And It Continues...

[aunt betty]

Jim, you have continuously said these methods have never been tested, yet I have told you, along with a few others, that this is nothing new. I did a lot of this in school 20 years ago and still have a lot of the old homework showing it. The only difference I can see between this new "idea" and the old is they are introducing it about a year earlier.

You have also stated "least common denominator" which is also false. The new ELA modules are far, far advanced from what was taught 3 years ago for the same grade. As I said before, it may be just because this is NY, but I don't understand where your thoughts are coming from, other than you don't understand it.

Current high school seniors...the ones just now graduating (maybe) ...38% are literate. Roughly the same number are proficient in math. This new way is obviously working much better than our outdated way. @@@@

[Eric Haynes]

Jim, you have continuously said these methods have never been tested, yet I have told you, along with a few others, that this is nothing new. I did a lot of this in school 20 years ago and still have a lot of the old homework showing it. The only difference I can see between this new "idea" and the old is they are introducing it about a year earlier.

You have also stated "least common denominator" which is also false. The new ELA modules are far, far advanced from what was taught 3 years ago for the same grade. As I said before, it may be just because this is NY, but I don't understand where your thoughts are coming from, other than you don't understand it.

Current high school seniors...the ones just now graduating (maybe) ...38% are literate. Roughly the same number are proficient in math. This new way is obviously working much better than our outdated way. @@@@

That's a stupid statistic that one of your peers guessed. There is a higher % than that holding a bachelors.

[aunt betty]

Jim, you have continuously said these methods have never been tested, yet I have told you, along with a few others, that this is nothing new. I did a lot of this in school 20 years ago and still have a lot of the old homework showing it. The only difference I can see between this new "idea" and the old is they are introducing it about a year earlier.

You have also stated "least common denominator" which is also false. The new ELA modules are far, far advanced from what was taught 3 years ago for the same grade. As I said before, it may be just because this is NY, but I don't understand where your thoughts are coming from, other than you don't understand it.

Current high school seniors...the ones just now graduating (maybe) ...38% are literate. Roughly the same number are proficient in math. This new way is obviously working much better than our outdated way. @@@@

That's a stupid statistic that one of your peers guessed. There is a higher % than that holding a bachelors.

CBS News is the source. They prolly made it up. They're from New York.
Bunch of lying cocksuckers in New York.

[huntfishnv]

Assa I appreciate the response! I think I understand (maybe) where we might be disagreeing on this issue.

I'm talking about common core in the most literal of meanings. In that common core establishes standards for information that teachers must teach and that students must learn in that class by the end of the year, or basically that teacher is "ineffective". In other words, all students in theory should have AT LEAST the same basic education. Not to say they can't have a much more advanced education or that some won't slip by with next to no real education like kids have manged to do forever. Here's an example of why I think common core is a great thing. I'm going to switch from math to history, but I'd love to hear what you think about it.

This an extremely simple situation, but you're right 2+2=4, but your kid only knows that if the teacher teaches the student how to get that answer. Now in my own education, I've had World history teachers completely digress from their curriculum and teach me how to balance a checkbook and other finance skills in History class. For the most part, before recently there was no set standard on what they had to teach, and no way to make sure that they were teaching it. Now there are clear standards and a final assessment that tests knowledge on those standards at the end of the year. Now that teacher, if she wants to keep her job, will make sure that no matter what her students are proficient with the required information.

These standards, I admit could probably be higher because I think higher standards are better for education in general, but I don't think its dumbing down the smart kids. They can can still excel past the required knowledge, it just requires more work like it always has

If I'm correct, where you're becoming frustrated is in the way the way the teacher is presenting the material. You're familiar with traditional adding/subtracting and there's nothing wrong with that, it could very well be the best way to learn how to do it! However, within the common core teachers are given discretion on how they want to teach their students! In you're case the teacher chose the base method (or whatever it's called) and maybe they should be required to teach it the traditional ways or maybe it shouldn't matter how students do it as long as they get the correct answer! All that matters is that they understanding what they need to learn!

[vincentpa]

The only benefit I got from all the math **** was I learned to multiply big numbers in my head by using the distributive property. For instance
25X23
20x25+3x25
575

For years that was my "thing". I could multiply faster than you could with a calculator. Used to race ppl all the time in grade school.

