As a kid that studies in private school, thank you (on behalf of your kid)

10

deleted
· 5 years ago

Look, a user that believes the 1% of spewed bullshit about America that gets blown out of proportion. Believe it or not, there are excellent school that care for children and their education. From K through 12th grade, it's all ok, but go ahead and keep generalizing things and doing no research whatsoever.

From a statical standpoint areas that have a lot of private schools the public schools have higher performance on average than the private ones. Also the longer a private school has existed the lower its average performance (in most cases.)

Ok, so you got 32 - 12 = ?
In this you're trying to gain, adding back up to get the original number. They use 12+3=15
But, from 12 I need to go up to 32. And you know there's a variety of numbers in between, they use 15, however . I can instead use a rounder number like 20
So, I got 12 and I want to "jump to" 20, then
12 + ?? = 20 (the answer is 8) now...
12+8=20 ( ok great, I earn 20/32 now) and from 20 I just repeat, there's a variety of number between 20 to 32
From 20 I want "jump to" 30 cause it's the next round number for me (but you can pick 25 if u like, though it's not that big of a jump)
Now that I got to 20 (from the last step)
20+ ??? = 30 (cause I'm trying to leap to 30)
20 + 10 = 30 (yay, but ok I need 32)
I got 30 now
30 + ?? = 32
Recap, 12 + 8 = 20
20 + 10 = 30
30+ 2 = 32
So 8 + 10 + 2 = 20

Common Core looks bonkers, but like @unklethan said below, it's great at teaching kids to see patterns in numbers and not just how to crunch numbers. When we all learned math, we were getting programmed to be accountants or scientists. I had to spend a f*ckton of time/money having my mind reoriented to this "new" math when getting my computer science degree. To understand how computers work, you need to be comfortable working in bases two, eight, and sixteen. Computers can't subtract natively - they just shift registers, flip bits, and add. Old math just made us all experts in base ten. Common core is prescient in that we are programming the next batch of kids to be ready to think in other bases and intuitively grasp how computers process and store information. We're not just churning out accountants, etc. anymore. CC looks like the devil but really does serve a powerful higher purpose.

Did you get the business or engineering version? In the latter, you need to convert between bin, oct, dec, and hex proficiently, and know the steps to apply basic arithmetic to each. Ihdk if the former requires any of that. Common Core gives kids the tools to recognize patterns that persist between base systems. My main point is that we didn't learn that because our parents didn't know we might need it; CC is an important correction to their oversight.

Being able to manually do conversions is useful theoretically but when actually coding it doesn't hold much use. That's something all done by the computer in any practical situation. Unless your making a completely new system without basis in anything preexisting you won't be using that.

I agree with you 100%. The heavy lifting is already done wrt compilers and general computer architecture. And thanks to common core, soon we'll have a fresh batch of people who have been trained from childhood to be comfortable with the "roundabout" way a computer actually computes. Hopefully, they can use this intuitive understanding to improve on the underlying theories themselves.

Most of the weird Common Core methods are hard to grasp because they are a visual representation of the steps our brains take to get to the answers.
The aim of Common Core is to teach many mathematical methods (yes, grading kids on how well they use each method) with the end goal of giving them a math problem and saying, "Use whatever method you want, as long as you get the right answer."
I totally get that this specific method looks stupid (to most or all of us who learned the old way), but that's because it's not really math that they're learning here. It's meta math. Kids are gonna know how math works instead of just knowing that it does work, and I think that's awesome.

3

deleted
· 5 years ago

In this example, the kids are forced to learn that addition and subtraction are the same thing, in opposite directions. They go through the steps of jumping to numbers that are easier to work with when adding, 5s and then 10s. They add up the addition steps from 12 to 32 and find the difference. They've learned some math, but they've mostly learned about how numbers work in relation to each other, which will hopefully make the next generation better at math.

this is NOT that aim. I've never in my life had this thought process. EVER. This is bullshit. This version of "common core" is meant to make you fucking retarded. My bad, that's an insult to retards... revert you into a willing troglodyte.
You do realize after looking at it, most of us fucking grasp it... but it's so overly convoluted that what REALLY pisses us off is how ridiculously stupid this is. Don't give me that shit that'll help them understand calculus.... as an entire country, our engineers have gotten WORSE.

