Comments for sursumcorda.salemsattic.com/post/common-concern

Comment #3260

2014-11-30T17:55:01Z

Now that was funny. I had to moderate my own comment. I guess I've never commented from my phone's hotspot before.

Comment #3259

2014-11-30T17:52:53Z

Thanks for the analysis, Jon. (Sorry for the late moderation.) It seems the confusion between Common Core Standards and the various implementations is everywhere, not just among the complainers but in the media and even among the supporters. In the end, I suppose it doesn't matter if the standards are fine, as long as everyone is going to go all weird with the implementation, but we should at least know what we're really dealing with.

There is such a big difference between "know now to multiply two-digit numbers" and "this is the one and only way you multiply two-digit numbers." I've lived through any number of changes to the "one and only way to teach" math, reading, grammar, biology, foreign languages, you kname it. The only thing they have in common is that all work for some students and none works for all.

Comment #3258

2014-11-26T18:03:00Z

Sarah just referenced this post in a conversation, so I looked it up.

You've probably heard me say this before, but I don't think you referenced it, so maybe you haven't heard me argue on Facebook about the silly anti-common-core arguments that are routinely made (I think there are rational arguments against it, but showing the "new, required" methods of addition are not one of them).

If you read the actual standards (Common Core Math Standards) you will see that these methods that the Florida testing company is using have nothing to do with Common Core.

Same for Khan Academy's method (I was confused in Khan Academy when they wanted me to fill out the area chart).

The Core standards hardly specify anything regarding the means in which to teach.

I just re-read the third grade standards regarding multiplication again, and I don't see anything objectionable in the standard at all. "Multiply two digit numbers within 100", "understand the relationship between multiplication and division", "represent and solve problems involving multiplication and division. (For example, describe a context in which a total number of objects can be expressed as 5×7)"

Similarly for Anthony Esolen's arguemnts - I haven't looked at the English standards as much, but a quick review of them doesn't show anything that is all that interesting, and appears that my English education would fit within the standards.

"Cite strong and thorough textual evidence to support analysis of what the text says explicitly as well as inferences drawn from the text, including determining where the text leaves matters uncertain."

"Analyze how an author's choices concerning how to structure specific parts of a text (e.g., the choice of where to begin or end a story, the choice to provide a comedic or tragic resolution) contribute to its overall structure and meaning as well as its aesthetic impact."

"Analyze multiple interpretations of a story, drama, or poem (e.g., recorded or live production of a play or recorded novel or poetry), evaluating how each version interprets the source text. (Include at least one play by Shakespeare and one play by an American dramatist.)"

"The Common Core requires certain critical content for all students, including classic myths and stories from around the world, America’s founding documents, foundational American literature, and Shakespeare. Appropriately, the remaining crucial decisions about what content should be taught are made at the state and local levels."

In some cases, people are objecting to how their local administrators or teachers are testing or teaching, but it really has nothing to do with Common Core.

Comment #3257

2014-10-03T19:53:57Z

I scored like Sarah: ignoring the weirdness of the multiples of three, I got that one right; overlooking the number of students and focusing on the red herring of giving a minimum number of basketball lovers, I just figured that with 6 basketball lovers and 12 hikers the problem was sufficiently solved, though undetermined. (I can rationalize that nowhere does it say that all students answered one of those three options, but really, I just didn't pay attention to the "32" up there.)

Comment #3256

2014-10-03T19:39:16Z

"assume if they get the questions right, they understand it enough and their understanding will deepen as needed."

This reminds me of how I react when I'm told (and if you read much in the education field, you'll hear it a lot) that it's not sufficient for a child to merely read a book—he must prove that he understands it. This is used to justify endlessly dull "reading comprehension" questions—and to sneer at the mother who announces that her eight-year-old has just finished reading Little Women. Does anyone fully understand a great book on first (or second, or third) reading? I say that if a child understands a book well enough for it to hold his interest, that's all that is necessary. Fuller comprehension will come with time (and no need for questions at the end of each chapter).

Comment #3255

2014-10-03T18:29:36Z

The strange thing is that they somehow think doing it their way prooves understanding, but a child could memorize the "Everyday Math way" just as easily as any other method. Proving understanding is actually rather difficult. You might as well just stick to the facts and assume if they get the questions right, they understand it enough and their understanding will deepen as needed.

Comment #3254

2014-10-03T10:57:07Z

"I guess I was thinking that maybe not all were included in the results." That's the problem: thinking. Keep thinking and you'll find lots of reasons why a test question is poorly worded. Half the battle is figuring out what the real question is.

Comment #3253

2014-10-03T00:09:45Z

Although I noticed the weird wording for question 9, I decided to just ignore it based upon how the graph was set up and would have gotten the correct answer.

On question 10, it did not even occur to me that they were trying to have the results add to 32. I knew he asked 32 kids, but I guess I was thinking that maybe not all were included in the results. Not sure why I thought that. You are right though, that it seems like a complex question to ask a 3rd grader.

I think for me, the most awkward part is not writing the problem out with pencil and paper.

I think one of the problems with Common Core (from stuff I have heard) is that, like Everyday Math, it is being taught with no flexibility. They may expect you to do division problems a certain way, even if you already know how to do them another way.

Sarah