That works for you, so there must be something to it, right? You can't be the only one that it works for, so shouldn't we be giving that some thought? Not all kids get the basic way on how to do things, and those kids are getting left in the dark. That is the reasoning for doing math the "crazy" way. It does work for more people than you would ever imagine.

And yet our kids either are falling behind or treading water compared to other wealthy societies. The new math has been a bust.

The problem with AT's daughter's homework was that it is too abstract. 7 year olds don't possess the cognitive capacities to think abstractly in a manner required to solve that particular math problem.

Because they haven't been taught to think abstractly, vp. Or, more accurately, they always though abstractly but it is being conditioned out of them. There was one way to solve a problem and it doesn't matter if it makes no sense to them as long as they do it the right way and get the right answer. Pass this test and move on to the next. It's like teaching someone to build an airplane by giving him the specs. He might build a flyable aircraft, but he won't understand why it flies, and that might prevent him from coming up with a solution if he has to build a plane for a different purpose.

You can try to teach a dog to sing the alphabet until you're blue in the face. The dog will never be able to sing the song because it doesn't have the mental capacity to learn a language, ignoring the vocal structure of course. You can try to teach a 7 year old to think abstractly until you're blue in the face. The 7 year old will never learn to do it. Their brain has not developed the ability to think abstractly yet. Child cognitive development is well understood. Anyone who has ever taken a first year child psych class could tell you that.

[ducks~n~bucks]

The only benefit I got from all the math **** was I learned to multiply big numbers in my head by using the distributive property. For instance
25X23
20x25+3x25
575

For years that was my "thing". I could multiply faster than you could with a calculator. Used to race ppl all the time in grade school.

That works for you, so there must be something to it, right? You can't be the only one that it works for, so shouldn't we be giving that some thought? Not all kids get the basic way on how to do things, and those kids are getting left in the dark. That is the reasoning for doing math the "crazy" way. It does work for more people than you would ever imagine.

And yet our kids either are falling behind or treading water compared to other wealthy societies. The new math has been a bust.

The problem with AT's daughter's homework was that it is too abstract. 7 year olds don't possess the cognitive capacities to think abstractly in a manner required to solve that particular math problem.

Because they haven't been taught to think abstractly, vp. Or, more accurately, they always though abstractly but it is being conditioned out of them. There was one way to solve a problem and it doesn't matter if it makes no sense to them as long as they do it the right way and get the right answer. Pass this test and move on to the next. It's like teaching someone to build an airplane by giving him the specs. He might build a flyable aircraft, but he won't understand why it flies, and that might prevent him from coming up with a solution if he has to build a plane for a different purpose.

You can try to teach a dog to sing the alphabet until you're blue in the face. The dog will never be able to sing the song because it doesn't have the mental capacity to learn a language, ignoring the vocal structure of course. You can try to teach a 7 year old to think abstractly until you're blue in the face. The 7 year old will never learn to do it. Their brain has not developed the ability to think abstractly yet. Child cognitive development is well understood. Anyone who has ever taken a first year child psych class could tell you that.

Hell, I'm in a child development class at my high school, and I know that.

[vincentpa]

Jim, you have continuously said these methods have never been tested, yet I have told you, along with a few others, that this is nothing new. I did a lot of this in school 20 years ago and still have a lot of the old homework showing it. The only difference I can see between this new "idea" and the old is they are introducing it about a year earlier.

You have also stated "least common denominator" which is also false. The new ELA modules are far, far advanced from what was taught 3 years ago for the same grade. As I said before, it may be just because this is NY, but I don't understand where your thoughts are coming from, other than you don't understand it.

Current high school seniors...the ones just now graduating (maybe) ...38% are literate. Roughly the same number are proficient in math. This new way is obviously working much better than our outdated way. @@@@

That's a stupid statistic that one of your peers guessed. There is a higher % than that holding a bachelors.

Getting a bachelors degree doesn't make you proficient in math.

