Does Common Core math = Singapore Math???

[Reefgazer]

As per Courtney's post above, teachers are not being allowed to teach in the best way possible for their students to learn.  But that's a feature, not a bug, of the system.

Yes, I read all of it. I find it amusing that national papers often rave about the program, but when similar demands are pushed, they write the opposite. Either everybody complains how behind we are, or it's now developmentally inappropriate . CC isn't Singapore. I am using SM because if you look at CC math materials NY published (and and there is a lot of complaining from NY), it looks very similar to it. It is also the topic of this thread - is CC similar to SM. I am trying to tell you that I think in early grades it is very similar based on materials I have looked at. I am also trying to say that if you have intelligent people writing curriculum, they could come up with better math questions than what I have seen used as examples of why CC is bad. I am not debating LA standards and if writing under CC is developmentally appropriate. I am trying to say that CC math attempts to teach conceptually topics (a good thing in my book), it actually isn't too advanced (CA is apparently not allowing SM math because SM is advanced). Unproven, untested methods? Can you give concrete examples of elementary math standards that use unproven methods?
I believe no one standard can serve all kids and the best approach is to train teachers well and give them the freedom to teach real kids they have in their classrooms. I think tailoring instruction to individuals is the best approach, but I think often the criticism leveled at CC math standards (I can only speak to elementary grades) is simply misplaced.

 

[Roadrunner]

As per Courtney's post above, teachers are not being allowed to teach in the best way possible for their students to learn. But that's a feature, not a bug, of the system.

But that's not a feature of CC either. I have number of friends who teach in CA and they all express frustration over scripted lesson plans and total inflexibility of the system. That was true prior to CC and just continued on post CC. It's a bad trend, which won't be reversed I am afraid as long as test culture remains under any standards, CC or not.

[Courtney_Ostaff]

But that's not a feature of CC either. I have number of friends who teach in CA and they all express frustration over scripted lesson plans and total inflexibility of the system. That was true prior to CC and just continued on post CC. It's a bad trend, which won't be reversed I am afraid as long as test culture remains under any standards, CC or not.

 

Technically, you are correct. This started with NCLB. However, since it has come to the forefront of national attention at the same time as Common Core, and is imposed in the same paragraph of the RTTT funding as the national standards, most people use Common Core as a shortcut to refer to the four part system of:

• creating a system of high-stakes testing to link teacher hire/fire decisions and public school existence to student test scores
• requiring states to use national standards 
• linking funding (including student loans) for education colleges to the test scores of the students that their graduates teach
• instituting a de facto national student data system which includes data on homeschool students

[nature girl]

This is probably going to sound like an obvious question/issue, and it’s probably been debated numerous times without me seeing it, but because this has been bothering me for awhile and I may have missed federal policies where this has been addressed, I’ll bring it up. Aren’t those schools that are most likely to have the hardest time meeting standards those that are most in need of more funding for teachers and programs? And now they’re most likely to be denied that funding?

[Courtney_Ostaff]

This is probably going to sound like an obvious question/issue, and it’s probably been debated numerous times without me seeing it, but because this has been bothering me for awhile and I may have missed federal policies where this has been addressed, I’ll bring it up. Aren’t those schools that are most likely to have the hardest time meeting standards those that are most in need of more funding for teachers and programs? And now they’re most likely to be denied that funding?

 

Technically, they don't "lose" funding. They just lose the ability to direct where it would go, and be required to purchase high-priced consultants to tell them how to teach, and pay private, for-profit tutoring firms in mandatory after school tutoring, and to spend more money on transportation. 

 

"It means that local districts will have less flexibility to use about $38 million a year in federal Title I funds. They will likely be required to spend millions of that funding on private tutoring services for at-risk students. Another $19 million in Title I money may be reallocated for professional development and teacher training.

The state will also have to notify parents in low-performing schools that they have the right to transfer their children to stronger schools. The state will have to provide transportation for those children, paying for it out of federal funds. Washington also will have less flexibility to direct funding to schools that the state thinks need it most. Instead, it will have to follow federal guidelines for which schools merit priority status.

Perhaps most troubling for the state, the waiver revocation means nearly every school in Washington will labeled as failing under NCLB. Under the law, every child was supposed to be doing math and reading at grade level by this school year — a nearly impossible task. The waivers the department has extended exempted states from meeting that 100 percent proficiency goal.

Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2014/04/washington-state-nclb-waiver-arne-duncan-105997.html#ixzz325zEuyHv"

[sweetpea3829]

This all has been quite enlightening.

 

Now, does anybody have any suggestions for what WILL work for PS and other classroom settings?  

 

More than just, what will work, but what will work and is feasible to apply.  

 

 

Edited to correct spelling...lol!!!  

[Roadrunner]

This all has been quite enlightening.

 

Now, does anybody have any suggestions for what WILL work four PS and other classroom settings?

 

More than just, what will work, but what will work and is feasible to apply.

Define success to me. :)

[sweetpea3829]

Define success to me. :)

 

Touche!

 

 

Success....perhaps we should start with that.  What does it mean to be "successful" as a student?  Does it really matter if a person is "successful" as a student.  My husband sucked as a student, but is wonderful at other things.

 

I keep thinking about something that was said to me once...what if "musical talent" was what our culture valued as successful.  What if our schools were all about musical talent, and the ability to complete math equations was secondary and not that important.  Well, I would be a TERRIBLE student in such a system.  

 

So let's debate that then...what would a successful education consist of?  

[Courtney_Ostaff]

LOL! Wouldn't it be a classical education?  :laugh:

[sweetpea3829]

LOL! Wouldn't it be a classical education?  :laugh:

 

Maybe for some students, but not for others...

