I have some understanding of parents' confusion about school math

[MotherGoose]

I helped a sweet grandmother with her 2nd grader's math homework today from public school.  It wasn't foreign to me, because we use Singapore (not sure what the curriculum was they were using) but the child had to break down 18 + 54 into 10+8 and 50 +4 then add them together.  The father had tried to help her then got aggravated and left in a huff ?!?  Anyway, I spent awhile trying to explain the idea to her.  On the reverse was the traditional algorithim (spelled wrong) with carrying.  She came up with using money as analogy, and we discussed that.  We had no manipulatives handy.  She also had no idea what "regroup" meant--knew borrowing and carrying.  Reading Liping Ma's book when my dd was 4 or 5 helped me, as does starting Singapore in 1st grade and having the TM.  

 

But I really got a sense of the confusion and irritation parents must feel about the "new" math.  It seems that this school, in particular at least, must be doing a poor job of educating parents.  Because it really is easier to add 10 +50 and 8 +4 than to try to carry and borrow in your head.  After I left, I of course thought of a great way to explain the reason to use "regroup" instead of "borrow."  Think back to when you could make a phone call for 10 cents.  What if you had 10 pennies in your pocket but no dime?  You could go into the gas station and ask the clerk to "regroup" your pennies into one dime.  But if you went in there and asked to "borrow" a dime, she wouldn't give you one.   I'll try to remember to mention that to her next week.  I remember Liping Ma doing an excellent job of explaining why they don't use that word--I think she says compose and decompose but that's too confusing for typical Americans too.  I am really glad I homeschool! If I'm confused about the work at least I have the teacher's manual :)

[kiana]

I really think that the huge kerfluffle over this math would be a lot less if they posted weekly "notes to parents" on "what your kids are doing and why". 

[momacacia]

That problem also lends itself to the Take 2, Give 2. But yeah, the 10 regrouping is genius and seemingly unknown here.

[T'smom]

I just explained that same concept to someone via a Facebook post! She had taken a photo of her 2nd graders math and asked what in the world was going on. I explained and then a bunch of people started ranting about Common Core and how their kids were never going to understand math. I wanted so badly to post about why this is a brilliant strategy, but couldn't condense my thoughts down to. Facebook comment length!

[kiana]

I just explained that same concept to someone via a Facebook post! She had taken a photo of her 2nd graders math and asked what in the world was going on. I explained and then a bunch of people started ranting about Common Core and how their kids were never going to understand math. I wanted so badly to post about why this is a brilliant strategy, but couldn't condense my thoughts down to. Facebook comment length!

 

Yeah, I get real tired of seeing that. 

 

I don't even respond unless they post on my wall, but since I do math they seem to post these exact comments on my wall all the time and then get mad when I respond and explain why. Apparently the only correct response is "yes this is horrible, I will write a letter to your kid's school demanding that they go back to the old way of math and sign it Math PhD". 

[Farrar]

I find that it's really difficult when I talk to school parents, in part because there's so many things going on. Some of it is methods new to many parents like with the regrouping and the mental math, but which are really good. Others are things that are not so good or are just poorly taught or implemented. But to parents who are confused or frustrated, it *all* just becomes really hated. I hear a lot of irrationality about math from the ps parents I know. Sil ranted at us for about half an hour about it without much of a break. And there was no reasoning with her or even getting to the point of what was really good or bad or wrong or right. It was just an open ended tirade without a real focus. I feel like I hear a lot of that.

 

Notes on the work would be useful. Curricula should write this stuff up as a little packet to photocopy for parents. Like a couple pages introduction with a few examples and pictures that parents could just keep on hand for themselves for the year: Why ____ Math Curriculum, What are some things that "look weird" in this math and what do they mean, and How to help your child with this math homework.

[lazzaroni]

In defense of those PS parents who are concerned about how math is being taught, I can offer my own personal experience having recently been one of them. The lack of communication has been horrendous here where I live. Those who do ask questions are treated in such a condescending manner that it becomes impossible not to walk off in a huff. We are told we just are too old to understand. I regroup mentally and have for as long as I can recall although I do not think it has ever been explicitly taught to me. My son who was taught the common core way can regroup mentally but was greatly relieved when I recently taught him the old fashioned way. For him, it is easier to do this the old way at this stage in his development. Add to that the fact that schools expect parents to teach their child basic addition and subtraction facts AFTER SCHOOL because they still have TIMED fact drills and you have a recipe for disaster. My son, for example, is so busy regrouping mentally that he does his basic facts super slowly because that's how the school wants them to do math. But the timed tests do not play nicely with the regrouping method. I am now homeschooling. We spend 10 minutes every day just cementing our facts. We are doing great with Singapore math. There is a problem with how this math is being taught in some many all public schools. Please do not trivialize it or just assume we hate common core. I am a supporter at least in theory on math. But it absolutely must be well taught and well implemented or it is a disaster.