I think the fact that Jim is mistaking the flawed method of teaching math with common core is irrelevant even to his argument. I believe what you are describing was called at one time called "the new math." The new math, I believe came out of the Columbia university school of education where much of the "new" methods of teaching have their origins. The new math like just about every other liberal paradigm shift in education has been a complete bust. It's funny how the rest of the world doesn't have a problem learning the old fashioned way. The liberals are constantly trying to devise new systems for covering up the failures of their institutions.

[Glimmerjim]

You can try to teach a dog to sing the alphabet until you're blue in the face. The dog will never be able to sing the song because it doesn't have the mental capacity to learn a language, ignoring the vocal structure of course. You can try to teach a 7 year old to think abstractly until you're blue in the face. The 7 year old will never learn to do it. Their brain has not developed the ability to think abstractly yet. Child cognitive development is well understood. Anyone who has ever taken a first year child psych class could tell you that.

So your kids are a little slower than most, vp. No big deal. I'd defend 'em too. Some kids just progress at different rates. No sweat. They'll catch up in no time I'm sure.

[assateague]

Ok, I need to clear something up.

I am against the curriculum, not the teachers. Teachers teach what they are handed and are told to instruct. (That's a problem for another thread, though, the centralization of education)

My problem is not with how they're teaching, but what they are being told to teach. For those who say "it's been around forever", no, it has not. Of course the bits and pieces have. The curriculum has not.

If I take apart a car completely, and then mix up all the parts and put it back together differently, you could argue "these pieces have been around forever- they were on my car back in the 70s". And you would be correct. But that doesn't mean the piece of shit I built with 2 wheels on the roof and two in the backseat will drive worth a damn. Even though I used a the same "parts".

[aunt betty]

You gotta wonder just how in the fuck they figured out how many bricks to order for the pyramid. They sure as fuck did not use new math and the great pyramid is thousands of years old.

New math will build bigger pyramids and stronger bricks. @

[vincentpa]

You can try to teach a dog to sing the alphabet until you're blue in the face. The dog will never be able to sing the song because it doesn't have the mental capacity to learn a language, ignoring the vocal structure of course. You can try to teach a 7 year old to think abstractly until you're blue in the face. The 7 year old will never learn to do it. Their brain has not developed the ability to think abstractly yet. Child cognitive development is well understood. Anyone who has ever taken a first year child psych class could tell you that.

So your kids are a little slower than most, vp. No big deal. I'd defend 'em too. Some kids just progress at different rates. No sweat. They'll catch up in no time I'm sure.

My kids are three years old dickhead. One speaks two languages. The other understands both and both can count objects.

Apparently, like most things in life, you want to believe what you want to be true or how you wish things were, not how they are.

[aunt betty]

You can try to teach a dog to sing the alphabet until you're blue in the face. The dog will never be able to sing the song because it doesn't have the mental capacity to learn a language, ignoring the vocal structure of course. You can try to teach a 7 year old to think abstractly until you're blue in the face. The 7 year old will never learn to do it. Their brain has not developed the ability to think abstractly yet. Child cognitive development is well understood. Anyone who has ever taken a first year child psych class could tell you that.

So your kids are a little slower than most, vp. No big deal. I'd defend 'em too. Some kids just progress at different rates. No sweat. They'll catch up in no time I'm sure.

My kids are three years old dickhead. One speaks two languages. The other understands both and both can count objects.

Apparently, like most things in life, you want to believe what you want to be true or how you wish things were, not how they are.

I have a lot of trouble with people like that because I get out a real machine gun with real bullets and shoot their false rainbow reality full of holes and then describe how it really is.

I'm a realist.

[huntall6]

You can try to teach a dog to sing the alphabet until you're blue in the face. The dog will never be able to sing the song because it doesn't have the mental capacity to learn a language, ignoring the vocal structure of course. You can try to teach a 7 year old to think abstractly until you're blue in the face. The 7 year old will never learn to do it. Their brain has not developed the ability to think abstractly yet. Child cognitive development is well understood. Anyone who has ever taken a first year child psych class could tell you that.

So your kids are a little slower than most, vp. No big deal. I'd defend 'em too. Some kids just progress at different rates. No sweat. They'll catch up in no time I'm sure.

That's a statement that would get your ass kicked.

