Is this a "common core" problem?

[mjr]

I've seen a few instances of something similar, and I'm wondering if this is some sort of "Common Core" problem.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/lifestyle/f...gxz?li=BBgzzfc

It's "baffling parents", because apparently the "Common Core" wants you to read it in a different way.

If you were to solve 5 x 3 with repeated addition, you could read that as "five, three times", so you would write 5 + 5 + 5, which is apparently not what the question actually means.

So is this a problem of Common Core itself, with a bunch of PhD's outsmarting themselves? Is it a matter of making the questions unclear, or what?

Stories like this are what make people fight back against Common Core.

[Gravekeeper]

I'd say the problem is that there's no context for this image. Yes, the answer is mathematically correct, but the issue is ye old "show your work". If the lesson the quiz is about was showing your work about a specific concept ( ie that 5 x 3 can be understood both as 3 fives and as five groups of 3 ) then yes, it would be wrong. In the context of the lesson.

It could also be the teacher misinterpreting or being too anal about the concept that CC is trying to put forth. But without sitting in on some third grade class we don't know.

So is this a problem of Common Core itself, with a bunch of PhD's outsmarting themselves? Is it a matter of making the questions unclear, or what?

CC only outlines the objectives of what kids should understand by what grades. Its still up to individual teachers and schools to come up with the lessons, quizzes, questions, etc themselves. So these sorts of things could just as easily be the teacher themselves screwing up or not understanding the concepts in question. Thus passing that confusion on to the kids when they try to come up with lesson plans and tests.

IE the CC is an attempt to create a baseline educational standard. If that standard is significantly higher than the standard in a given state, then stupid teachers teaching low standards in that state may not grasp the new higher standards. Some states have shockingly low education standards.

The problem is its easier and more politically convenient to blame the CC instead of the idiot trying to teach it. If you have a halfwit teacher that's been teaching shitty math for 20 years and he now suddenly has to teach better of course he's going to blame the material instead of himself.

[Kheldarson]

The problem is its easier and more politically convenient to blame the CC instead of the idiot trying to teach it. If you have a halfwit teacher that's been teaching shitty math for 20 years and he now suddenly has to teach better of course he's going to blame the material instead of himself.

Or just the fact that they've been teaching for 20 years and they only got one day-- a week, if they're lucky-- of training in Common Core. Hard to teach a new way of thinking if you haven't learned it yourself.

[Gravekeeper]

Or just the fact that they've been teaching for 20 years and they only got one day-- a week, if they're lucky-- of training in Common Core. Hard to teach a new way of thinking if you haven't learned it yourself.

Yes, that's a more polite way of putting it that is relevant to states whose education systems are not based on a bartering system with a few dashes of Jesus. But again, that's a failing at the local level not the CC level.

If shitty education produced shitty teachers that continue to propagate that shitty education its a systematic problem. However, its not an excuse they can use to deflect attempts at improving said shitty system.

Being a teacher is a profession that requires the teacher to keep learning along with their students. The very nature of the job demands it and anyone standing in the way of that ( be they teacher, school board, politician, etc ) needs to get out of the way and let someone more qualified take over.

Honestly, education is one of the many, many problems the US inadvertently saddled itself with when it went with that whole States Rights(tm) thing.

[TheHuckster]

This specific instance is almost definitely a case of a teacher being stupid (and possibly even discouraging the student from really wanting to learn math). I understand teaching kids how to apply different methods to solve a math problem and asking them to show their work to prove they understand the method, but this is too picky. I mean, isn't one of the things to pick up is the fact that multiplication is commutative and therefore doing the method in either fashion is equally valid?

Zooming out on the issues I hear every week on Facebook, though, the methods themselves don't seem that bad. Yes, teachers aren't emphasizing the "carry the 1" method of solving arithmetic problems, but some of the methods I'm seeing instead are better geared for mental math, which is an important skill to have. I'm sick of reading those memes claiming these new methods are "wrong" or "stupid" just because they are different from how they were taught. I'm sure if the inverse happened, where we were teaching kids this sort of math in the 50s-90s, and then introduced the "carry the one" method today, they'd be just as pissed because they didn't understand it.

[Rageaholic]

Sounds like a pick ass teacher. Though perhaps they wanted the student to show both ways in which the answer can be found. I noticed that the answer wasn't crossed out; just another one was added. Since the score was 4/6, I take it the student recieved some credit (only one point was added off per problem).

Though the assignment itself looks like an excessive case of 'show your work', something which should not be necessary for students who already mastered the material.

[Kheldarson]

Though the assignment itself looks like an excessive case of 'show your work', something which should not be necessary for students who already mastered the material.

But we don’t know if the student has mastered it. Third grade is when you learn the multiplication table, usually. This is just one snapshot. And, arguably, if the assignment was to show your work by showing all the ways the problem can be solved, then the student hadn't mastered it because they forgot a way. Or they failed to follow instructions which is still a problem.