[nature girl]

Is it Sweden that starts vocational education at an early age? Allowing students to follow their passions (and change as necessary if those passions change) through doing internships, along with whatever's needed for their basic education? Those kids can't ask, "What's the point of wasting my time learning X,Y, Z when I'm never going to use them?" Those children who follow their passions then turn them into careers that will fulfill them, which should (in theory, but it makes so much sense to me) lead to a more productive society.

[Courtney_Ostaff]

To me, this is in large part, a cultural problem.  

 

We don't value our plumbers and mechanics and electricians and nurses, so the middle-class parents almost never want their kids to go to the Vo-Tech schools, so those schools are underfunded and undervalued.  We all show up for football games, but there are no stadium events for academics.  Etc.  

 

And, yes, poverty plays a role.  I was in a small school this year that filled an entire classroom every weekend with food donated from the community for the children to take home on the weekend, so that they didn't go hungry.  The food had be non-perishable, and able to be opened by a 6-year-old, and require no preparation. They show up hungry, because if parents don't meet welfare-to-work requirements, they don't get SNAP, and the shelves are bare. Our children show up to class cold--most schools keep a clothing closet nowadays, and I've had students told me that their favorite Christmas present was a second-hand, warm coat from the school.  They show up in pain because their dental care is non-existent. They show up without glasses, because theirs are broken and Medicaid will only buy one pair a year, so they can't see the whiteboards or read their textbooks. They show up without pencils or paper.  They show up tired, because they don't have a bedroom, and they can't go to sleep on the sofa until Mom or Dad or Mom's boyfriend or girlfriend or both turns off the TV at 10pm. They show up over-medicated to the point of stupor, because it's easier to medicate than to parent. Often, they just don't show up, because mom or dad didn't want to get up in the morning and put them on the bus--and schools generally accept all notes from parents that say the kids were sick, because how are you going to challenge that in truancy court? 

 

Then, we try to teach these tired, cold, hungry, over-medicated, in-pain, unable-to-see students.  We look the other way when they nap at breakfast because of their medication and late nights, and we sneak them double portions in the lunch line, and we send home food, and we send home clothes, and we seat them next to the board and let them get close enough to see, and we call CPS about missed doctors visits when we find out, and we hope the school nurse is in that one day of the week that she's allotted so she can refer them to a dentist.  We take our paychecks and buy pencils and paper and snacks and classroom manipulatives and little Christmas presents. 

[Arcadia]

Is it Sweden that starts vocational education at an early age? Allowing students to follow their passions (and change as necessary if those passions change) through doing internships, along with whatever's needed for their basic education?

I dont know about Sweden. Singapore has a vocational track from 12 years old (7th grade) and I have friends who benefited from being able to opt for that track. When that track started, courses were in plumbing, electrician, hairdressing and cooking. The people I know who benefited were actually strong in math and weaker in written languages. They earn a good income.

 

ETA:

From the vocational track, it is possible to go on and get an associate degree and a bachelors in engineering. My hairdresser friends earn more than a senior engineer :)

[Arcadia]

Perhaps it should be that our government provides a base education and anything more is on us?

It is hard to define what a base education would be. Where do you set the baseline. Who should set the baseline. Who should modify the baseline as societal needs changes.

 

Fo example, I expect my kids school to at least teach whatever is in California's state standards properly. Unfortunately I do need to remediate when things like math concepts are taught wrongly.

[Arcadia]

I'm on my ipod so sorry for the multiple posts as I can't muli-quote.

 

Common core math is not Singapore math. Also additional math in Singapore is taken by the majority. There is no "STEM track" until 11th and 12th grade.

[Courtney_Ostaff]

Fo example, I expect my kids school to at least teach whatever is in California's state standards properly. Unfortunately I do need to remediate when things like math concepts are taught wrongly.

 

I agree that math is taught shockingly badly at the early elementary level. We could do as other countries do, and hire subject matter experts to teach at more than the high school level, but that would cost more, since you'd have to have a teacher for every subject, rather than hire one per class.

[Courtney_Ostaff]

I just wonder why we don't have dedicated math instructors for elementary.  That would solve the problem.  It's a lot to ask a teacher to be strong in every subject. 

They have reading specialists and specialists who can remediate and intervene for reading.  Do they have that for math?  I've never heard of it. 

 

DH (grew up in Germany) said they had separate math instructors even in elementary. 

 

I recall having instructors say, "Math is not my strong suit."  Uh..not the kind of thing I want to hear from the person who is trying to teach me about math!

 

Because it would cost more.  Instead of having 1 teacher per 25-40 students, you'd have to have 8 per 175-320, which amounts to an extra teacher's salary for the same number of students.

 

Plus, math and science teachers are graduated at a rate of 1 science or math teacher to 20 social studies teachers.  They've had open science and math positions for years at some high schools, because they simply can't find anyone certified to hire. I didn't have a certified science teacher for 9th, 11th, or 12th grades (earth science, chemistry, or physics).  Imagine the competition to hire an elementary science teacher!

[Courtney_Ostaff]

Ugh, I know right? They're like the rock stars of school districts. I tell you what ticks me off is buying consumable textbooks. Not workbooks, not e-books, not literature. Consumable textbooks. Who came up with that genius idea? And what genius approved it?!!

[Arcadia]

I tell you what ticks me off is buying consumable textbooks. Not workbooks, not e-books, not literature. Consumable textbooks. Who came up with that genius idea? And what genius approved it?!!