[beaners]

I feel guilty for doing it, but every now and then I can't stop myself from posting on the Facebook common core math rants. I get that people are frustrated in general, and that a lot of people don't go beyond plain algorithm-based arithmetic in their daily lives. But most of the time the problems people are complaining about are "new" techniques that are covered in the 20 year old textbooks I have here on my shelf, or they are simple mental math strategies, or they are simpler problems used to demonstrate a technique that will be useful on more complicated problems. I'm not nasty about it but I'm pretty sure a couple people have unfriended me for it.

[T'smom]

In defense of those PS parents who are concerned about how math is being taught, I can offer my own personal experience having recently been one of them. The lack of communication has been horrendous here where I live. Those who do ask questions are treated in such a condescending manner that it becomes impossible not to walk off in a huff. We are told we just are too old to understand. I regroup mentally and have for as long as I can recall although I do not think it has ever been explicitly taught to me. My son who was taught the common core way can regroup mentally but was greatly relieved when I recently taught him the old fashioned way. For him, it is easier to do this the old way at this stage in his development. Add to that the fact that schools expect parents to teach their child basic addition and subtraction facts AFTER SCHOOL because they still have TIMED fact drills and you have a recipe for disaster. My son, for example, is so busy regrouping mentally that he does his basic facts super slowly because that's how the school wants them to do math. But the timed tests do not play nicely with the regrouping method. I am now homeschooling. We spend 10 minutes every day just cementing our facts. We are doing great with Singapore math. There is a problem with how this math is being taught in some many all public schools. Please do not trivialize it or just assume we hate common core. I am a supporter at least in theory on math. But it absolutely must be well taught and well implemented or it is a disaster.

The thing is, this way of teaching is NOT "common core". I was introduced to it in

RightStart and it just makes so.much.sense! Anyway, RightStart was published before CC was even a thing. It seems to be very hard to grasp that the way things were done when you were a child is not necessarily the best way. Not saying you said that, just the people who rant about it on fb. Just to note: my friend didn't post to rant about it, she posted a question "what answer do they want here and how do you find it" It was other commenters that were ranting.

[Farrar]

I feel guilty for doing it, but every now and then I can't stop myself from posting on the Facebook common core math rants. I get that people are frustrated in general, and that a lot of people don't go beyond plain algorithm-based arithmetic in their daily lives. But most of the time the problems people are complaining about are "new" techniques that are covered in the 20 year old textbooks I have here on my shelf, or they are simple mental math strategies, or they are simpler problems used to demonstrate a technique that will be useful on more complicated problems. I'm not nasty about it but I'm pretty sure a couple people have unfriended me for it.

 

There was a day a couple of months ago when I got into not one, not two, but three completely separate common core math arguments on Facebook.  :blushing: So you're not alone. In my defense, I was very reasoned about it.  :tongue_smilie:

[kiana]

The thing is, this way of teaching is NOT "common core". I was introduced to it in

RightStart and it just makes so.much.sense! Anyway, RightStart was published before CC was even a thing. It seems to be very hard to grasp that the way things were done when you were a child is not necessarily the best way. Not saying you said that, just the people who rant about it on fb. Just to note: my friend didn't post to rant about it, she posted a question "what answer do they want here and how do you find it" It was other commenters that were ranting.

 

Yes, exactly.

 

I'm not talking about people who are frustrated with their school's lack of communication or anything else. I'm specifically focused on the people who ONLY want to rant without bothering to figure out anything about how it works.

 

People who blame the weak math skills of college students on common core fall into that too.

 

[MarkT]

I really think that the huge kerfluffle over this math would be a lot less if they posted weekly "notes to parents" on "what your kids are doing and why". 

 

you're assuming the teacher knows :huh:

[Targhee]

I get tired of hearing so any parents rip to shreds the CC math - too confusing, developmentally inappropriate, etc - when in reality they just don't understand it. And teachers don't understand it. And textbooks are overcomicating the process. But still, they attack the math methods. I wish they could really experience for themselves the beauty and utility of these methods.

