Parents' frustration with distance learning -- "Common Core Math Methods"

In summary: Common Core calls for students to be able to do up to 20x10 multiplication tables.At first I thought the article was saying that for many parents, helping their kids with their math homework was the hardest because maybe they weren't all that great at math themselves.But the real reason is that the "Common Core" math methods used in primary school these days involve new tricks ("grouping") to solve the problems. The methods that we are all used to have been replaced, so if you're going to help your kids with their work, you'll need to learn the new paradigm. Sigh.
  • #71
Please take this with a grain of salt, as everyone's experience and opinion of teaching and learning differ, but in my opinion, (at the moment), the primary problem with teaching is how to teach more than one person at a time. I.e. every student's background information, motivation, and speed of learning is different, so it is very challenging to keep the attention of a class of more than one, and present useful material without going too slow or too fast. If you are the fastest learner in a class of 35, or the most conscientious, it is quite likely you will almost always be bored and wonder why more challenging content is not offered.

Even with one student it is not trivial to teach significant information. Just think of this forum, where each student has the freedom to start his own thread devoted to his own specific question, and the answers are directed precisely at him/her alone. Experts here, even in combination, still often struggle to make themselves clear and eradicate misunderstandings.
Now place yourself in a high school classroom with 40 kids, some or most often ill prepared and uninterested, and try to design an effective program that will satisfy most of them, hopefully including the most gifted.

Perhaps for this reason the most accomplished young students i have met were mostly home schooled, essentially individually. This unfortunately may deny them the socialization benefits and comradeship of a standard school atmosphere.
What to do? I do not know the answer, after some 50+ years of teaching, with my most successful experiences limited to very small groups of highly gifted and motivated students.

Of course I may be unusually challenged, as I can share one teaching technique I have used that absolutely guarantees failure: once while I was giving an explanation of a clever trick for proving Taylor's theorem in an honors class, (the argument from Courant, and reproduced in Spivak), a very bright and motivated student in the front row leapt ahead mentally and shouted out the point of the still incompletely explained trick. Delighted, and somewhat embarrassed to continue, since I concluded the point was now obvious, I complimented him and stopped the explanation right there, thus guaranteeing that exactly one student in the class would understand it. Never do this. Plod right ahead with the explanation in full. The silent majority will thank you, as no doubt everyone else here already knows.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes Astronuc
Science news on Phys.org
  • #72
Astronuc said:
Some basic things simply don't change - ever. Certainly, if something works, keep using it. If there is a better method that teaches more efficiently, then by all means, use that method.
Completely agree.
 
  • #73
mathwonk said:
Of course I may be unusually challenged, as I can share one teaching technique I have used that absolutely guarantees failure: once while I was giving an explanation of a clever trick for proving Taylor's theorem in an honors class, (the argument from Courant, and reproduced in Spivak), a very bright and motivated student in the front row leapt ahead mentally and shouted out the point of the still incompletely explained trick. Delighted, and somewhat embarrassed to continue, since I concluded the point was now obvious, I complimented him and stopped the explanation right there, thus guaranteeing that exactly one student in the class would understand it. Never do this. Plod right ahead with the explanation in full. The silent majority will thank you, as no doubt everyone else here already knows.

Or let the students who understtand explain it to the class.

I have heard of estimates that 10% of students do not need teachers. The rest, well need some assistance. The usual teacher is criticized for teaching the way she was taught probably because it is easier than developing your own style. But additionally, we often forget the problems of learning that even we encountered as students. Having matured our understanding of a topic our familiarity of it keeps us blind to those problems.

In the 1980 some physicists began to look at teaching university physics more closely since it became apparent to some that most students finished courses (particularly service courses) with little comprehension. Sure, they could solve the problems, but the understanding of the principles was lacking. A Harvard physicist Eric Mazur discovered by accident a solution. Let those students who know the subject teach those who don't. He termed this unimaginatively 'peer-instruction'. I think this is similar to the term "flipping the classroom" and it might be in the process of being implemented is some high schools.

This is a podcast discussing the history, and how it is being implemented (or not).
http://americanradioworks.publicrad...ows-college/lectures/rethinking-teaching.html
 
  • Like
Likes mathwonk
  • #74
gleem said:
particularly service courses
what is a "service course" ?
 