Singapore uses consumable textbooks from 1st grade and they are very affordable. The govt. used to be the publishing house. Kids own their textbooks so it is easy for kids to revise their work.

Publishers came up with the idea of charging relatively high prices for school textbooks and then lobby the state's DoE to adopt them, as well as the school districts to purchase them.

If you compare the price of high school and university textbooks here to the equivalent low price asian edition abroad, the price difference is a lot.

[Courtney_Ostaff]

Yes, I just bought the Singapore Math books for my daughter for 1st grade. Those are more like workbooks.  I'd've been just as happy with a reference text and cheap workbook. There's something to be said for buying reference books that you can re-use.We can't afford to paint the school bathrooms, or run activity buses, but we're buying consumable textbooks? 

[Arcadia]

It's a lot to ask a teacher to be strong in every subject.

......

DH (grew up in Germany) said they had separate math instructors even in elementary.

While it is hard to expect a teacher to be strong in every subject, at elementary school level, the "gatekeeper" is in people admitted to being trained to be a teacher. It is competitive to become a school teacher in Finland. It is not easy to become a teacher in Singapore either. If a person is allowed to be trained to be a lower elementary school teacher only if the person has already aced precalculus and high school language arts, it does not matter if the teacher is not a subject expert.

 

I had separate subject teachers in elementary, my hubby only have different subject teachers from 7th grade (same country). His 6th grade homeroom teacher had to be competent in language arts, math and science.

 

It is a chicken and egg problem when teachers in general don't get the respect because it is assume that becoming a teacher is easy. It is also hard for a child to respect or trust that a teacher knows what he/she is teaching when the prealgebra teacher gets surface area and volume mixed up.

[Courtney_Ostaff]

While it is hard to expect a teacher to be strong in every subject, at elementary school level, the "gatekeeper" is in people admitted to being trained to be a teacher. It is competitive to become a school teacher in Finland. It is not easy to become a teacher in Singapore either. If a person is allowed to be trained to be a lower elementary school teacher only if the person has already aced precalculus and high school language arts, it does not matter if the teacher is not a subject expert.

 

I had separate subject teachers in elementary, my hubby only have different subject teachers from 7th grade (same country). His 6th grade homeroom teacher had to be competent in language arts, math and science.

 

It is a chicken and egg problem when teachers in general don't get the respect because it is assume that becoming a teacher is easy. It is also hard for a child to respect or trust that a teacher knows what he/she is teaching when the prealgebra teacher gets surface area and volume mixed up.

 

Don't forget pay.  Teachers get excellent benefits in my state, but that's because we have a strong union.  Our pay isn't awesome.  I don't know very (any?) many mathematically inclined women who decided to become a teacher.  Mostly they became statisticians, engineers, etc.

[nature girl]

How strong do you even need to be in math to teach it in elementary school??? Many of the parents here would not consider themselves strong in math, but they make themselves learn enough in every subject to teach effectively, some up through high school.

 

But of course we can choose our textbooks, and the vast majority of people here wouldn't be choosing, or able to effectively use, Everyday Math. It seems like the problem is both with the textbooks and with insufficient teacher training in those methods they're being told to use, not that they don't have math/science degrees.

[sweetpea3829]

Is it Sweden that starts vocational education at an early age? Allowing students to follow their passions (and change as necessary if those passions change) through doing internships, along with whatever's needed for their basic education? Those kids can't ask, "What's the point of wasting my time learning X,Y, Z when I'm never going to use them?" Those children who follow their passions then turn them into careers that will fulfill them, which should (in theory, but it makes so much sense to me) lead to a more productive society.

 

I have a slight problem with this.  I am in my mid 30's.  Went to college right out of high school, as did a large number of my peers.  And how many of those same peers are now BACK in college or trade school because the degree they got, the career they thought they wanted at 18, turned out to not be what they wanted once they experienced a bit of the world.

 

I know for myself, when my kids are grown, I'd like to go back to school for a field completely unrelated to the field I got my degree in.  

 

 

To me, this is in large part, a cultural problem.  

 

We don't value our plumbers and mechanics and electricians and nurses, so the middle-class parents almost never want their kids to go to the Vo-Tech schools, so those schools are underfunded and undervalued.  We all show up for football games, but there are no stadium events for academics.  Etc.  

 

 

 

I agree with this.  When I stop and consider what teachers are making per year, and what a professional athlete is making per year, it makes me ill.  Seriously, ill.  But aside from that cultural issue, you're correct in that these other vocations are not valued.  And its very easy to fall into that trap.  My husband is a truck driver.  He works hard and makes enough money for us to be a single income family (despite not being an over the road driver).  My 7 yr old son made a comment about how he wanted to be a truck driver "like daddy" and my immediate thought was, "Please don't...you're too smart for that."  FAIL!  I didn't actually say it outloud, but I thought it...and felt terrible about it afterwards.  

 

Listen, I'd LOVE for my son to become a doctor (which is what he's been saying he wants to do since he was 4 years old).  But we have to get past this idea that being a doctor is the end-all be-all for our kids.  If my son becomes a truck driver, I hope he becomes a DARN GOOD truck driver and works his best.  

 

 

Yes, I just bought the Singapore Math books for my daughter for 1st grade. Those are more like workbooks.  I'd've been just as happy with a reference text and cheap workbook. There's something to be said for buying reference books that you can re-use.We can't afford to paint the school bathrooms, or run activity buses, but we're buying consumable textbooks? 

