Menu
Jump to content

What's with the ads?

Targhee

Members
  • Content Count

    3,603
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

3,252 Excellent

About Targhee

  • Rank
    Amateur Bee Keeper

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Yay, they’ve added Int Alg to Alcumus!
  2. Targhee

    Sounds like SWB could use some support, guys

    Hope for a recovery soon, and prayers for you, DH, and family!
  3. Targhee

    Teaching properties of numbers.

    No. But for MOST kids beginning with a concrete object, then moving on to pictorial, and then on to symbolic is appropriate provides the best foundation. My oldest did mental calculations at 4 before ever receiving math instruction (except the concept that addition is the total, subtraction is taking away, and multiplication is repeated addition). And she did it on her own, not from a prompt (eg I didn’t ask her how many of such and such, she cane to me in a “did you know ___?” Fashion). She was unable to explain her thinking or how she came a solutions until she was 11 or 12, despite accurately doing her math without any written work. This is not the norm, even if common among “mathy” people. She did it, but I would never require that of my other kids even if they *could* do it. What is developmentally appropriate is not just this progression either of concrete first and abstract last. Much of what is inappropriate about CCSS for math has to do with requiring young kids to write an explanation for how they solved the problem and why they chose the strategy. It seems twice as inappropriate when your child is accelerated in a math and are very math intuitive. Also, as 8 said above, just because a child *can* do something doesn’t mean it is appropriate for their growing mind. That’s another topic in itself.
  4. Targhee

    Logic of English game book

    We used to have the game book when I had Essentials 1st edition. It was a fun way to practice with the kids. It wasn’t thrilling, but it was better than drill or more worksheets. I sold 1st edition 4 years ago and then recently bought the Foundations, in which the game instructions are integrated into teacher book. We are doing an accelerated pass through foundations and haven’t found the games as helpful for that reason (much of Foundations is already review), but my dd still enjoys them do you play them once in a while. Would I just buy game book and cards? Well, if my child needed more practice then yes! Seeing as PP and ETC both provide practice (and PP has some games) I don’t know that you would find it added a lot.
  5. Targhee

    Teaching properties of numbers.

    It isn’t only “a copies of b.” It’s also a sets of B, a scaled by b, an array of a by b, it’s combinatorics, it’s skip counting, it’s many things... When children are young, and for some learning styles even when they are older, a verbal definition is insufficient and even developmentally inappropriate. A concrete model should be used. They can infer relationships much better than with a verbal definition. The verbal definition will come, but the concrete idea (and higher reasoning skills) must be there first. The concrete definition comes first. And yes, they discover relationships and strategies for themselves as well.
  6. Targhee

    Teaching properties of numbers.

    For the elementary student it was nearly everything outside the standard algorithm. I am not blaming teachers - most elem teachers don’t have to take conceptual math courses, they have new curriculum thrown at them regularly and with short notice, they have more than math (and too many students) to focus on, and after teaching math the X way for 15 years it can be hard to transition to the Y way. For my high school student it was similar - teacher was a computational teacher and dd had been in years of conceptual math. She made calculation errors at time (ADHD partly to blame) but she could explain why something didn’t turn out tightbonbthe board while teacher was lecturing (that didn’t go over well), or explain in clearer terms to her peers than the teacher did, because she understood the way the math worked, the concepts behind it.
  7. Targhee

    Teaching properties of numbers.

    I have not found that to be the case with my kids. We teach multiple strategies, practice a specific one, then practice mixed issuing a strategy of choice. I think in your example of whether to see the difference (73-1=?) or look at it like a missing subtrahend (eg 73 -?=69) is easily resolved by teaching number bonds/part-while models from the beginning. I can say to my 1st header “are we looking for a part or a whole? Yes, and what’s the missing part?” Or as easily she could think of subtraction as a model of comparison and see there’s only 4 difference between the two. No regrouping needed yet because 4 is a difference you can count on/back easily.
  8. Targhee

    Teaching properties of numbers.

    I know this was not addressed to me, but here’s my $.02. The standards attempted to take learning/teaching strategies and methods from nations who did well on the PISA and present them to American schools. I appreciate the intent, and think they were going in the right direction, but then there was a disconnect when writing the CCSS. It seems a lot like Nightmare Before Christmas - someone from American math land saw the beauty of Asian math land and wanted to bring it home. But American educators, textbook companies, testing services, policy makers, etc just didn’t grasp the nuance of “Asian math” (or notice the cultural reinforcement of the methods, the simplified beauty in delivery, the developmental age appropriateness), brought in their own familiar perspectives and approaches, and created something that terrifies many when they were least expecting it. eTA When two of my kids transitioned into CCSS math at public school in 4th and 9th they were not only way ahead of the game, they understood what was going on better than the teachers. Both spent lots of team teaching their peers. This was because they had a solid foundation in conceptual math (that wasn’t directed by CCSS) and actually *knew* why the commutative property of multiplication works, and why you can us partial quotients to do Long division in your head, etc.
  9. Targhee

    Teaching properties of numbers.

    I suggest using a conceptual math program like Singapore PM, RightStart, Miquon, MEP, or similar. I can’t soeak to the 2nd grade level, but for 3rd grade on Beast Academy builds from the conceptual basis in a way that requires and reinforces the need to understand the concepts behind the math. None of these programs rely on or can be done with only memorizing algorithms, and they all present multiple methods for problem solving (which itself reinforces using the properties and concepts of math over plug-and-chug output).
  10. I have PVCs, did Holter Monitoring, had an echocardiogram, and in the end they said I didn’t need any treatment. Sorry I don’t remember my numbers, but just maybe giving an optimistic outlook that doing nothing is an option too. Oh, that was 20 years ago and I haven’t had any issues.
  11. My thought as well! There seems to be an apathy towards knowing practical or academic things, while finding and knowing obscure and ridiculous/odd/weird is trendy. Teens and young adults probably want to and *do* know things, but they are different things because they place different value on them than we do. And with the rise of the inane, thanks to the fact that the internet gives everyone a platform, there is probably a higher proportion of inanity in their memories. Ds has a friend and he and his whole family watch hours of toy unboxing YouTubes, Vines of kids failing at skateboarding/parkour/stunts, and other thing which to me are pointless. Even if they are humorous or interesting I don’t want to waste time and thought space with them. Sorry if it sounds judgemental, but my intention is just to point out a shift of values - to the friend maybe it is family bonding, but to me they ARE a waste.
  12. I think this is a good explanation why opening a sentence with a coordinating conjunction is both incorrect and acceptable.
SUBSCRIBE TO OUR NEWSLETTER & RECEIVE A COUPON FOR
10% OFF
We respect your privacy.You’ll hear about new products, special discounts & sales, and homeschooling tips. *Coupon only valid for first-time registrants. Coupon cannot be combined with any other offer. Entering your email address makes you eligible to receive future promotional emails.
0 Shares
Share
Tweet
Pin
×