This Is What Common Core Looks Like
erickerickson.org
This Is What Common Core Looks Like
1–10 of 29 posts
Re: This Is What Common Core Looks Like
#2Common core is not a curriculum. It is not a textbook. It is not a method of subtraction. There are badly-written textbooks both in and outside of Common Core.
Edit: Here we go, Common Core math standards. Grade 2 starts on page 17. http://www.corestandards.org/wp-content/uploads/Math_Standar... Have a look, it's only 4 pages long.
To be specific, this is a third-grade textbook. Students learn subtraction in previous grades, so this is just a quick review before moving on to third-grade topics like multiplication. Notice the problems at the bottom don't require students to use this particular method. If your third-grader can't subtract, they were already behind before you switched to Common Core.
Also, is the method given really that hard to understand? It's probably not my favorite way to subtract, but it's kinda cool.
Re: This Is What Common Core Looks Like
#3While I agree that one example is not enough to grasp the concept for most people, I think that the "counting up" method is actually better because it shows kids what is going on in subtraction.
The borrowing method that I learned growing up doesn't make much sense. You just follow the rules with no real reason.
I'm in my third year of college and only just learned why the borrowing method works - and I only learned it because I had to start subtracting numbers in different bases for my MIPS assembly class.
Re: This Is What Common Core Looks Like
#4As a homeschooler I think Common Core is a good thing in that it tells you what you need to cover, and it means that I can choose from a lot of different curricula which include it.
If you work through Kahn Academy math, you will certainly run through some of these areas where kids are pushed to do some kind of math problem in a highly stylized way that (i) they struggle with and (ii) don't see the relevance of. Elementary school teachers have told me the same thing, but it is not the end of the world.
There is "no one true way" to do arithmetic. When I was in the fourth grade I had the worst time with 3-by-3 digit multiplication. That didn't stop me from getting a B.S. in Physics and Math, with an A average in my majors, and also getting a PhD in theoretical physics. Recently I read that a lot of other people who were "good at math" struggled with the curriculum when I was a kid so nothing is going to be perfect.
Re: This Is What Common Core Looks Like
#5This is what one implementation of Common Core looks like
Re: This Is What Common Core Looks Like
#6Common core is not a curriculum. It is not a textbook. It is not a method of subtraction. There are badly-written textbooks both in and outside of Common Core. Edit: Here we go, Common Core math standards. Grade 2 starts on page 17. http://www.corestandards.org/wp-content/uploads/Math_Standar... Have a look, it's only 4 pages long. To be specific, this is a third-grade textbook. Students learn subtraction in previous…
Just to be clear
"But standardized tests, the SAT, and the ACT are all moving over to Common Core. So our child has to learn this insanity."
which implies that standardized tests test for this particular "counting up" subtraction method. If I understand your statement you are saying that this is not the case.
Right?
Re: This Is What Common Core Looks Like
#7This seems like generated outrage.
The OP should take a minute to think about how the method of subtraction works, and then explain it to his kid.
I associate this panic reaction (OP: "this new method makes no freaking sense") with people who are math-phobic. The solution is to just settle down and think about it. (Common core, third grade objectives, number 1: "Make sense of problems and persevere in solving them.")
And, one thing I've learned about elementary educators is that they don't want to fight with parents. (Unsurprising!) So if you say (like OP did), "This common core math sucks," they are going to say, "yes, we don't like it either." If you said it was an interesting way to do subtraction, they'd agree with that too.
Re: This Is What Common Core Looks Like
#8Common core is not a curriculum. It is not a textbook. It is not a method of subtraction. There are badly-written textbooks both in and outside of Common Core. Edit: Here we go, Common Core math standards. Grade 2 starts on page 17. http://www.corestandards.org/wp-content/uploads/Math_Standar... Have a look, it's only 4 pages long. To be specific, this is a third-grade textbook. Students learn subtraction in previous…
Just to be clear "But standardized tests, the SAT, and the ACT are all moving over to Common Core. So our child has to learn this insanity." which implies that standardized tests test for this particular "counting up" subtraction method. If I understand your statement you are saying that this is not the case. Right?
Common Core standards do not include the counting-up method. So a test that only measures Common-Core compliance would not test for that.
Re: This Is What Common Core Looks Like
#9Back in the days before computerized cash registers, this was typically how cashiers made change. Hand one $5 for a $1.34 purchase, and the cashier counts it back out as
(penny) $1.35 (nickel) $1.50 (quarters) $1.75, $2 (dollar bills) $3, $4, $5
Some still do it that way.
In Teacher in America, chapter "Let x Equal ...", Jacques Barzun mentioned as an example of widespread innumeracy the half-trained cashiers who did not know this technique. That was written in the early 1940s.
Re: This Is What Common Core Looks Like
#10I'll echo the comment that Common Core is not a textbook nor a particular way to add/subtract. It's a standard to establish baseline knowledge US kids must master.
That blog post is raging about a new way to do subtract which seems to be out of reach for his comprehension, can't teach an old dog kindda thing, so he blames it on Common Core.
He also mentioned that there are 4 new ways to do subtraction. This should be good news. Kids/people learns to do things differently. 4 different ways means kids have more arsenals to tackle their problems. I wish I had that learning opportunity!
Specifically about that subtraction, did you noticed that it'd make it easier to do the math in your head? maybe there is a reason for the madness after all.