 

You know what we do with our consumable workbooks?  We cut off the binding, 3-hole punch them, and stick them in 3-ring binders.  My kids use them with dry erase pockets so that I can pass the workbook on to the next kid.  I can't see spending money on the same workbook year after year.  Plus, we really can't afford to do that!  

[vaquitita]

Nm

Edited December 13, 2015 by vaquitita

[sweetpea3829]

Ha ha. This made me laugh. My husband is an auto mechanic and when my son says he wants to be a mechanic like daddy, I have to stop myself from saying don't! :D

 

Though my reason is a little different, if he wants to be a mechanic, great, just be an air conditioning mechanic or something. Can you believe that a/c mechanics make three times what an auto mechanic does? and has his tools supplied to him, while an auto mechanic has to buy his own (and as cars are constantly changing, the needed tools keeps growing. It's never ending). I guess this shows that a/c is more important than your brakes. Lol.

 

Being an auto mechanic is tough work.  Seriously, its hard on the body.  My dad was an auto body mechanic, and my step-uncle is an automotive mechanic.  

 

Being a truck driver is hard work, too...at least the kind my husband does.  His knees are starting to show damage, his back is damaged, his hands are starting to show signs of arthritis from handling cold steel in the winter.  He's only 43!  

[Reefgazer]

I do think most teachers are hard working, capable, professional, and know what is best for their students and want to teach that way; at least the teachers my kids have had are that way.  But that doesn't mean that those with education leadership PhDs and those running our schools of education that certify those teachers want that.  So of course your friends are frustrated because they are not being allowed to do their job in the best way they know how.  That does not matter one iota to those who run accrediting agencies and determine education policy though; the only thing that matters is equal outcomes, incomplete transmission of information, marginal reading skills, and the production of useful idiots.  Teacher frustration is not really a concern of theirs and has no bearing on policy, and the testing regime is a way to ensure that teachers can only teach marginally, regardless of what their instincts and professional judgment tell them tell them to do.  The last thing educrats want is teachers using their best ability to transmit actual knowledge.

 

 

 

But that's not a feature of CC either. I have number of friends who teach in CA and they all express frustration over scripted lesson plans and total inflexibility of the system. That was true prior to CC and just continued on post CC. It's a bad trend, which won't be reversed I am afraid as long as test culture remains under any standards, CC or not.

 

[sweetpea3829]

How different are the editions of Singapore?  I'm writing up the kids' IHIPS for next year and I see that there are now THREE Singapore editions.  Singapore Standards, Singapore Common Core, and Singapore US.  Is the Singapore Common Core all that different from the Standards edition? 

[Roadrunner]

Equal outcome.

I have been thinking lately that ironically USA appears more "communist" than USSR was when it comes to education. :)

I think it's important to provide equal access to public education, but equal outcome? That's just silly. Nobody could possibly seriously expect that. Russian math is often admired, but in schools in the USSR I am familiar with, not every kid was expected to master all the material. That's what grades were for. Kids with fives (Grade A) were the ones that mastered it (including challenging sections), and ones with 3s (C or a D), were only proficient in basics for that grade level. Very small percentage of kids received an A in everything. I don't think such an outcome would ever be tolerated here. The majority of students in our local middle school are A students. I don't even know what that means.

 

I think generally variety would be a good thing for our system. Waldorf is the worst possible match for my DS, yet I know number of kids who would do well in that environment. I would love to see more small schools operate that cater to different interests, math intense schools, art focused ones, with different vocational focus (my cousin graduated from high school that was a year longer than normal but incorporate a great nursing program), classical ones.....

[terrikuns]

 

 

Listen, I'd LOVE for my son to become a doctor (which is what he's been saying he wants to do since he was 4 years old).  But we have to get past this idea that being a doctor is the end-all be-all for our kids.  If my son becomes a truck driver, I hope he becomes a DARN GOOD truck driver and works his best.  

 

 

 

My husband and I are both doctors, and we would strongly discourage our children from doing the same. Obviously, all careers have pros and cons, but I can only think of one or two of the hundreds of doctors we know who actually encourage their children to go into medicine. I understand your underlying point about perception of different careers, but really, have your son do a lot of shadowing and research before embarking on a medical track. If you can get into med school, you have a lot of other options that are worth considering.

[Courtney_Ostaff]

I think it's important to provide equal access to public education, but equal outcome? That's just silly. Nobody could possibly seriously expect that. ... The majority of students in our local middle school are A students. I don't even know what that means.

 

Oh, but they do expect that. Hence, the As.

 

Part of the problem is the change in standards, and I don't mean Common Core. I'm assuming (and you know what they say about assumptions! ;) ) when you and I went to school, there was this expected material to learn.  But it was also expected that not everyone would "get" it all.  That was OK. The A students would get it pretty darn well, the B students got it above average, the C students got what one would normally expect, etc.  It was fairly bell-curved. The material was ambitious, and that was OK, because it was a goal, not a floor.  Students were compared to each other--Tom is a sharp cookie, and he got 95% of the concept, so he gets an A, etc.  We call that "norm referencing." "Yeah, that's an A paper for a 10 year old with experience in paper writing."

 

Now, the material is expected to be mastered at 100% by everyone. That's the equal outcome, and it's the standard. No, hold on, I'm serious. It doesn't matter if it's an unrealistic goal, but that's the expectation.  When the schools will be labeled "failing" in Washington state this fall, it's because their students, even the dying ones, don't master the material at that standard. We have also switched the way we grade.