[vincentpa]

You can try to teach a dog to sing the alphabet until you're blue in the face. The dog will never be able to sing the song because it doesn't have the mental capacity to learn a language, ignoring the vocal structure of course. You can try to teach a 7 year old to think abstractly until you're blue in the face. The 7 year old will never learn to do it. Their brain has not developed the ability to think abstractly yet. Child cognitive development is well understood. Anyone who has ever taken a first year child psych class could tell you that.

So your kids are a little slower than most, vp. No big deal. I'd defend 'em too. Some kids just progress at different rates. No sweat. They'll catch up in no time I'm sure.

That's a statement that would get your ass kicked.

Ole jimmy boy was just teasing me. He didn't mean anything personal. I internet know him. We give each shit all the time. Otherwise, I'd be pissed.

[Feelin' Fowl]

You can try to teach a dog to sing the alphabet until you're blue in the face. The dog will never be able to sing the song because it doesn't have the mental capacity to learn a language, ignoring the vocal structure of course. You can try to teach a 7 year old to think abstractly until you're blue in the face. The 7 year old will never learn to do it. Their brain has not developed the ability to think abstractly yet. Child cognitive development is well understood. Anyone who has ever taken a first year child psych class could tell you that.

So your kids are a little slower than most, vp. No big deal. I'd defend 'em too. Some kids just progress at different rates. No sweat. They'll catch up in no time I'm sure.

That's a statement that would get your ass kicked.

Ole jimmy boy was just teasing me. He didn't mean anything personal. I internet know him. We give each shit all the time. Otherwise, I'd be pissed.

Teaching your kids Hebrew to fit into the neighborhood?

[Glimmerjim]

You can try to teach a dog to sing the alphabet until you're blue in the face. The dog will never be able to sing the song because it doesn't have the mental capacity to learn a language, ignoring the vocal structure of course. You can try to teach a 7 year old to think abstractly until you're blue in the face. The 7 year old will never learn to do it. Their brain has not developed the ability to think abstractly yet. Child cognitive development is well understood. Anyone who has ever taken a first year child psych class could tell you that.

So your kids are a little slower than most, vp. No big deal. I'd defend 'em too. Some kids just progress at different rates. No sweat. They'll catch up in no time I'm sure.

That's a statement that would get your ass kicked.

Ole jimmy boy was just teasing me. He didn't mean anything personal. I internet know him. We give each **** all the time. Otherwise, I'd be pissed.

Sheesh! Thanks vp. I was hoping SOMEBODY realized that!

[vincentpa]

You can try to teach a dog to sing the alphabet until you're blue in the face. The dog will never be able to sing the song because it doesn't have the mental capacity to learn a language, ignoring the vocal structure of course. You can try to teach a 7 year old to think abstractly until you're blue in the face. The 7 year old will never learn to do it. Their brain has not developed the ability to think abstractly yet. Child cognitive development is well understood. Anyone who has ever taken a first year child psych class could tell you that.

So your kids are a little slower than most, vp. No big deal. I'd defend 'em too. Some kids just progress at different rates. No sweat. They'll catch up in no time I'm sure.

That's a statement that would get your ass kicked.

Ole jimmy boy was just teasing me. He didn't mean anything personal. I internet know him. We give each shit all the time. Otherwise, I'd be pissed.

Teaching your kids Hebrew to fit into the neighborhood?

No, they're learning Spanish so when the beaners take over, they'll be prepared to lead. A la Charles Manson.

[Feelin' Fowl]

You need to teach them Mexican, not Spanish (but I'm sure you know that).

[Glimmerjim]

You can try to teach a dog to sing the alphabet until you're blue in the face. The dog will never be able to sing the song because it doesn't have the mental capacity to learn a language, ignoring the vocal structure of course. You can try to teach a 7 year old to think abstractly until you're blue in the face. The 7 year old will never learn to do it. Their brain has not developed the ability to think abstractly yet. Child cognitive development is well understood. Anyone who has ever taken a first year child psych class could tell you that.

So your kids are a little slower than most, vp. No big deal. I'd defend 'em too. Some kids just progress at different rates. No sweat. They'll catch up in no time I'm sure.

That's a statement that would get your ass kicked.

I may say some inappropiriate things sometimes, huntall, but I'd never say anything about a guy's kids, especially vp's......the poor little things!