Honestly... what does it say about our kids if they can't do 32-12 in the first fucking place before this? I'm sorry for that one fucking kid... but confusing 29 other kids isn't how you fucking fix that one fucker. FUCK THIS SHIT.
As one of those other 29 kids.. you know what this shit teaches? Apathy, lethargic tendancies and a sense of empowerment; that they are smarter than their own parents because their own parents are like "WHAT THE FUCK!?"

I said it above, it's meta math. If the kids memorize their tables, great. If they develop deeper understanding of how numbers work, they'll be better at it than we were.

They are just reversing the logic. Rather than “what do I get if I take 12 from 32” it’s “what do I need to add to 12 to get to 32” then they break that up in little chunks so it’s easier. It doesn’t make as much sense with two digit numbers but scale it out to 5 or 6 and this technique lets you do it in your head while the traditional way has you using pencil and paper.

I will explain why.
Add to the next 5 (if needed)
Add to the next 10
Add to the next 100
...scale out as needed given the size of the numbers...
...now scale in to the answer...
Add to the closest 100 of the higher number
Add to the closest 10
Add to the closest 5 (if needed)
Add to the exact higher number.

Since it’s a decimal numbering scheme it’s easiest to deal with 10s but 5s come in second place. You use them if needed so you don’t end up having to deal with a 7 or 8.

1's and 9's are nearly as bad as 7's and 8's. Fuck it.. some kids will learn, some won't. The ones that learn math will probably be the ones taking the lunch money from the ones who didn't 30 years later.

I’ll give you a real world example. I’m going to do this inside the comment box and my head without using paper or a calculator. You try it your way with the same restrictions.
Problem is 9353-8692:
.
8692+3 = 8695
8695+5 = 8700
8700+300 = 8900
9000+300 = 9300
9300+50 = 9350
9350+3 = 9353
3+5+300+300+50+3=661

like... if you can hold any three numbers at a time... that should be easy as fuck
If I tried to be forced into doing it your way... I'd have to find a pencil... find a piece of paper I was ok writing on, do that stupid fucking shit, while writing it all because "showing my work" and then arrive at the same goddamn answer that took me 12 seconds in my head. 12 is being generous.

well... I'm back. Anyway. If the fucking kid can't figure out 3+5 in the first place, either he is a dumbass and will always be slow or parents have failed. You're still dragging the other 29 kids down. Fucking fail his ass.

I guess what really irks me.. is if you demand the stupid 5, my +8 +600 +53 answer, even though it is right, would be marked wrong.... because of some stupid "method". Does that part make sense? Why waste my fucking time? All it does is make kids who are good at math hate it and resent those who can't. It's like listening to that one fucker with a stutter read a book in literature.... it's fucking cringe-worthy.

Now you’re evaluating individuals instead of the methodology. Individual capacity to do math mentally will vary so you have to teach a framework. The framework I learned subtraction is to “borrow” from the column next to it which is extremely awkward. This seems a lot more logically streamlined.

but you just did the same thing you accused me of. "I learned subra...."
I never even used subtraction on your example. I did with the "32" example, yeah, but as a negative number. They are eventually going to have to use them... throwing a bunch of 5's in the mix with -4's and -6's and eventually -(7x/3) is just going to end with a collective clusterfuck of "What?" in every class beyond the pre-AP or AP classes.

I’m not sure what I accused you of. I said I learned an inferior way and I think this new way will work better for people on the whole regardless of their individual ability to do math in their heads.

You're both wrong (and right), so please stop arguing. This kind of math, while educating, is unecessarily convoluted. Why should the kids learn math that they will have no use of in their adult life at all? Why is it needed to understand WHY the numbers do what they do rather than learn a quick, easy way to do it? Many children have issues with math and and numbers as it is, and making it harder when they are just starting to understand and know how to do it a certain way is just cruel. Meanwhile, this kind of math will, indeed, help with higher educations. If you later in life choose to do so. Engineers, physicists and doctors are all examples of this. In high school, college and university these skills are crucial to pass. So while this metod should, indeed, be taught (if they choose to become something that requires a lot of education) it shouldn't be taught at such a young age

Teaching why at a young age develops logical thinking in addition to math skills and I think we can all agree adults need more skill at logical thinking. This isn’t convoluted, it just has a lot of little steps. I have two kids in 1st and 3rd grade and I’m blown away with how much they are actually able to learn without it being stressful; kids below the age of 7 or 8 have a much higher capacity to learn complex subjects like language. The stress comes in when they get older and start to feel more pressure.

What I don’t get is that people complain that the US education systems sucks and we are falling behind China (or whomever) but then complain when that same system tries to improve their methods of learning because “It’s not how I learned it!”