 

Instead of comparing students to each other, or even using a teacher's experience, we grade on mastery, also known as "criterion referencing." It doesn't matter if Suzy studied 12 hours a day and Sally studied for 10 minutes, if Suzy is 5 and Sally is 7, or if Suzy is terminally ill and Sally is healthy as a horse. What matters is that they prove they can do X, Y, and Z identically. They have mastered the skill, according to the multiple choice test. If your students can do more, it's irrelevant. (AKA, no Singapore Math for CA students!) If they can't do it, it doesn't matter what they can do, all that matters is that they failed.  

 

I suppose it's good that we know for sure that students grade 3 can perform at X level on Y date according to Z test.  But, it makes no allowances for individual differences, and it provides no incentive to go above and beyond.  Employers hate that, I hear, that their young employees perform tasks like they're running down a checklist, and then when they're done, they feel free to sit on their behinds, because they performed to mastery. And then, imagine, they want a reward because they did what you told them to do--here's the checklist! If you want them to do something else, they'd be happy to, but you didn't ask! How are they supposed to know what to do if you don't tell them? See the problem here?

[Courtney_Ostaff]

That just won't happen in a million years here (equal outcome).  Even if you consider the whole early education preschool push.  It was initially about leveling the playing field when kids start school.  So those kids who come from deprived backgrounds could start off at a similar place as kids who come from more well off backgrounds (I swear I'm not trying to sound obnoxious, but I don't know how else to word that.)  Anyhow.  What has happened is the well off parents not only send their kids to preschool as well, they send them to super high quality preschools.  Which once again insures their kids start off ahead. 

 

:iagree:  They start off ahead, and stay ahead.

[Reefgazer]

This is actually a major thread of John Dewey's and what he promoted.  John Dewey is much admired for his work in education and we can "thank" him for a lot of what we are seeing today in education.  He was actually a trained psychologist who studied in Germany and the early USSR, and admired their educational systems and what they had the potential to do for/to society.  He promoted his particular vision using psychological techniques to accomplish his goals through universal public education, and eventually brought those ideas to U of Chicago and Columbia Teachers College.  You see this as OBE today, with the eventual goal of transforming our society into something he felt was "better", where everyone was on equal footing and achieves/performs equally.  But of course, that's impossible.  Hence, cutting off the legs of the more capable.  There, now we're all equal.  The goal of Dewey's, and of his educrat successors, was and is transforming society into a more equal entity, and he felt schools were the most efficient place to do that.  It didn't work every time it's been tried in the past (Goals 2000, for example) because there was no enforcement to keep teachers in line.  Now there is, through testing tied to pay.  Fascinating reading, if you're so inclined....

 

I think small schools with more variety would be a great idea; it would promote real education.

Equal outcome.
I have been thinking lately that ironically USA appears more "communist" than USSR was when it comes to education. :)
I think it's important to provide equal access to public education, but equal outcome? That's just silly. Nobody could possibly seriously expect that. Russian math is often admired, but in schools in the USSR I am familiar with, not every kid was expected to master all the material. That's what grades were for. Kids with fives (Grade A) were the ones that mastered it (including challenging sections), and ones with 3s (C or a D), were only proficient in basics for that grade level. Very small percentage of kids received an A in everything. I don't think such an outcome would ever be tolerated here. The majority of students in our local middle school are A students. I don't even know what that means.

I think generally variety would be a good thing for our system. Waldorf is the worst possible match for my DS, yet I know number of kids who would do well in that environment. I would love to see more small schools operate that cater to different interests, math intense schools, art focused ones, with different vocational focus (my cousin graduated from high school that was a year longer than normal but incorporate a great nursing program), classical ones.....

 

[Roadrunner]

This is actually a major thread of John Dewey's and what he promoted. John Dewey is much admired for his work in education and we can "thank" him for a lot of what we are seeing today in education. He was actually a trained psychologist who studied in Germany and the early USSR, and admired their educational systems and what they had the potential to do for/to society. He promoted his particular vision using psychological techniques to accomplish his goals through universal public education, and eventually brought those ideas to U of Chicago and Columbia Teachers College. You see this as OBE today, with the eventual goal of transforming our society into something he felt was "better", where everyone was on equal footing and achieves/performs equally. But of course, that's impossible. Hence, cutting off the legs of the more capable. There, now we're all equal. The goal of Dewey's, and of his educrat successors, was and is transforming society into a more equal entity, and he felt schools were the most efficient place to do that. It didn't work every time it's been tried in the past (Goals 2000, for example) because there was no enforcement to keep teachers in line. Now there is, through testing tied to pay. Fascinating reading, if you're so inclined....

 

I think small schools with more variety would be a great idea; it would promote real education.

Interesting. Only I do not think USSR ever really aimed for equal outcomes. I think they wanted top notch scientist and artists to compete with the West and they identified gifted kids and send them to special schools (math, music, ballet). Even in regular schools there was a clear difference in expectations. They provided equal access to schools, but what you did there was really up to you. There was clearly the floor for each grade level on expectations (I remember my teachers articulating to less academically inclined kids what they needed to know and do to get a C and move on to the next grade), but they taught to the top of the class. I am by no means trying to imply that they had an education system figured out, but just making an observation that even the ideologically driven communist country wasn't delusional enough to think one could achieve equal outcome (I am not talking about basic literacy).

I do not know how this all ties back to the CC debate, other than to say that basic standards aren't bad to have, but we need to be intelligent enough on implementation from curriculum developers to policy makers. CA decision to not allow SM is a bad decision and the responsibility really lies with CA Department of Education. Is anybody challenging that decision? We should be. People we hire to write curriculum need to be held responsible (we should vote with our purse) for garbage they often produce. Have you seen the segment Colbert did on CC math? Yes, it was CC aligned math program, only apparently that particular math problem was in place well before they slapped CC label on the curriculum. I honestly believe that implementation matters more at this point than CC standards.