[school17777]

My nephew used to love math. He is a numbers kid. He just figures math out, before he went to school. Now that is school has implemented common core math, not sure which curriculum the school uses, he does not like it. He brings home an hour's worth of math homework every school night (at least it takes him that long). He has to explain how he got the answer in addition to solving the problem (in my experience, this is harder for math kids who just get it). His mom is an actuarial analyst (has a lot of higher math courses under her belt) and cannot help with his homework because it does not make sense to her. The other parents in the class are also frustrated. She is mostly upset at how her son's love of math has been squelched because he no longer looks forward to math class.

[Serenade]

I find that it's really difficult when I talk to school parents, in part because there's so many things going on. Some of it is methods new to many parents like with the regrouping and the mental math, but which are really good. Others are things that are not so good or are just poorly taught or implemented. But to parents who are confused or frustrated, it *all* just becomes really hated. I hear a lot of irrationality about math from the ps parents I know. Sil ranted at us for about half an hour about it without much of a break. And there was no reasoning with her or even getting to the point of what was really good or bad or wrong or right. It was just an open ended tirade without a real focus. I feel like I hear a lot of that.

 

Notes on the work would be useful. Curricula should write this stuff up as a little packet to photocopy for parents. Like a couple pages introduction with a few examples and pictures that parents could just keep on hand for themselves for the year: Why ____ Math Curriculum, What are some things that "look weird" in this math and what do they mean, and How to help your child with this math homework.

 

 

I think what really frustrates parents is that often there is no textbook or note packet as you suggest above.  Providing something like that would be a measure of goodwill.  As it is now, many parents have no way to help their child (because they don't understand what to do), and that  provokes anger at the teachers and school -- I think it makes parents feel like  teachers/school are purposefully alienating them.  One of my friends said her kid, who was an 8th grader at the time, had never had a textbook to take home in all of his years of schooling.

 

Now, my question, for anyone out there, is that I "get" why solving the math problem as described might be easier when one has to do it in his or her head, especially for a relatively simple problem.   But when one has to write it out, it seems like it is actually more cumbersome, no?    Or are kids just supposed to always do this sort of problem in their heads.  What happens later on when kids get more complex math? It all seems like it would be too cumbersome.  But maybe that's just because I learned it the old way.  Borrowing and carrying doesn't seem to be all that complex to me.  

[Farrar]

I think what really frustrates parents is that often there is no textbook or note packet as you suggest above.  Providing something like that would be a measure of goodwill.  As it is now, many parents have no way to help their child (because they don't understand what to do), and that  provokes anger at the teachers and school -- I think it makes parents feel like  teachers/school are purposefully alienating them.  One of my friends said her kid, who was an 8th grader at the time, had never had a textbook to take home in all of his years of schooling.

 

Now, my question, for anyone out there, is that I "get" why solving the math problem as described might be easier when one has to do it in his or her head, especially for a relatively simple problem.   But when one has to write it out, it seems like it is actually more cumbersome, no?    Or are kids just supposed to always do this sort of problem in their heads.  What happens later on when kids get more complex math? It all seems like it would be too cumbersome.  But maybe that's just because I learned it the old way.  Borrowing and carrying doesn't seem to be all that complex to me.  

 

The fact that so many kids can't take their textbooks home anymore is wacky to me. They're just going to replace them in a couple of years for way too much money anyway and throw them all in a bin.

 

It is more cumbersome to write it out. On the other hand, without seeing it written out, many kids won't really learn it. And it is much easier to work this way for many problems. I mean, you would never regroup 100-98 with the borrowing and carrying method in your head, you would count up. But that can also work for other problems with less obvious answers. Ditto for many of these other methods. When you get to more complex math, this stuff is even more useful because you have to do a lot more quick addition, subtraction, multiplication and division in order to do something like long division or subtracting big mixed number fractions or something. And then when you get to even more complex math, in algebra and so forth, again, you want to be able to manipulate the numbers with as much ease as possible and being able to subtract (or whatever) in your head quickly is going to make the problem flow faster and help you focus on the math at hand. Of course, sometimes you have to subtract or add or whatever six or seven or even larger digit numbers and you just need to do it the old fashioned way. Which is also fine and good.