Wait, languages aren't complex? Its just, "this is how they say/write this in that language with those variables"? And then bam, there you go.
And no, according to psychological studies logical thinking developes with age, though exercising those aspects certainly helps. Now that I think more about it, training at a young age will improve their understanding for numbers, but there must be other ways. Because despite what you said about it not being convoluted, it certainly is. Why should they think in so many tiny steps instead of just a few, concise ones?
BTW I'm not american, I just geniunely don't get why maths (along with other subjects) constantly needs to become more and more work. Keep the bits that are important and teach that to the kids, then scrap all the unneccesary stuff. The human brain has to focus on something deemed unneccesary or boring for too long, it eventually looses motivation completely, and no motivation means worse grades.

Ok, I think there is a misconception. These same kids won’t use this many steps in higher grades. This is broken up into into component parts early so they can understand how it works. As they get older the method is shortened but follows the same logic. No one expects a 17yo to write out all those lines on a math test.

deleted
· 5 years ago

And I just want to jump in and reiterate that this is not the only method taught. A teacher using Common Core will cycle through 5 or 6 methods until all the kids have a shot at understanding at least one of them. The methods won't be graded more than a few times, and likely won't even be thought about by 5th grade.
Also languages are readily grasped at earlier ages.
I've taught Common Core math to a bunch of white kids, exclusively in Spanish. They managed to understand the math and the Spanish, because their brains are plastic enough to make room for new ways of thinking.

As a kid, we were taught regular maths, the normal way. We were also taught Quantitative Reasoning, which is in principle quite similar to Common Core. There we could learn to see patterns & such. Regular maths is necessary because you tend to think that way much more than the common core pattern seeking. Just my opinion.

Statistically, common core sucks. Math scores in America have dropped after it’s implementation. It also moves so slowly that kids in common core can’t take AP math classes unless they skip a year somehow, whilst requiring the students to take the ACT years after non-common core students because the common core just doesn’t teach the kids how the content in the math section.

ACT scores:blog.prepscholar.com/average-act-score-for-2015-2014-2013-and-earlier-years
SAT scores:blog.prepscholar.com/average-sat-scores-over-time
The international PISA test is only every three years, but US math scores were lower on the last one as well.
compareyourcountry.org/pisa/country/USA?lg=en
The major problem with measuring the effect of this is that school is a multi-year thing, so we won't get conclusive proof for another few years, but so far since common core became, well, common, scores have been dropping.

TIMSS math scores have gone up since Common Core was introduced. You are correct about the difficulty measuring the effect. All the stats are post hoc correlation until someone is able to normalize out variables to pinpoint Common Core’s direct results.

guest· 5 years ago · FIRSTrosalinas· 5 years agodeleted· 5 years agobethorien· 5 years agodeleted· 5 years agoparisqeen· 5 years agokatzumi· 5 years agoIn this you're trying to gain, adding back up to get the original number. They use 12+3=15

But, from 12 I need to go up to 32. And you know there's a variety of numbers in between, they use 15, however . I can instead use a rounder number like 20

So, I got 12 and I want to "jump to" 20, then

12 + ?? = 20 (the answer is 8) now...

12+8=20 ( ok great, I earn 20/32 now) and from 20 I just repeat, there's a variety of number between 20 to 32

From 20 I want "jump to" 30 cause it's the next round number for me (but you can pick 25 if u like, though it's not that big of a jump)

Now that I got to 20 (from the last step)

20+ ??? = 30 (cause I'm trying to leap to 30)

20 + 10 = 30 (yay, but ok I need 32)

I got 30 now

30 + ?? = 32

Recap, 12 + 8 = 20

20 + 10 = 30

30+ 2 = 32

So 8 + 10 + 2 = 20

parisqeen· 5 years agofunkmasterrex· 5 years agofunkmasterrex· 5 years agoparisqeen· 5 years agofreudiandip· 5 years agogummy· 5 years agojasonmon· 5 years agoguest· 5 years agojasonmon· 5 years agobethorien· 5 years agojasonmon· 5 years agowasserstern· 5 years agoguest· 5 years agodeleted· 5 years agoguest· 5 years agofreudiandip· 5 years agof__kyeahhamburg· 5 years agoguest· 5 years agodeleted· 5 years agodeleted· 5 years agoThe aim of Common Core is to teach many mathematical methods (yes, grading kids on how well they use each method) with the end goal of giving them a math problem and saying, "Use whatever method you want, as long as you get the right answer."