[Rageaholic]

But we don’t know if the student has mastered it. Third grade is when you learn the multiplication table, usually. This is just one snapshot. And, arguably, if the assignment was to show your work by showing all the ways the problem can be solved, then the student hadn't mastered it because they forgot a way. Or they failed to follow instructions which is still a problem.

If a student gets the right answers, it's safe to say they've mastered it. Math was one of my strong subjects and I was able to do the steps in my head. I'd get the the right answers, but I'd still get marked down for not showing my work.

[s_stabeler]

If a student gets the right answers, it's safe to say they've mastered it. Math was one of my strong subjects and I was able to do the steps in my head. I'd get the the right answers, but I'd still get marked down for not showing my work.

actually, to an extend, i remember there being a couple of reasons for this. 1. in exams i took, on a 6-mark question, ONE of the marks was for the correct answer, and 5 were for how you worked it out. That had two advantages- first, if someone cheated, they'd get the answer right, but not necessarily the method- reducing the benefit of cheating. (or meaning you had to do more work to cheat- and if you did enough work to cheat your way to passing the test, there would be a fair chance you'd learn the material anyway) second, it meant that it was easier to distinguish between people who got the wrong answer- 5/6 marks might have been given for the wrong answer, but you made a small mathematical error somewhere. 4/6 marks might be given when you got the wrong answer, and made a fairly large mathematical error. 3/6 marks might mean you tried to use the right method, but made several mistakes. 2/6 might mean you got the wrong answer, and it looks like you might have tried to use the right method, but things went seriously wrong somewhere to the point it's not entirely clear what you were trying to do. 1/6 might mean you seriously lost the plot somewhere, but it's clear you at least made an effort. 0/6 might be for if the marker has to wonder if you even turned up to the lessons, or slept through them.

In regards the assignment shown: whoever decided that you had to do that question by adding up the threes, not the fives, is a complete and utter gibbering moron. Common Core is supposed to be about encouraging critical thinking instead of rote memorization. An assignment like this- where you have to use the exact correct method the exact correct way- encourages the exact opposite. The kid's answer shows he put some thought into it- and probably chose to add the 5's since it meant there was less opportunity to make a mistake.

[Kheldarson]

If a student gets the right answers, it's safe to say they've mastered it. Math was one of my strong subjects and I was able to do the steps in my head. I'd get the the right answers, but I'd still get marked down for not showing my work.

Not necessarily. If it's homework, how do you know they didn't just punch it into a calculator? You have them show the work to show that they understand the concept and theories.

[Gravekeeper]

If a student gets the right answers, it's safe to say they've mastered it. Math was one of my strong subjects and I was able to do the steps in my head. I'd get the the right answers, but I'd still get marked down for not showing my work.

Its not safe to say that at all though. Which is why you have to show your work. >.>

Which is the core problem here I'm guessing. Education that focuses on memorizing the multiplication table instead of actually understanding multiplication isn't exactly teaching mathematics per say. Its teaching memorization.

Hence you always had to show how you arrived at an answer rather than just remembering what the answer should be. Especially these days when any given kid is never more than 10 feet from a device with a calculator on it.

[mjr]

Which is the core problem here I'm guessing. Education that focuses on memorizing the multiplication table instead of actually understanding multiplication isn't exactly teaching mathematics per say. Its teaching memorization.

The problem here, though, is the way the problem/question is worded seems to be the exact opposite of what is expected as an answer.

In other words, 5 x 3 means five, three times. Or 5 + 5 + 5. That's how you and I understand it, and it should be a correct answer. If the expected answer is 3 + 3 + 3 + 3 + 3, then the problem should be 3 x 5; meaning three, five times.

I think the schools purchase these worksheets from somewhere (Pearson, I think). I don't think this is something the teacher came up with.

[Gravekeeper]

In other words, 5 x 3 means five, three times. Or 5 + 5 + 5. That's how you and I understand it, and it should be a correct answer. If the expected answer is 3 + 3 + 3 + 3 + 3, then the problem should be 3 x 5; meaning three, five times.

Well, no. Again, context. In the context of the lesson 5 x 3 is read as five groups of three. The correct answer is the one the lesson is trying to teach. The reasoning behind teaching this method actually turns out because it works as a basis into more advanced math later on in high school. Such as the dreaded calculus.

I think the schools purchase these worksheets from somewhere (Pearson, I think). I don't think this is something the teacher came up with.

US school textbooks are a whole other can of worms onto themselves at this point. >.>

[Kheldarson]

Such as the dreaded calculus.

Calculus was easy. It was addition and subtraction that was the problem...

[wolfie]

Well, no. Again, context. In the context of the lesson 5 x 3 is read as five groups of three. The correct answer is the one the lesson is trying to teach.

From the context, it could just as easily be read as "group of 5, taken 3 times". After all, a flat of 710ml (24 ounce) soda bottles has 6x4 bottles. Would you say that means it has 6 4-packs? I wouldn't - the plastic banding (Pepsi) or shrinkwrap (Coke) groups the bottles into 4 6-packs.