of their children.
I encourage folks to watch New Math, by Tom Lehrer. Especially watch the illustration of the math at the beginning that he describes as the default way of doing things: if you’re like me, it’s totally bewildering. The “new math” he complained about in 1965 is the way I learned it, probably the way a lot of y’all learned it, and it looks totally reasonable, because that’s what we learned when we were kids.
Common Core math does have students using the standard US algorithm to solve addition and subtraction once they hit fourth grade, so kids will get there, don’t worry. However, there’s ample research to show that a lot of kids have historically found the traditional algorithm baffling, and either misuse it (borrowing in the wrong place value or the like) or use it without understanding it. Common Core suggests that understanding why the algorithm works–in other words, having a deep understanding of place value and other mathematical concepts–is key to being able to advance as a mathematician.
Thus the use of number lines, crossed out circles, and the like: students use semiconcrete (drawings of things) and semiabstract (drawings of symbols like number lines) to demonstrate understanding before they settle in the world of abstract (exclusive use of numerals).
Folks who complain about common core need to listen to Tom Lehrer and realize that their complaints are neither new nor related specifically to the common core methods, but are rather a normal and healthy symptom of their growing old; they should go buy a cane and be ready to chase kids off their lawn and complain about that noise they call music :).
Which is how I, and most other teachers I know, grade math work. I was doing this before I ever heard of Common Core. It just makes sense to me.
What makes it common is what the students should be able to do. A 3rd grader may have to tell the main idea of the text or identify the author’s purpose. The choice of text is not dictated by the standards.
I think confused and complaining people should go read the standards. See for yourself what is specifically stated about how to teach, for example, subtraction in 2nd grade.
