tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3907677492250052991.post5012359310338351147..comments2023-10-18T05:06:49.026-05:00Comments on Missouri Education Watchdog: Fifth Grade Traditional Math Problem vs Common Core Math Problem. dsmhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01501964533388756254noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3907677492250052991.post-6068728168917364972013-05-13T14:01:05.170-05:002013-05-13T14:01:05.170-05:00A deeper conceptual knowledge of math? That's ...A deeper conceptual knowledge of math? That's what you think CCSS'll<a href="http://www.nationalreview.com/article/347973/two-moms-vs-common-core" rel="nofollow"> give our kids?</a> Through this?<br /><br /><br /><i>">>>...Stanford mathematics professor R. James Milgram to withhold his approval from the Common Core math standards.<br /><br><br><br />Professor Milgram was the only math content expert on the Validation Committee reviewing the standards, and he concluded that the Common Core standards are, as he told the Texas state legislature, “in large measure a political document that . . . is written at a very low level and does not adequately reflect our current understanding of why the math programs in the high-achieving countries give dramatically better results.”<br /><br><br><br />The Common Core math standards deemphasize performing procedures (solving many similar problems) in favor of attempting to push a deeper cognitive understanding — e.g., asking questions like “How do you know?”<<<"</i><br /><br /><br />I'm all for questions... and deeper cognitive understanding... but a deeper cognitive and conceptual understanding of math will not be brought about by tacking on a "How do you know?" to a worksheet question, especially while drastically reducing the number of exercises the student engages in.<br /><br />And with apologies to every two bit seminar speaker on the circuit, there really is such a thing as a stupid question, and I see these questions coming home on worksheets every day... (correction, I <i>used</i> to see them coming home every day, very few worksheets come home anymore - same issue, different feature)... and asking 'Why' and 'How' questions of what amount to nearly perceptual facts, such as "How do you know?" that one number is larger than another, or how do you know that 2x2=4? are very, very, very stupid questions.<br /><br />Over the last couple months I've been reading through mathematics text books, stretching back over the centuries, and one development I've found, appearing and picking up speed just prior to the 19th century, is an increase in focus on developing 'math skills', and a decrease in discussion of why Mathematics has been thought of as being critically important since Plato's time. <br /><br />'Math Skills' as any 4th grader will be happy to complain to you, can be performed on their cell phone faster than their teacher can perform them. Why bother? Competing with the Chinese doesn't is as useless of an answer today, as competing with the English was two hundred years ago.<br /><br />What's valuable in learning Math, properly taught, is what it fosters in us, which is partly the habit of thinking logically, but more importantly, if taught right, it develops the habit of thinking conceptually, it demonstrates the power of thinking in principles, and demonstrates how to derive those principles from a mass of particulars.<br /><br /><i>That</i> ability, is most definitely, not found in the math standards, or in the 'informational texts' standards, or in any other of the CCSS standards. They'll toss around the buzz words rather liberally 'conceptual understanding', etc, but they do nothing to actually promote conceptual understanding, let alone the value of principles, and a great deal to harm them.<br /><br />Bottom line, their bottom line came from the bottom of the cognitive barrel, and we would be wise to flush it. Double flush for good measure.<br />Van Harveyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08470413719262297062noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3907677492250052991.post-35827681913830521772013-05-13T12:09:11.032-05:002013-05-13T12:09:11.032-05:00Bottom line is that the CCSS in math are designed ...Bottom line is that the CCSS in math are designed to allow every student the opportunity to develop a strong conceptual knowledge of math by providing standards for practice that challenge student's thinking and helps them to deeply understand why math works, not just the how. Those students who have a specific interest and strong math aptitude should excel beyond what we have been able to do with them with a traditional instructional approach. Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12823171139698455774noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3907677492250052991.post-4043155507779132582013-02-05T08:42:49.226-06:002013-02-05T08:42:49.226-06:00What makes anyone think Common Core Mathematics is...What makes anyone think Common Core Mathematics is intended to actually enable children to learn, achieve, and excel in mathematics? There's only one overarching goal of Common Core Math - reduce "Achievement Gaps" by ensuring "Equalization of Educational Outcome." And the only way that can happen is by ensuring No Child Gets ahead. As long as the government controls the monopoly on K-12 education, American student achievement will continue to decline. Again, it's all about equalization of outcome and preserving the monopoly on education. In that respect, Common Core is "winning."Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3907677492250052991.post-75018908816163601502013-02-05T07:31:44.160-06:002013-02-05T07:31:44.160-06:00Ya know what this,
"...The Smarter Balanced ...Ya know what this,<br /><br />"...The Smarter Balanced summative assessments in mathematics are designed to measure the full range of student abilities in the Common Core State Standards or Core Academic Standards (CAS). Evidence will be gathered in support of four major claims: (1) Concepts and Procedures, (2) Problem Solving, (3) Communicating Reasoning, and (4) Modeling and Data Analysis...."<br /><br />, reminds me of?<br /><br />This:<br /><br />"...Be sure you have read the Exception in the instructions for this line to see if you can use this worksheet instead of Pub. 525 to figure if any of your refund is taxable.<br />Before you begin:<br />1. Enter the income tax refund from Form(s) 1099G (or similar statement). But do not enter more than the amount of your state and local income taxes shown on your 2011 Schedule A, line 5 . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.<br />2. Enter your total itemized deductions from your 2011 Schedule A, line 29 . . . . . . . . . . . 2.<br />Note. If the filing status on your 2011 Form 1040 was married filing separately and your spouse itemized deductions in 2011, skip lines 3 through 5, enter the amount from line 2 on line 6, and go to line 7.<br />3. Enter the amount shown below for the filing status claimed on your 2011 Form 1040.<br />Single or married filing separately—$5,800<br />Married filing jointly or qualifying widow(er)—$11,600<br />Head of household—$8,500 3.<br />4. Did you fill in line 39a on your 2011 Form 1040?<br />No. Enter -0-.<br />4.<br />Yes.<br />Multiply the number in the box on line 39a of your 2011 Form 1040 by $1,150 ($1,450 if your 2011 filing status was single or head of household).<br />5. Add lines 3 and 4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.<br />6. Is the amount on line 5 less than the amount on line 2?<br />No. STOP<br />None of your refund is taxable.<br />Yes. Subtract line 5 from line 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6.<br />7. Taxable part of your refund. Enter the smaller of line 1 or line 6 here and on Form 1040, line 10..."<br /><br />, from the IRS 1040 form.<br /><br />Huh. Go figure.Van Harveyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08470413719262297062noreply@blogger.com