Home
What's new
Latest activity
Authors
Store
Latest reviews
Search products
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New listings
New products
New profile posts
Latest activity
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Log in
Register
Cart
Cart
Loading…
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Search titles only
By:
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More options
Change style
Contact us
Close Menu
Forums
SVTPerformance's Chain of Restaurants
Road Side Pub
Federal study even shows Common Core sucks
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="VegasMichael" data-source="post: 16209471" data-attributes="member: 105950"><p>I'll address this as professionally as I can. I've been an elementary public school teacher for 27 years and remember when Common Core hit the schools. Frankly speaking, there's nothing wrong with Common Core. It's merely a set of standards that establish what students need to learn by the end of the year. To wit: read through this link and tell me what is so offensive to you. <a href="http://www.corestandards.org/Math/Content/3/OA/" target="_blank">Grade 3 » Operations & Algebraic Thinking | Common Core State Standards Initiative</a></p><p></p><p>I understand that many parents don't like the modeling method or the lattice method. Here's an example that a poster put up earlier: </p><p><img src="https://www.svtperformance.com/attachments/52cb0c6f4c49b25b9104c3fefccc9b30-jpg.1576630/" alt="" class="fr-fic fr-dii fr-draggable " style="" /></p><p>When I teach math I avoid the lattice method and the distributive method. They are not horrid but I only have so many minutes in a day to teach and they are unnecessarily complicated. I instruct the kids on the traditional algorithm, the box method, the partial products method and the area model. Why? Because it expands their thinking and makes them understand that there are more ways to skin a cat than just one. It helps them realize that math can be thought of in different ways. But know this: Come test time I tell them that I don't care which method you use as long as you get the correct answer. Also, I firmly tell them that the traditional algorithmic way of solving problems is the fastest. And I tell them to use that method when we do timed arithmetic tests.</p><p></p><p>One of the problems I've noticed with many of today's teachers is that they DO NOT supplement their district's adopted series to help the kids meet the Common Core Standards. Common Core is NOT a curriculum. It's just some standards that we want our kids to reach. My district has an adopted math series that is okay for some areas but not for others. So I supplement to ensure that my kids are learning what is required by Common Core. It frustrates me to no end when I notice that teachers I work with blame the adopted curriculum for not helping the kids know what they need to by year's end. That's their fault because they did not seek out supplementation.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="VegasMichael, post: 16209471, member: 105950"] I'll address this as professionally as I can. I've been an elementary public school teacher for 27 years and remember when Common Core hit the schools. Frankly speaking, there's nothing wrong with Common Core. It's merely a set of standards that establish what students need to learn by the end of the year. To wit: read through this link and tell me what is so offensive to you. [URL="http://www.corestandards.org/Math/Content/3/OA/"]Grade 3 » Operations & Algebraic Thinking | Common Core State Standards Initiative[/URL] I understand that many parents don't like the modeling method or the lattice method. Here's an example that a poster put up earlier: [IMG]https://www.svtperformance.com/attachments/52cb0c6f4c49b25b9104c3fefccc9b30-jpg.1576630/[/IMG] When I teach math I avoid the lattice method and the distributive method. They are not horrid but I only have so many minutes in a day to teach and they are unnecessarily complicated. I instruct the kids on the traditional algorithm, the box method, the partial products method and the area model. Why? Because it expands their thinking and makes them understand that there are more ways to skin a cat than just one. It helps them realize that math can be thought of in different ways. But know this: Come test time I tell them that I don't care which method you use as long as you get the correct answer. Also, I firmly tell them that the traditional algorithmic way of solving problems is the fastest. And I tell them to use that method when we do timed arithmetic tests. One of the problems I've noticed with many of today's teachers is that they DO NOT supplement their district's adopted series to help the kids meet the Common Core Standards. Common Core is NOT a curriculum. It's just some standards that we want our kids to reach. My district has an adopted math series that is okay for some areas but not for others. So I supplement to ensure that my kids are learning what is required by Common Core. It frustrates me to no end when I notice that teachers I work with blame the adopted curriculum for not helping the kids know what they need to by year's end. That's their fault because they did not seek out supplementation. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
SVTPerformance's Chain of Restaurants
Road Side Pub
Federal study even shows Common Core sucks
Top