[Courtney_Ostaff]

I do not know how this all ties back to the CC debate, other than to say that basic standards aren't bad to have, but we need to be intelligent enough on implementation from curriculum developers to policy makers. CA decision to not allow SM is a bad decision and the responsibility really lies with CA Department of Education. Is anybody challenging that decision? We should be. People we hire to write curriculum need to be held responsible (we should vote with our purse) for garbage they often produce. Have you seen the segment Colbert did on CC math? Yes, it was CC aligned math program, only apparently that particular math problem was in place well before they slapped CC label on the curriculum. I honestly believe that implementation matters more at this point than CC standards.

 

Part of the implementation problem is the test score problem. If you're teaching, and you'll get fired/the entire faculty and staff will be laid off/the district will lose funding--unless all your kids get to mastery.  You're going to work your hardest on those kids that need just a little edge to raise the average score for the class/school/district.  The hopeless ones are the special educators' problems, and the top-notch ones just need to be babysat. The test becomes the alpha and the omega. 

 

CA Dept of Ed is just trying to get those kids who need a little extra edge the support they need to hit those test scores.  The state, as a whole, will lose funding (see also: Washington state) unless they comply with RttT requirements. Remember, states now have to compete for funding with their students' test scores.

[PachiSusan]

Can I just blanket like all of Courtney_Ostaff's posts? LOL I clicked on everything you posted and I'm so very grateful for your input and sharing what you know.

[Courtney_Ostaff]

:blushing:  Thank you! Hanging out on the message boards is something I can do while nursing my two-month-old. You are all so knowledgeable yourselves that I'm flattered that I've found a little niche I can share some information in. :)

[PachiSusan]

:blushing:  Thank you! Hanging out on the message boards is something I can do while nursing my two-month-old. You are all so knowledgeable yourselves that I'm flattered that I've found a little niche I can share some information in. :)

 

I'm having Moms come to me after having a year of common core in their schools and saying things like, "I had no idea..." and "What the heck happened??" and I try really hard to stifle the "That's what I've been saying for the past two years!!!!!!!".  

 

No, I don't have an agenda. No, I don't have a vendetta against public schooling, and it's not because it came out of an administration I don't support. It's a one size fits all untested educational policy that I don't believe will benefit our children. 

 

Uniformity of Mediocrity. 

[PachiSusan]

:blushing:  Thank you! Hanging out on the message boards is something I can do while nursing my two-month-old. You are all so knowledgeable yourselves that I'm flattered that I've found a little niche I can share some information in. :)

 

How can you nurse and type? I never perfected that. LOL 

[Courtney_Ostaff]

How can you nurse and type? I never perfected that. LOL 

 

Boppies are the best thing since sliced bread, IMHO. :) That, and wireless keyboards.  

 

I don't have anything against public schools, either. I think that they serve an enormously important purpose in our country.  I don't blame teachers, who are just trying to do their jobs. An adjunct friend of mine has a phrase I think is relevant here: #badmin :)

 

I'm unhappy with an administration I voted for. ;)  

[Elisabet1]

The writers of common core books here in the US has put a lot of political and social agenda in to the books. Even if you look at a public school textbook, it is riddled with a ton of political/social stories and distractions that have nothing to do with math. To top it off, another push in education here is "collaborative" which means one person does the work, everyone takes credit.

 

My daughter had a calculus class, our last straw on public school math, where homework is participation credit, so everyone was given 100's on this. And then the tests, they were put in to groups of 4. The tests were 4 pages long. No one knew which page would be corrected. They did not share answers. They did the tests on their own and turned them in. Within the group, 1 page from each test was graded. The total equalled the grade for everyone. One girl did not even bother with her first test. She got a zero on her page. So the entire group got a 65. Everyone got an individual test grade of 65. My daughter dropped after that. She was told she was assigned to the group for the term so she just needed to get that 4th person up to speed on the calculus. She knew the class would destroy her GPA and class ranking if she stayed, so she dropped.

[Nart]

Interesting. Only I do not think USSR ever really aimed for equal outcomes. I think they wanted top notch scientist and artists to compete with the West and they identified gifted kids and send them to special schools (math, music, ballet). Even in regular schools there was a clear difference in expectations. They provided equal access to schools, but what you did there was really up to you. There was clearly the floor for each grade level on expectations (I remember my teachers articulating to less academically inclined kids what they needed to know and do to get a C and move on to the next grade), but they taught to the top of the class. I am by no means trying to imply that they had an education system figured out, but just making an observation that even the ideologically driven communist country wasn't delusional enough to think one could achieve equal outcome (I am not talking about basic literacy).

I do not know how this all ties back to the CC debate, other than to say that basic standards aren't bad to have, but we need to be intelligent enough on implementation from curriculum developers to policy makers. CA decision to not allow SM is a bad decision and the responsibility really lies with CA Department of Education. Is anybody challenging that decision? We should be. People we hire to write curriculum need to be held responsible (we should vote with our purse) for garbage they often produce. Have you seen the segment Colbert did on CC math? Yes, it was CC aligned math program, only apparently that particular math problem was in place well before they slapped CC label on the curriculum. I honestly believe that implementation matters more at this point than CC standards.