[Serenade]

The fact that so many kids can't take their textbooks home anymore is wacky to me. They're just going to replace them in a couple of years for way too much money anyway and throw them all in a bin.

 

It is more cumbersome to write it out. On the other hand, without seeing it written out, many kids won't really learn it. And it is much easier to work this way for many problems. I mean, you would never regroup 100-98 with the borrowing and carrying method in your head, you would count up. But that can also work for other problems with less obvious answers. Ditto for many of these other methods. When you get to more complex math, this stuff is even more useful because you have to do a lot more quick addition, subtraction, multiplication and division in order to do something like long division or subtracting big mixed number fractions or something. And then when you get to even more complex math, in algebra and so forth, again, you want to be able to manipulate the numbers with as much ease as possible and being able to subtract (or whatever) in your head quickly is going to make the problem flow faster and help you focus on the math at hand. Of course, sometimes you have to subtract or add or whatever six or seven or even larger digit numbers and you just need to do it the old fashioned way. Which is also fine and good.

 

 

Thanks for explaining.  I'm trying to be more open about this.  I actually think that I myself have been moving towards doing math like this naturally, simply as a result of understanding math better now that I'm teaching it to my kids.  (That was a rather awkward sentence.  Hope it made sense.  LOL.)

[Garga]

Oooo! Common Core Math Rants on Facebook. I do my best not to join anything serious on Facebook, but I've joined in a few of the Common Core Math Rants. I end up try to explain how the math problem works and that is seems a pretty cool way of teaching math to me. I'm sure I totally irriate my friends when I do that but I can't seem to help myself.

[kiwik]

Not in the US. But the complete absence of textbooks or instructions and info on what the kids are doing and how is what drives most people I know crazy.

 

Also a lot of parents who struggled with maths and whose parents couldn't help must be a bit stressed to find out the way they learnt with great effort is now "wrong" (although it still works) and now they can't help their kids like they hoped.

 

I just find the faddishness of education mind-blowing. If you had been a young teacher when I started school in 1974 you could still be teaching now but you may have gone insane in the meantime with the flip-flopping over class sizes, maths teaching, classroom management methods, back to basics, extension galore, streaming, full inclusion, compulsory Maori, optional Maori, nothing that hasn't got a national standard attached etc etc.

 

Reminds me of Sir Humphrey explaining why public servants didn't believe in any of the policies they implemented.

[LisaKinVA]

While I am with you on rants against math techniques that are blamed on CC that have zero to do with CC, there are things within CC -- especially in math and LA -- that are simply NOT developmentally appropriate for most young students.  There are also huge problems with the rush to produce new curriculua giving poorly written and edited texts, teachers being wed to answer keys (even if you get the problem right, you're wrong), the forced lengthy written explanation of how one arrives at answers, arriving at the correct answer, but getting marked wrong because you use a DIFFERENT, but still viable process, being forced to draw out pictures, when you don't need to draw out pictures to figure out the answer...much of this is tedious, overly-complicated, and just plain wrong..

 

I've used Singapore and Math Mammoth.  I understand what the schools are trying to get to -- but they are losing math skills (dramatically), when bad standards (I believe the standards -- especially at the lower levels ARE bad), are coupled with bad curriculua, poorly trained teachers, and the gaming involved in teaching to a test.

 

The school here is fully engaged in CCS.  They have been fully implemented.  The results are staggeringly bad from what I'm seeing at those in the ES (who have been there during the transition for the past 3 years).  They are at least a full grade level behind where they should be, in some cases more.  And these are the HONOR students.  I thought about K for my speech-delayed 5yo -- however, when I looked at what her day would actually include, and what the goals were, I lost all interest.  As it is, she attends the "elective" period after her speech lesson.   She finds K utterly boring -- and is very happy to be doing school work at home.

[LMD]

There was a day a couple of months ago when I got into not one, not two, but three completely separate common core math arguments on Facebook. :blushing: So you're not alone. In my defense, I was very reasoned about it. :tongue_smilie:

Why don't I have Facebook friends like you?!

[kiana]

Why don't I have Facebook friends like you?!

 

Ditto! :D

[kiana]

While I am with you on rants against math techniques that are blamed on CC that have zero to do with CC, there are things within CC -- especially in math and LA -- that are simply NOT developmentally appropriate for most young students.  There are also huge problems with the rush to produce new curriculua giving poorly written and edited texts, teachers being wed to answer keys (even if you get the problem right, you're wrong), the forced lengthy written explanation of how one arrives at answers, arriving at the correct answer, but getting marked wrong because you use a DIFFERENT, but still viable process, being forced to draw out pictures, when you don't need to draw out pictures to figure out the answer...much of this is tedious, overly-complicated, and just plain wrong..