[huntall6]

You can try to teach a dog to sing the alphabet until you're blue in the face. The dog will never be able to sing the song because it doesn't have the mental capacity to learn a language, ignoring the vocal structure of course. You can try to teach a 7 year old to think abstractly until you're blue in the face. The 7 year old will never learn to do it. Their brain has not developed the ability to think abstractly yet. Child cognitive development is well understood. Anyone who has ever taken a first year child psych class could tell you that.

So your kids are a little slower than most, vp. No big deal. I'd defend 'em too. Some kids just progress at different rates. No sweat. They'll catch up in no time I'm sure.

That's a statement that would get your ass kicked.

I may say some inappropiriate things sometimes, huntall, but I'd never say anything about a guy's kids, especially vp's......the poor little things!

I shoulda known.

At least his girls will have access to a hair dresser at an early age....

[vincentpa]

An expensive hair dresser at that. Everybody's got their hands in my pockets.

[RonE]

If I take apart a car completely, and then mix up all the parts and put it back together differently, you could argue "these pieces have been around forever- they were on my car back in the 70s". And you would be correct. But that doesn't mean the piece of shit I built with 2 wheels on the roof and two in the backseat will drive worth a damn. Even though I used a the same "parts".

When designing a curriculum there is usually a goal such as ease of learning, ease of teaching or better understanding maybe to combine elements of this and that to achieve broader understanding. In your example there is no goal as to functionality, merely to stack the parts in a neat pile.

The example you cite is not within the realm of reality. Curriculum is normally approved and adopted only after it has been reviewed through an extensive process and seldom is it made up on the spot unless it is for subject matter across the board and not a specific subject.

If you are really concerned about your child's curriculum, I will gladly put you in touch with my wife and she can not only explain things to you but can also tell you what questions you need to ask and to whom you need to direct the questions to get the answers you seek.

It seems that you are frustrated because although you are educated, this is new and unknown to you and you are finding it difficult to help your daughter.

[Glimmerjim]

An expensive hair dresser at that. Everybody's got their hands in my pockets.

The Al Bundy syndrome!

[GadwallGetter530]

This thread bores me.

[huntall6]

An expensive hair dresser at that. Everybody's got their hands in my pockets.

That why you have soo many friends!

[assateague]

If I take apart a car completely, and then mix up all the parts and put it back together differently, you could argue "these pieces have been around forever- they were on my car back in the 70s". And you would be correct. But that doesn't mean the piece of shit I built with 2 wheels on the roof and two in the backseat will drive worth a damn. Even though I used a the same "parts".

When designing a curriculum there is usually a goal such as ease of learning, ease of teaching or better understanding maybe to combine elements of this and that to achieve broader understanding. In your example there is no goal as to functionality, merely to stack the parts in a neat pile.

The example you cite is not within the realm of reality. Curriculum is normally approved and adopted only after it has been reviewed through an extensive process and seldom is it made up on the spot unless it is for subject matter across the board and not a specific subject.

If you are really concerned about your child's curriculum, I will gladly put you in touch with my wife and she can not only explain things to you but can also tell you what questions you need to ask and to whom you need to direct the questions to get the answers you seek.

It seems that you are frustrated because although you are educated, this is new and unknown to you and you are finding it difficult to help your daughter.

To the best of my knowledge, common core was neither reviewed nor tested before being implemented basically nationwide. Feel free to show me if I'm wrong.

I have no problem helping my daughter. It's when the curriculum "unteaches" her that I have a problem. Or when it introduces something which I understand fine, but yet which the students have zero basis for understanding- like calculating the square footage of a sidewalk. Yes, that was a question on the homework back in September.

[aunt betty]

It always make me a bit nervous when a concept or idea has to have Greek words in it.
Curriculum...is one.

[Pintail]

This thread bores me.

I agree. Too much talk of school and homework.

[Pintail]

It always make me a bit nervous when a concept or idea has to have Greek words in it.
Curriculum...is one.

Sometimes I wonder about you.

[aunt betty]

It always make me a bit nervous when a concept or idea has to have Greek words in it.
Curriculum...is one.

Sometimes I wonder about you.

You don't know me...I do what I want.
[attachment=-1]uploadfromtaptalk1400944014735.jpg[/attachment]