 

CA set clear standards for what needed to be included in CA math textbooks. Singapore Math based in the US did NOT include all the necessary standards for the 2014 adoption. The decision lies with the textbook company, not the Dept. of Education. The vast majority of math programs were approved. SM Common Core had several issues. To start with,  they only submitted books for grades 1-3 and did not include kindergarten or grades 4-5, so no district realistically was going to adopt the program even if it did meet the criteria. The review board found that the program was not fully aligned with Common Core, there were problems with assessments, issues with providing universal access to students with special needs and English Language Learners, and issues with instructional planning. The reason SM Common Core was not approved is NOT because it is too advanced. Math in Focus: Singapore Approach is more advanced than other textbooks and it was approved.    

 

http://www.cde.ca.gov/ci/ma/im/documents/mathadoptionrpt2014.pdf

 

Here are the reasons it was not approved

 

Marshall Cavendish, Primary Mathematics Common Core Edition (Grades 1–3) Program Components The Mathematics program Primary Mathematics Common Core Edition is composed of, but not limited to, the following items: Primary Mathematics Common Core Textbooks (TB); Primary Mathematics Common Core Teacher's Guides (TG); Primary Mathematics Common Core Workbook (WB); Primary Digital Math Buddies Online Resource (PD). Summary The SBE did not adopt Primary Mathematics Common Core Edition because it does not meet all of the evaluation criteria. Primary Mathematics Common Core Edition does not meet criteria categories 1, 3, 4, and 5. Additionally, Primary Mathematics Common Core Edition is not fully aligned with the California Common Core State Standards for Mathematics. Criteria Category 1: Mathematics Content/Alignment with the Standards The program does not support teaching to the California Common Core State Standards for Mathematics, and does not cover all of the evaluation criteria in category 1. Criteria Category 2: Program Organization The organization and features of the instructional materials support instruction and learning of the Standards. Criteria Category 3: Assessment The instructional materials do not contain strategies and tools for continually measuring student achievement. Assessments do not provide guidance for the teacher in determining whether the student needs additional materials or resources to achieve grade-level standards and conceptual understanding. Criteria Category 4: Universal Access Students with special needs are not provided access to the same standards-based curriculum that is provided to all students, including both the content standards and the standards for mathematical practice. Instructional materials do not provide access to the standards-based curriculum for all students, including English learners, advanced learners, students below grade level in mathematical skills, and students with disabilities. Criteria Category 5: Instructional Planning The instructional materials do not contain a clear road map for teachers to follow when planning instruction.

[Roadrunner]

CA set clear standards for what needed to be included in CA math textbooks. Singapore Math based in the US did NOT include all the necessary standards for the 2014 adoption. The decision lies with the textbook company, not the Dept. of Education. The vast majority of math programs were approved. SM Common Core had several issues. To start with, they only submitted books for grades 1-3 and did not include kindergarten or grades 4-5, so no district realistically was going to adopt the program even if it did meet the criteria. The review board found that the program was not fully aligned with Common Core, there were problems with assessments, issues with providing universal access to students with special needs and English Language Learners, and issues with instructional planning. The reason SM Common Core was not approved is NOT because it is too advanced. Math in Focus: Singapore Approach is more advanced than other textbooks and it was approved.

 

http://www.cde.ca.gov/ci/ma/im/documents/mathadoptionrpt2014.pdf

 

Here are the reasons it was not approved

 

Marshall Cavendish, Primary Mathematics Common Core Edition (Grades 1–3) Program Components The Mathematics program Primary Mathematics Common Core Edition is composed of, but not limited to, the following items: Primary Mathematics Common Core Textbooks (TB); Primary Mathematics Common Core Teacher's Guides (TG); Primary Mathematics Common Core Workbook (WB); Primary Digital Math Buddies Online Resource (PD). Summary The SBE did not adopt Primary Mathematics Common Core Edition because it does not meet all of the evaluation criteria. Primary Mathematics Common Core Edition does not meet criteria categories 1, 3, 4, and 5. Additionally, Primary Mathematics Common Core Edition is not fully aligned with the California Common Core State Standards for Mathematics. Criteria Category 1: Mathematics Content/Alignment with the Standards The program does not support teaching to the California Common Core State Standards for Mathematics, and does not cover all of the evaluation criteria in category 1. Criteria Category 2: Program Organization The organization and features of the instructional materials support instruction and learning of the Standards. Criteria Category 3: Assessment The instructional materials do not contain strategies and tools for continually measuring student achievement. Assessments do not provide guidance for the teacher in determining whether the student needs additional materials or resources to achieve grade-level standards and conceptual understanding. Criteria Category 4: Universal Access Students with special needs are not provided access to the same standards-based curriculum that is provided to all students, including both the content standards and the standards for mathematical practice. Instructional materials do not provide access to the standards-based curriculum for all students, including English learners, advanced learners, students below grade level in mathematical skills, and students with disabilities. Criteria Category 5: Instructional Planning The instructional materials do not contain a clear road map for teachers to follow when planning instruction.

That makes sense. I hope they approve CC editions.

[Ohdanigirl]

I haven't read through all the posts but wanted to address the comparison to SM. My two oldest entered school this year after we moved back to the US. We are after-schooling, though.

 

The transition to CC math has been smooth for my oldest. He is the one that always struggled in math and found it difficult. He grew up doing SM+SM Challenging Word Problems. He worked through them slowly and often had to redo problems. Looking back, I realize that the word problems did not seem so hard for him. This year, hhas worked with an engineering student off and on when he has had difficulty with any concepts, but never the write ups.

 

My 7th grader has had a very different experience. He also did the SM books his brother did. He was able to fly through the SM text book, and some of the extra practice books. Challenging Word Problem were his least favorite. He knew how to solve them but wanted to approach them as mental math. Showing his work and drawing the bar diagrams seemed like a chore, when all the answers were right. At school, he struggles on the write ups that are required for every problem on every test, quiz, and assignment. He has complained that Math class fells like an additional English class, and, after speaking to his teacher, I have learned that this is a common complaint.

