A mom with a PhD in mathematics gets her 8 year old daughter to show how they are taught at school with common core to solve maths problems. ****ing
The girl is attempting to solve the simple question at the start (1568+1423+680). She needs about 8 minutes to solve it using some strange method which involves drawing everything out and counting the pictures. Then she solves it in a minute using the old-style stack method, and realises that her previous answer was wrong. Because she had to rub out half the stuff she drew for space reasons, she can't even verify her working/answer or see where she went wrong. The video also says at the end that the method implies to children that problems with large numbers are harder than those with small numbers, and they even have difficulty conceptualising large numbers. Hence stack is better. But the child is banned from using the stack method (which she learnt at home) in school; they have to use the strange method.
It's nuts. It ain't just mathematics. Common core is designed to get every kid to the same standard, that means possibly the average and definitely above average kids will be dumbed down. The standard requires 50% of literature be removed and replaced with "informational texts" like EPA reports on global warming.. and Obama executive orders documents, I call that indoctrination, so out goes Moby Dick and other such worthy books. Add to this books, like one about a girl who gets nabbed by a **** and she develops some weird relationship with him and sexually explicit context like “Dreaming in Cuban" which is one on the cirriculum. They are giving these to 10 year old kids.
I haven't looked into this at all, but isn't the idea to have unified standards across states, rather than getting all children to the same level (which I can't see much point in)?
"Common core" is "leave no child behind" on steroids. It wants to get all kids to the same level, which has been decided by 5 guys who wrote common core. None of which are education experts. Lets put it this way, you seen how that child is taught to do math. Someone being taught conventional maths will progress much faster, of that I have no doubt
Why do they constantly **** about with it? Don't get me going on education. I'm labour through and through but they ****ed up royally when they did away with the 11+
Fair enough. As I say, I have no knowledge on the matter. I can see how the method could perhaps be useful for children who struggle with the standard methods and conceptualising maths. But to make it the standard method for everyone? Hell no!
That's what common core is, a standard system for everyone. So "all kids are the same" which sounds like some left leaning bullshit to be honest with you. Common Core was written by 5 guys who are not education experts and it has been bankrolled by the Gates Foundation. None of it is accountable to the voter Teaching a kid with a talent for methematics with this crap would certainly dumb then down. Of that I have no doubt.
They ****ed up education back home too, all focused on selective cirriculum which is very limited in scope and designed to get students to pass tests. It's not education its programming, and stat whoring When I was in school even in English class, we discussed a given subject, we had leway to question what we were being taught and discussions were quite broad and only limited by time of the class, sometimes we spend almost the entire class discussing a subject. #goodolddays
You questioned everything and spent almost an entire class discussing the same subject? That explains a lot...
If I was taught with common core I would still be struggling in my 40s with Ann has two apples, john has three apples, how many apples do you have if you add John's and Ann's apples togther" cos I am **** at drawing
I don't know much about common core, but I remember an entire generation of kids being taught how not to spell using the ITA.
Not everything. I was a trouble maker in history class. For example when I was in 2nd year we discussed the japan nuking. I obviously was hte only one to call it a war crime.. but I based my argument on sound logic.. that japan offered total surrender and only wanted to keep their emperor, the allies said no to and nuked Japan twice. I still think the teacher got pissed because they had no counter argument to that, the logic is inescapable, the choice before the allies was let Japan keep their emperor or nuke Japan because they want to keep their emperor, making it a war crime as barbarous as anything Japan did.
I failed my mock O level maths so was put in the CSE group [CSE grade 1 being equivalent with O level]. In the CSE group I was introduced to set theory - lots of circles, overlapping circles, venn diagrams. I had no idea what was going on, learning maths through drawings - sounds a bit like what's going on in this video. Dumbing down or finding the lowest common denominator, call it what you will, it drags the brightest down.
Well put JB my thoughts exactly. Now why would you want to dumb down kids, especially in a country 2 years behind the rest of the world in maths, reading and writing already.
I think Venn diagrams are fine- but they illustrate a concept that is more difficult to explain in other ways. The traditional forms of addition and subtraction are straightforward and intuitive, so why complicate them? It always smacks to me of meddling for its own sake by educationalists trying to justify their worth. Of course there will always be some who are wired differently and will struggle with methods that suit most- but they need special attention rather than trying to devise an entirely new system to fit everyone based on the inabilities of a minority.
I don't believe in streaming or setting kids either. Lots of my mates went to secondary schools where they were assessed and placed in sets for every subject. Granted I went to a very good school that boasted the brightest pupils but not everyone was of the same academic standard going in. The lessons were geared towards bright pupils, no doubt, and those struggling were asked to stay back for further explanation rather than dumbing down the whole lesson.