  • #75
gmax137 said:
what is a "service course" ?
Usually, a core course that students from many disciplines are required to take together, like engineering students and physics students.

EDIT: Or a physics course for biologists.
 
  • #76
i.e. presumably a course that is offered "in the service of" a specific major's or department's needs.
 
  • #77
jedishrfu said:
During a school open house, the math dept head talked about their teaching methods. I asked about why kids can't bring their tests home. The response was that's against school policy, we only have a limited number of test problems and we don't want the students passing them on to other students.
That IS understandable. (But again this depends on the sophistication of the students or other devious people.)
 
  • #78
jedishrfu said:
My old HS math teacher said those teachers were just too lazy to make up new problems for their tests and makeup tests.
Some Education situations place a bureaucratic arrangement into instruction NOT allowing the teacher to make-up new tests!
 
  • #79
Except my old math teacher told that answer was BS and that my child’s teachers should be more flexible.

As a parent I was prevented from effectively helping my child because I couldn’t see their test each time unless I left work, scheduled an appointment with the teacher and went to the school to review it.
 
  • Like
Likes Astronuc
  • #80
Mark44 said:
Well, 50 years ago puts us at 1970, and which was quite a while after I had graduated from high school. What exactly was so bad about the educational methods back then?

BTW, the educational methods at that time had produced scientists and engineers who were about to put men on the moon in 1969.
Back at that time, not sure for elementary schools, but "tracking" was happening in the high schools. Either a student would be placed into some general math kind-of-thing or he would be in the college preparatory series of courses. All I can say is that the college preparatory route was very good or excellent; but I have no idea what was the kind of content of the other non-college-prep courses.
 
  • #81
Our high school did this tracking. Non college bound kids would go into trades like beauty salon, automotive, drafting, machine shop or agricultural. I’m sure there were other trades as well but I didn’t keep track.
 
  • #82
jedishrfu said:
Our high school did this tracking. Non college bound kids would go into trades like beauty salon, automotive, drafting, machine shop or agricultural. I’m sure there were other trades as well but I didn’t keep track.
Sure. That is what Tracking really meant. Part of it was that the non-college-preparatory students did not typically go through the Algebra1/Geometry/Algebr2/Precalculus sequence for Mathematics courses. My FEELING is that this college preparatory sequence in Mathematics was better instruction for Mathematics.
 
  • #83
Mark44 said:
BTW, the educational methods at that time had produced scientists and engineers who were about to put men on the moon in 1969.
And many still used slide rules, which I learned in high school and used my first year of university.
 
  • Like
Likes hutchphd
  • #84
Astronuc said:
And many still used slide rules, which I learned in high school and used my first year of university.
Hey, I still have a collection of slide rules, including two round ones.
 
  • Like
Likes Astronuc
  • #85
PAllen said:
Hey, I still have a collection of slide rules, including two round ones.
I have mine (K+E) from high school and university, and I inherited two from my father-in-law. All straight.
 
  • #87
Mark44 said:
Well, 50 years ago puts us at 1970, and which was quite a while after I had graduated from high school. What exactly was so bad about the educational methods back then?

BTW, the educational methods at that time had produced scientists and engineers who were about to put men on the moon in 1969.
Those same teaching methods also produced a largely innumerate population.

I think the point many are missing is that good students can learn even with less-than-ideal teaching methods. It's the students who haven't yet developed good learning skills, which make up the bulk of many classes, that benefit from updated teaching practices informed by knowledge of how people learn.
 
  • Like
Likes symbolipoint
  • #88
vela said:
Those same teaching methods also produced a largely innumerate population.
I don't know, I think we still have a largely innumerate population today. maybe I'm wrong.
 
  • Like
Likes Averagesupernova and gleem
  • #89
vela said:
I think the point many are missing is that good students can learn even with less-than-ideal teaching methods. It's the students who haven't yet developed good learning skills, which make up the bulk of many classes, that benefit from updated teaching practices informed by knowledge of how people learn.
Yes, this seems to be the problem. But how did we screw things up. The work of Piaget on children's cognitive development goes back to 1936. The teaching community has had access to this research for decades, but it appears to be only sporadically implemented.