 

After the change to the new CC math text, Samples and Populations, the teacher says the A student's grades dropped dramatically. The book is very wordy, you can go through a few pages before ever seeing a number, and it seems to focus on charts. My ds longs for his SM books. I have looked through the PDF book and believe wannabe SM is accurate. The math is not hard, in fact ds feels it is easy and boring. From what I have seen, the problems are related to implementation of new standards, texts, and teaching styles without the correct training. Math teachers are not English teachers, but they spend whole periods trying to teach kids to write paragraphs. Parents are not familiar with this new style of teaching and don't know how to help.

 

At this point, my son is doing a separate book, AOPS, at home. He loves this book. He finally feels he is learning Maths. Over the summer I will pull out CWP and help ds explain the theories, reasoning behind each problem and why he solved it the way he did. I hope it will help him next year. He does not want to come home just yet, because he is at a performing arts school and thoroughly enjoys it.

 

Take from this what you will. My take is that cc can kill math for the math person who enjoys the computations, but may make understanding the reasoning behind the math easier for the non Mathy child. Also, lack of teacher training is making it very hard. Imagine jumping in to SM at book 5A with no prior knowledge of SM bar diagrams. With that in mind, I may sit in on a few classes at school in an attempt to learn how to teach my son the write ups.

[Arcadia]

That makes sense. I hope they approve CC editions.

I think it would be hard to fulfil criteria category 4 unless the textbooks and workbooks are re-written. The publishers might need to add in a bilingual glossary or a spanish edition as well.

[Arcadia]

At this point, my son is doing a separate book, AOPS, at home. He loves this book. He finally feels he is learning Maths. Over the summer I will pull out CWP and help ds explain the theories, reasoning behind each problem and why he solved it the way he did.

Your son's AoPS book would be able to help him with that. You can go over the worked examples with him as well as how he write out his solutions to the questions.

[Roadrunner]

I can't wait to see what our local high school decides to use for math. Nothing has changed here in the elementary school. They continue to use enVision, the same program they used prior to CC, but I think there are some changes in the upper grades. 

 

MIF is approved at least. :)

 

 

[sweetpea3829]

How timely...

 

http://ww.abc6.com/story/25560082/honors-night-canceled-at-east-greenwich-middle-school

[Chrysalis Academy]

To me, this is in large part, a cultural problem.  

 

We don't value our plumbers and mechanics and electricians and nurses, so the middle-class parents almost never want their kids to go to the Vo-Tech schools, so those schools are underfunded and undervalued.  We all show up for football games, but there are no stadium events for academics.  Etc.  

 

And, yes, poverty plays a role.  I was in a small school this year that filled an entire classroom every weekend with food donated from the community for the children to take home on the weekend, so that they didn't go hungry.  The food had be non-perishable, and able to be opened by a 6-year-old, and require no preparation. They show up hungry, because if parents don't meet welfare-to-work requirements, they don't get SNAP, and the shelves are bare. Our children show up to class cold--most schools keep a clothing closet nowadays, and I've had students told me that their favorite Christmas present was a second-hand, warm coat from the school.  They show up in pain because their dental care is non-existent. They show up without glasses, because theirs are broken and Medicaid will only buy one pair a year, so they can't see the whiteboards or read their textbooks. They show up without pencils or paper.  They show up tired, because they don't have a bedroom, and they can't go to sleep on the sofa until Mom or Dad or Mom's boyfriend or girlfriend or both turns off the TV at 10pm. They show up over-medicated to the point of stupor, because it's easier to medicate than to parent. Often, they just don't show up, because mom or dad didn't want to get up in the morning and put them on the bus--and schools generally accept all notes from parents that say the kids were sick, because how are you going to challenge that in truancy court? 

 

Then, we try to teach these tired, cold, hungry, over-medicated, in-pain, unable-to-see students.  We look the other way when they nap at breakfast because of their medication and late nights, and we sneak them double portions in the lunch line, and we send home food, and we send home clothes, and we seat them next to the board and let them get close enough to see, and we call CPS about missed doctors visits when we find out, and we hope the school nurse is in that one day of the week that she's allotted so she can refer them to a dentist.  We take our paychecks and buy pencils and paper and snacks and classroom manipulatives and little Christmas presents. 

 

This post is heartbreaking, and rings so true - this is exactly what I've seen in our local ps, too.  Courtney, I've really appreciated reading your contributions to this thread, it's interesting to get an inside view - thanks for sharing.

[Soapy]

Part of the implementation problem is the test score problem. If you're teaching, and you'll get fired/the entire faculty and staff will be laid off/the district will lose funding--unless all your kids get to mastery.  You're going to work your hardest on those kids that need just a little edge to raise the average score for the class/school/district.  The hopeless ones are the special educators' problems, and the top-notch ones just need to be babysat. The test becomes the alpha and the omega. 

 

CA Dept of Ed is just trying to get those kids who need a little extra edge the support they need to hit those test scores.  The state, as a whole, will lose funding (see also: Washington state) unless they comply with RttT requirements. Remember, states now have to compete for funding with their students' test scores.

 

It's been a while since I've been in a classroom, but I can say that I've sat in staff meetings where we were instructed by the administration to highlight the kids who fit this (bold above) description and come up with action plans for them.  And this was pre-CC is a district that, at the time, wasn't particularly test focused.   40th percentile was the magic number. :(