I totally agree with pretty much everything that you've said.

 

I see nothing wrong with having students draw out a picture for 1-2 problems, especially when a new method is used. Forcing them to draw pictures for 10+ problems? Ugh, what torture. Ditto writing explanations.

[Saddlemomma]

I just explained that same concept to someone via a Facebook post! She had taken a photo of her 2nd graders math and asked what in the world was going on. I explained and then a bunch of people started ranting about Common Core and how their kids were never going to understand math. I wanted so badly to post about why this is a brilliant strategy, but couldn't condense my thoughts down to. Facebook comment length!

 

I agree with you. I don't think this concept has anything to do with Common Core.  We use Horizons here and DD's been doing regrouping since 1st. grade.

 

[Chrysalis Academy]

Yeah, I've ranted about 1st & 2nd grade math since long before common core.  We were cursed with Houghton-Mifflin CA Math, a pre-CC thing.  My objection was that it gave the kids problems that really needed multiplication or division to solve, when they hadn't learned that yet, and that the word problems were worded so badly that it was often impossible to figure out what they were trying to ask the kid to do.  When I wrote notes to the teacher about it, she basically said, "Yeah, we all hate this curriculum too, don't worry about it."  Which was so not good enough for me . . . 

 

In July, I talked to a friend who is a high school math teacher and asked him about implementation of cc.  He said the teachers were totally frustrated - the district was telling parents that they weren't going to use a textbook, the teachers were going to create materials and teach it themselves.  The teachers were like  :confused1:  "Oh we are, are we?"  They still didn't have a curriculum purchased for the 2014-15 school year at that point.  They were looking to shifting to a computerized thing where there would be no textbook or workbook, period.  It would all be online.  Not sure how they will pull that off - we have a lot of rural areas nearby where internet access is very slow, and not every kid has a computer at home . . . . 

 

Anyway, point being that regardless of content, implementation seems to really suck.  I feel sorry for the actual math teachers, and frustrated that at the elementary level the teachers don't seem to understand the math that they are supposed to teach.

[justasque]

 arriving at the correct answer, but getting marked wrong because you use a DIFFERENT, but still viable process, 

 

I agree with much of what has been said, but I'm going to be  nit-picky about this one thing.  Quite often, a math text will introduce a method by purposely having the student use it on problems they already know how to do using a different method.  By using the new method on an easier, "old" problem, the student can often "see" how the new method works, which helps them understand the method and know when and how to use it appropriately.  Often, the new method can solve problems the old one can't.  If the student uses the old method (contrary to the directions), he will not learn the new method, and will be stuck when confronted with problems that can only be solved the new way.  As an example, a student might be able to solve x + 1 = 11 simply by using mental math.  It's obvious that x=10.  However, if the book is trying to introduce algebraic methods, it may instruct the student to solve such problems this way:

x + 1 = 11

x + 1 - 1 = 11 - 1

x + 0 = 10 

x = 10

 

Now that's a *whole* lot more work than just looking at the problem and saying "TEN!!!"  But it lays the groundwork for problems like

x + 3sqrt18/9sqrt2 = 44/sqrt16

which most students won't be able to solve in their heads, but using the pencil-and-paper algebraic method can be solved exactly the same way as the problem above.

 

In addition, if a teacher wants to find out whether a student understands a particular method, they may put a problem on a test or in a homework assignment and request that the student do it a particular way.  If the student uses another method, it doesn't give the teacher the information she needs about the student's understanding (or lack thereof) of the target concept.

 

Of course, in daily life, one can use whatever technique gets the problem solved. Thus it's good - important, I would argue - to have some "you choose the method" problem sets mixed into the curriculum, along with the "use a particular method" problems.

 

However, there are situations where a teacher has good reasons to require a student to use a particular method; teachers can minimize students' frustration by explaining *why* they are making this requirement.

 

(As to the parents' dilemma - I think the root of the problem is the schools' failure to recognize how much instruction typical parents are actually providing (or trying to provide) at the elementary level.)