I totally get that this specific method looks stupid (to most or all of us who learned the old way), but that's because it's not really math that they're learning here. It's meta math. Kids are gonna know how math works instead of just knowing that it does work, and I think that's awesome.

deleted· 5 years agofunkmasterrex· 5 years agoYou do realize after looking at it, most of us fucking grasp it... but it's so overly convoluted that what REALLY pisses us off is how ridiculously stupid this is. Don't give me that shit that'll help them understand calculus.... as an entire country, our engineers have gotten WORSE.

funkmasterrex· 5 years agoAs one of those other 29 kids.. you know what this shit teaches? Apathy, lethargic tendancies and a sense of empowerment; that they are smarter than their own parents because their own parents are like "WHAT THE FUCK!?"

funkmasterrex· 5 years agodeleted· 5 years agofunkmasterrex· 5 years agodeleted· 5 years agoscatmandingo· 5 years agoscatmandingo· 5 years ago.

.

Worked it out with a pencil!

funkmasterrex· 5 years agofunkmasterrex· 5 years agoscatmandingo· 5 years agoAdd to the next 5 (if needed)

Add to the next 10

Add to the next 100

...scale out as needed given the size of the numbers...

...now scale in to the answer...

Add to the closest 100 of the higher number

Add to the closest 10

Add to the closest 5 (if needed)

Add to the exact higher number.

scatmandingo· 5 years agofunkmasterrex· 5 years agofunkmasterrex· 5 years agoscatmandingo· 5 years agoProblem is 9353-8692:

.

8692+3 = 8695

8695+5 = 8700

8700+300 = 8900

9000+300 = 9300

9300+50 = 9350

9350+3 = 9353

3+5+300+300+50+3=661

funkmasterrex· 5 years agofunkmasterrex· 5 years agoIf I tried to be forced into doing it your way... I'd have to find a pencil... find a piece of paper I was ok writing on, do that stupid fucking shit, while writing it all because "showing my work" and then arrive at the same goddamn answer that took me 12 seconds in my head. 12 is being generous.

funkmasterrex· 5 years agofunkmasterrex· 5 years agoI'll come back and refresh the page after a stogie

funkmasterrex· 5 years agofunkmasterrex· 5 years agoscatmandingo· 5 years agofunkmasterrex· 5 years agoI never even used subtraction on your example. I did with the "32" example, yeah, but as a negative number. They are eventually going to have to use them... throwing a bunch of 5's in the mix with -4's and -6's and eventually -(7x/3) is just going to end with a collective clusterfuck of "What?" in every class beyond the pre-AP or AP classes.

scatmandingo· 5 years agofreudiandip· 5 years agoscatmandingo· 5 years agoscatmandingo· 5 years agofreudiandip· 5 years agoAnd no, according to psychological studies logical thinking developes with age, though exercising those aspects certainly helps. Now that I think more about it, training at a young age will improve their understanding for numbers, but there must be other ways. Because despite what you said about it not being convoluted, it certainly is. Why should they think in so many tiny steps instead of just a few, concise ones?

BTW I'm not american, I just geniunely don't get why maths (along with other subjects) constantly needs to become more and more work. Keep the bits that are important and teach that to the kids, then scrap all the unneccesary stuff. The human brain has to focus on something deemed unneccesary or boring for too long, it eventually looses motivation completely, and no motivation means worse grades.

scatmandingo· 5 years agodeleted· 5 years agoAlso languages are readily grasped at earlier ages.

I've taught Common Core math to a bunch of white kids, exclusively in Spanish. They managed to understand the math and the Spanish, because their brains are plastic enough to make room for new ways of thinking.

freudiandip· 5 years agoscatmandingo· 5 years agofunkmasterrex· 5 years agofunkmasterrex· 5 years agofunkmasterrex· 5 years agotcole3710· 5 years agoIt’s better than mine...

poisin_kat· 5 years agotimebender25· 5 years agoguest· 5 years agotarotnathers13th· 5 years agoguest· 5 years agodeleted· 5 years agoguest· 5 years agoSAT scores:blog.prepscholar.com/average-sat-scores-over-time

The international PISA test is only every three years, but US math scores were lower on the last one as well.

compareyourcountry.org/pisa/country/USA?lg=en

The major problem with measuring the effect of this is that school is a multi-year thing, so we won't get conclusive proof for another few years, but so far since common core became, well, common, scores have been dropping.

scatmandingo· 5 years ago