Skip to comments.Decoding Common Core Math
Posted on 04/28/2014 7:31:06 AM PDT by Academiadotorg
If the Common Core education reforms introduced by President Obama and supported by big-name Republicans were subject to peer review, they might become a whatever became of? question.
Take, for example, my first-grade sons Common Core math lesson in basic subtraction, David G. Bonagura, Jr., writes in an article which appeared in The Education Reporter. Six- and seven-year-olds do not yet possess the ability to think abstractly; their mathematics instruction, therefore, must employ concrete methodologies, explanations, and examples.
But rather than, say, count on a number line or use objects, Common Cores standards mandate teaching first-graders to decompose two-digit numbers in an effort to emphasize the concept of place value. Thus 13 4 is warped into 13 3 = 10 1 = 9. Decomposition is a useful skill for older children, but my first-grade son has no clue what it is about or how to do it. He can, however, memorize the answer to 13 4. But Common Core does not advocate that tried-and-true technique.
The Education Reporter is published by the Eagle Forum, an organization founded by conservative attorney, author and activist Phyllis Schlafly. Bonanguras article was reprinted by permission from National Review, in which it originally appeared.
Malcolm A. Kline is the Executive Director of Accuracy in Academia.
If you would like to comment on this article, e-mail firstname.lastname@example.org.
(Excerpt) Read more at academia.org ...
Common Core is rubbish.
This is politically influenced teaching methodology, which doesnt’ work well for mathematics.
Decomposition” reminds me of the more political “Decontruction,” which frequently appears when leftists wish to find reasons to criticize.
If education were market-based, different schools would be able to employ different approaches from one another, and the schools would graduate kids that functioned at higher and lower levels than one another. Eventually, it would become clear that students attending schools with certain approaches did vastly better than schools adopting other approaches, and the latter would either change their approaches, or go out of business. But, instead, under the current coercive scheme, *all* schools must adopt the latest fad, and all kids will be subject to it whether it is good or not. Apparently, it is better to have all the kids fall behind than have some of them fall behind, and this without any hope that the future will rapidly evolve into one in which almost every student will succeed, because the good approaches will be rapidly identified.
Gee, flash cards worked great for my kids. They excelled at math all the way to calculus and differential equations. How? They had (a) performing teachers and (b) parents that cared and helped.
Liberalism is...as liberalism does. A true horror story.
Why fingers? It is so much better than giving the little darlings little wood cubes that just might get thrown awound the room, <^..^>
Just my opinion: support of "common core" math should be diagnosed as a psychiatric disorder.
There is a mistake here.
It should be “13 3 - 1 = 10 1 = 9”.
Set the kid up to fail. NICE
I know that what worked for me and others in kindergarten/1st grade back in the mid-50s were the dot pattern cards, much like dominoes, that we used to count and learn numbers. I still occasionally visualize those cards/patterns when counting even though I am long past that point in numbers and math. An we memorized multiplication tables before we actually got into the mechanics of multiplication. This is why we started learning to calculate in other bases like base 8 or base 16 as early as the 4th or 5th grade. Early on, kids are usually much better with patterns and images for learning numbers than learning the computations from the start. You learn to count before you learn to add, subtract, multiply, or divide.
When one has a talent for math, one demonstrates that talent by engaging in a profession which uses that math to create, improve, test, and study.
When one has no talent for math, one pretends they have talent by obtaining a degree in “education” and fosting an absolutely laughable system on unsuspecting students and parents. (I know well that there are many excellent math teachers out there...but that excellence came from the teachers themselves, not from the laughable courses they had to take in a joke of a school of “education”.)
There is a lib arts analog on the reading side...when one knows language, they teach phonics. When one knows nothing, we get “see and say”.
Best way to improve our schools is to kick out, eliminate, hang, drown, flush, dispose of, etc anyone with a mere degree in education only. (Nothing wrong with courses showing good approaches for children, but if you want your child to know history, it might be a good thing for the teacher to actually have studied a bit of it.)
If you feel good about your answer, it's correct!
What the heck is THAT?
Yep.Today all you need is something like Khanacademy.org.
Public schools are a 19th century paradigm that outlived its usefulness in the late 20th century.
Last time I checked, 10 is still a 2 digit number.
It’s grammar school math. The author stated incorrectly that
“13 3 = 10 1 = 9” and I corrected him.
Now, apparently, we need to reinvent the process?
As a math teacher has explained to me, Common Core Standards still do not teach students how to make change from paper money.
You’re equation is correct. Odd that others can’t see it.