[HeWillSoar]

I just had to teach my 5th grade son, who was in public school for 4th grade in the gifted program, how to multiply and divide.  When I pulled him out, he was doing middle school level math so he should have had multiplication and division down, and he's certainly capable of that.   When he tries to solve a problem with long division or multiplication of multi-digit numbers using this other method, all I'm seeing are extra steps and a wrong answer.  This is the kid who gets all of the other math problems solved before my older son and me.  This may or may not be common core, but this was implemented at the same time so it does leave one to wonder.    There was no communication from the school about it, and I did ask the teacher.   They have some major kinks to be ironed out, and I think my son will be just fine learning the way DH and I, and our older boys were taught.  

[Serenade]

I agree with much of what has been said, but I'm going to be  nit-picky about this one thing.  Quite often, a math text will introduce a method by purposely having the student use it on problems they already know how to do using a different method.  By using the new method on an easier, "old" problem, the student can often "see" how the new method works, which helps them understand the method and know when and how to use it appropriately.  Often, the new method can solve problems the old one can't.  If the student uses the old method (contrary to the directions), he will not learn the new method, and will be stuck when confronted with problems that can only be solved the new way.  As an example, a student might be able to solve x + 1 = 11 simply by using mental math.  It's obvious that x=10.  However, if the book is trying to introduce algebraic methods, it may instruct the student to solve such problems this way:

x + 1 = 11

x + 1 - 1 = 11 - 1

x + 0 = 10 

x = 10

 

Now that's a *whole* lot more work than just looking at the problem and saying "TEN!!!"  But it lays the groundwork for problems like

x + 3sqrt18/9sqrt2 = 44/sqrt16

which most students won't be able to solve in their heads, but using the pencil-and-paper algebraic method can be solved exactly the same way as the problem above.

 

In addition, if a teacher wants to find out whether a student understands a particular method, they may put a problem on a test or in a homework assignment and request that the student do it a particular way.  If the student uses another method, it doesn't give the teacher the information she needs about the student's understanding (or lack thereof) of the target concept.

 

Of course, in daily life, one can use whatever technique gets the problem solved. Thus it's good - important, I would argue - to have some "you choose the method" problem sets mixed into the curriculum, along with the "use a particular method" problems.

 

However, there are situations where a teacher has good reasons to require a student to use a particular method; teachers can minimize students' frustration by explaining *why* they are making this requirement.

 

(As to the parents' dilemma - I think the root of the problem is the schools' failure to recognize how much instruction typical parents are actually providing (or trying to provide) at the elementary level.)

 

Really love this post.  And I'm going to share it with my son!  

[FriedClams]

When I get in discussions about common core and new math and all that jazz, I have two points:

 

 

1. Changing standards doesn't DO anything. I can declare that my kids will speak French by the end of this year, and it's never going to happen. I feel like that's what CC is. Standards. It doesn't mean anyone is going to actually achieve them. And, since the goverment is notoriously horrible about enforcing anything, or reducing the amount of cash it doles out, not achieving the standards will likely mean nothing.

 

2. Singapore math is great... IF the teacher knows how to teach it, and the kis are taught early on more abstract concepts. How many elementary ed programs are teaching elementary ed grads HOW to teach math? Really deep, thoughtfully on the HOWs of math. I would bet very, very few. SM can be great. In the classrooms with good teachers and good instruction - it's probably working fine. But, lack of education for the educators (and I live in a POOR state, and I think minimal funding goes to real teacher education), and the lack of communication with parents (like the great change in your pocket example earlier in this post) is making this whole thing a joke. The poor kids. I pray we won't have a generation of math illiterates who can't do basic computations without a calculator.

[kiana]

Singapore math is great... IF the teacher knows how to teach it, and the kis are taught early on more abstract concepts. How many elementary ed programs are teaching elementary ed grads HOW to teach math? Really deep, thoughtfully on the HOWs of math. I would bet very, very few. SM can be great. In the classrooms with good teachers and good instruction - it's probably working fine. But, lack of education for the educators (and I live in a POOR state, and I think minimal funding goes to real teacher education), and the lack of communication with parents (like the great change in your pocket example earlier in this post) is making this whole thing a joke. The poor kids. I pray we won't have a generation of math illiterates who can't do basic computations without a calculator.

 

Even when I was in college, many of my fellow students struggled to do things like dividing by 10 without a calculator. 

 

The rest of your post -- yeah, I agree. If I were an elementary school principal with a bunch of teachers who didn't understand math very well, I don't think I'd choose a conceptual curriculum. 