Does anyone remember the "open classroom" model? It was an experiment in the 1960's and 70's in the US. Instead of formal classes there were age specific areas, open spaces, in which there were learning stations which a group of students could access as they wished. The teacher remained to help students if needed. Apparently, it is still in limited use today. Recently a new paradigm is being instituted sort of a hybrid of the open classroom and the traditional classroom, the "flipped" classroom which has been discussed somewhat in this forum. Traditional in the sense a single subject is focused on but different in that the student read pertinent material before class and come prepared to discuss the material in class with fellow students and the teacher as well as to perform relevant exercises in small groups. I guess this is also known as active learning. It seems to be gaining ground.
 
  • #90
gleem said:
Does anyone remember the "open classroom" model? It was an experiment in the 1960's and 70's in the US. Instead of formal classes there were age specific areas, open spaces, in which there were learning stations which a group of students could access as they wished. The teacher remained to help students if needed. Apparently, it is still in limited use today.
Also in use is the "Open-entry, open-exit" form of classroom, but usually it is another form of Individualized-Instruction, competency-based, at which several courses are being administered, and there small numbers of students, each studying a different course. This form of classroom is often used for several courses, none of which have enough students in each to form a full classroom dedicated to each course.
 
  • #91
Having gone back to the beginning of this thread there seems to be a misconception that a problem with Common Core is the unfamiliar teaching methods. Common Core does not specify how a subject is taught but establishes performance expectation for students by year four and eight in primary school. Teaching methods are left to the teacher.

Below is a link to an NPR podcast explaining the Common Core program. (About 11 minutes)

https://www.apmreports.org/episode/2013/07/30/common-core-explained

berkeman said:
I spent a lot of time on my smartphone in the late 1970s when I was graduating high school and going through undergrad and doing my MSEE. Oh wait...
@berkeman, you know when you time travel, you're not supposed to bring advanced technology back to the past.
 
  • Like
Likes jedishrfu and berkeman
  • #92
... you know when you time travel, you're not supposed to bring advanced technology back to the past.

tech like your time machine? Maybe that rule answers the "where is everybody" question.
 
  • #93
The rule first came up when Mark Twain wrote the story A Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur's Court. In the movie version Bing Crosby brought back a lighter.
 
  • #94
hmmm27 said:
12x12, late '60s... maybe the excuse for stopping at 10x10 is that "dozen" is now considered archaic ?

Meh, make them go to 16x16 to be modern.
Make it with Roman Numerals. Or Binary. Or with Complex Numbers.;).
 
  • #95
No real problem in memorizing Multiplication Tables or Multiplication Facts. Memorizing does not have to mean without-understanding. Why stop at 10s? Why stop at 12s? But remember some integer square is easier. I cannot explain why. 15 x 15 = 225; I computed this on paper a couple of times and never forgot the fact. Interesting about 13x13 and 14x14, because the resulting digits in the Ones and the tens place are switched. We may remember 256 as a certain square because of what we read on labels and other places about memory storage,... 16x16=256.
 
  • #96
symbolipoint said:
Why stop at 10s?
In my case (mid-1960s) we stopped at 9*9. I just assumed that's because if you know up to 9 by 9, you know all the single-digit combinations, and can use the long multiplication to figure any longer ones.

I'm not sure, does the multiplication algorithm (see example) have a name?

312
x 14
1248
3120
4368
 
  • #97
gmax137 said:
In my case (mid-1960s) we stopped at 9*9. I just assumed that's because if you know up to 9 by 9, you know all the single-digit combinations, and can use the long multiplication to figure any longer ones.
Same here.
 
  • #98
gmax137 said:
I'm not sure, does the multiplication algorithm (see example) have a name?

312
x 14
1248
3120
4368
Long Multiplication, or Long-hand Multiplication; but I am uncertain of the exact name.

An alternative was sometimes taught, "Lattice" Method, which is not much different except that the digits were arranged in a rectangular arrangement with rows and columns. (Hard to show here.)
 

Similar threads

Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
27
Views
4K
Replies
28
Views
4K
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
17
Views
2K
Replies
50
Views
5K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Back
Top