[MotherGoose]

I agree with much of what has been said, but I'm going to be nit-picky about this one thing. Quite often, a math text will introduce a method by purposely having the student use it on problems they already know how to do using a different method. By using the new method on an easier, "old" problem, the student can often "see" how the new method works, which helps them understand the method and know when and how to use it appropriately. Often, the new method can solve problems the old one can't. If the student uses the old method (contrary to the directions), he will not learn the new method, and will be stuck when confronted with problems that can only be solved the new way. As an example, a student might be able to solve x + 1 = 11 simply by using mental math. It's obvious that x=10. However, if the book is trying to introduce algebraic methods, it may instruct the student to solve such problems this way:

x + 1 = 11

x + 1 - 1 = 11 - 1

x + 0 = 10

x = 10

 

Now that's a *whole* lot more work than just looking at the problem and saying "TEN!!!" But it lays the groundwork for problems like

x + 3sqrt18/9sqrt2 = 44/sqrt16

which most students won't be able to solve in their heads, but using the pencil-and-paper algebraic method can be solved exactly the same way as the problem above.

 

In addition, if a teacher wants to find out whether a student understands a particular method, they may put a problem on a test or in a homework assignment and request that the student do it a particular way. If the student uses another method, it doesn't give the teacher the information she needs about the student's understanding (or lack thereof) of the target concept.

 

Of course, in daily life, one can use whatever technique gets the problem solved. Thus it's good - important, I would argue - to have some "you choose the method" problem sets mixed into the curriculum, along with the "use a particular method" problems.

 

However, there are situations where a teacher has good reasons to require a student to use a particular method; teachers can minimize students' frustration by explaining *why* they are making this requirement.

 

(As to the parents' dilemma - I think the root of the problem is the schools' failure to recognize how much instruction typical parents are actually providing (or trying to provide) at the elementary level.)

I've been going through this with my dd (3rd grade) on why she has to draw bar models. She does well on word problems because she has good reading comprehension and the problems are simple. She has to draw out the bar models because the problems will get more complicated and she needs to know how to do it on easy ones first.

[Joker]

I'm confused about all of these schools not using textbooks. We have CCS here and both dds have physical textbooks as well as access to online versions with videos and practice problems. So, that must be an implementation thing.

 

What I am seriously upset about this year is that the teachers at our middle school have no idea how to teach the material in a way the students need to do the work. They obviously do not have a good understanding of math. They are trying out flipped classrooms where the students are watching videos at home to do homework, so they are trying to get out of doing the actual teaching. It's not working and many students are struggling. Dd is not (because she has us helping her) and we're fighting with them right now to get her moved to an online class.

[8filltheheart]

I'm confused about all of these schools not using textbooks. We have CCS here and both dds have physical textbooks as well as access to online versions with videos and practice problems. So, that must be an implementation thing.

 

What I am seriously upset about this year is that the teachers at our middle school have no idea how to teach the material in a way the students need to do the work. They obviously do not have a good understanding of math. They are trying out flipped classrooms where the students are watching videos at home to do homework, so they are trying to get out of doing the actual teaching. It's not working and many students are struggling. Dd is not (because she has us helping her) and we're fighting with them right now to get her moved to an online class.

The schools here do not have textbooks. Everything is on iPads or laptops. The kids watch videos in their classrooms. Last yr a friend's dd was really struggling in alg 2 and when she asked for help, she was referred to videos on the computer and not directly taught.

[MBM]

My youngest's physics course is a flipped classroom. These classes can be good IF the instructor takes the time to clarify and help students the following day. That doesn't always happen, though. In some cases teachers are not doing much during class time and then the students begin to flounder. I know one teacher who uses videos to teach so that he can run his side business, which is what he wants to do instead of teaching. He doesn't bother teaching during class time so the students are teaching each other. Why even have the teacher?

 

As for teaching math, elementary math teachers in the US are notorious for not understanding basic math concepts. I'm not talking about higher math, just elementary concepts. How in the world can they possibly teach their students when they do not understand the material themselves? Worse, many are not even curious enough to try to learn what they don't understand. This does not apply to all but those who are like this shouldn't be teaching.

 

I've seen this in other subjects as well. Don't get me started on one of my kid's Catholic junior high school English teachers. No understanding of the material. No desire to learn it even after teaching for almost 30 years. Ugh.