Several days ago, a parent posted a photo of a check he had made out to his child’s school with symbols instead of written numbers. His apparent objective was to show his frustration over how ridiculous he feels the Common Core math standards are, and his post worked, renewing yet again a heated online debate over this controversy. Transfixed, I read through hours and hours of comments and news articles, trying to get a better understanding of what exactly are people’s main issues with the standards. Many parents are angry, railing against the policy, claiming frustration and tears over homework and threatening to remove their children from public schools. But it’s this seeming hysteria that tends to give me pause. Why and what exactly is causing all this fury?

In very short form, the Common Core is a set of standards that defines what a student should know and be able to do by the end of each grade. What it *doesn’t* do is specifically state the method that must be used to teach, and is instead leaving that up to schools and teachers at the state and local government level. So there goes one of the arguments I came across in which many feel that federal government should not control education. This policy still provides the autonomy in flexibility and creativity in how best to teach students to those who actually have to teach it. Although why some decry this as “federal curriculum” as if that’s such a terrible thing is beyond me anyway. I struggled to find a school in which to enroll my child and during my search, all I kept thinking was “It shouldn’t be this hard. Every school ought to be just as good as the other.” And if for any reason we ever had to pick up and move to a new state, my child ought to be able to set foot in any school in the country and be able to pick up exactly where she left off. If having a federally governed educational set of standards for all states to follow would be the only way to ensure that, then why exactly is that not a favorable idea?

While the Common Core standards issue guidelines across multiple subjects, it is math that appears to rankle parents most. I’m still trying to understand this, too. For so long, we’ve ballyhooed about how far our students lag behind other nations, such as students in Singapore whom consistently rank the highest of all nations in math test scores. One facet of the method they exercise, dubbed by the U.S. as Singapore Math, uses ** greater detail** and

**to solve math equations. Guess what new approach that sounds very similar to? You guessed it, Common Core! So these “silly symbols, dots and circles” that have many parents so upset are spot on to the methods used by arguably the**

*pictorial representations**very best*math students in the

*world*. Maybe I’m by myself on this one, but I fail to see the problem in that (pun intended)!

Now, I *will* acknowledge that when first looking at such an example as the above photo, I am also thoroughly confused. This picture makes no sense to me just by viewing it, and indeed it *does* seem much longer, convoluted, and unnecessary. *This* appears to be where many parents just stop and immediately become angry. And at this point, it would make complete sense that if you’re angry and frustrated about what you’re viewing (and not understanding), that it would 100% translate over to your child and also make them tense and frustrated, perhaps leading to tears and and meltdowns over homework. And here is where I take a moment to think this through a little more…

Why would I expect that this should immediately make sense to me the first time viewing it without any teacher-led instruction or explanation? I haven’t actually been *taught* this method, so *of course* it looks like gibberish to me. But logic would lead me to believe, that if this is work being given to my *first-grader*, then it *must* be something a first-grader is quite capable of understanding. I can’t imagine that our schools are in the business of just throwing numbers and concepts out there that are a) way above the student’s level of learning and b) that are absolutely and completely unhelpful and useless. So there *must* be a point to this; there must be a reason here WHY reformers believe this to be a better, easier way. And perhaps if I take advantage of the many workshops most schools have provided that teach the new method to parents and explain its logic then I, too, will actually *understand* it. How many of these parents that are all ready to burn reformers at the stake have actually *attended the workshops* and/or sought detailed explanations of the method from their principals and teachers *first*?

Yes, this method might make a simple arithmetic problem longer in the short run, but in the *long* run, it ultimately should help one solve harder math equations much more easily and quickly. That certainly seems like a justifiable pay-off to me. If you’ve always been able to do math in your head or if the “old way” has always worked for you, then truly, that is great. But for the many students (like me) that struggled greatly with math, I welcome any possibility of simplifying, solving and understanding the same problem. I don’t see how this would slow or “dumb down” the class for the ones that “already get it”, because they’re still learning the same math you and I learned, they’re just now likely having to “show” more of how they got the answer. And why exactly is that such a bad thing? I had plenty of math teachers that asked us to “show our work” so this isn’t even an entirely new concept, it’s just giving students an additional (and for some, possibly an easier-to-understand) method of doing so! With any other subject, one can’t expect to be able to simply spout information without any supporting facts. When you state a hypothesis in biology class, you record the steps of the scientific method to explain how you arrived at your conclusion. When you take a position on a written thesis, you include footnotes and a bibliography of your sources. In other words, you show your work. Why should math be any different?

Perhaps it’s easier for me to take this approach as my child is just entering the school system. This will (potentially) be all that she’ll know and I’ll get to learn all of this right along with her. I can certainly understand how this may be more frustrating for older students that are just now having to learn a new way of doing things. But I have much faith that kids are pretty adaptive and resilient. It tends to be the parents that are the ones so resistant to change. To go online and see the numbers of parents that are conceivably dismissing these standards without even first making sure they understand what the new standards mean before making up their minds, well, it’s rather scary knowing they could potentially succeed in pressuring Congress to repeal the policy before it has even had a chance to be successful. It just doesn’t seem right that a snap judgment is being made based off what they* think* or may have simply seen, *not* on what they 100% have actually *learned* and truly *understand*. To develop a strong critical-thinking aptitude and make decisions and arrive at conclusions based on logic and fact are *precisely* the skills in which the Core standards are pushing for our students to become better. And that, to me, seems most worthwhile of giving a fair chance.

Just the simple fact that you never explained how to do that problem the “common core” way, or why it is ridiculous to solve a problem in 10 steps instead of two shows me you have no idea either. I could give two Sh***s what students in Singapore are doing. We are in America, and America has produced more inventor’s, geniuses, million are entrepreneurs than all those other countries put together…keep up with common core and it’ll take them decades to solve one problem…maybe that’s the agenda. Why don’t explain where that three in the second row came from? How adding five to fifteen helps? Our old way was fast, easy…that’s what they don’t want anymore.

LikeLiked by 1 person

Hi Molly, you’re quite right, I can’t explain the Common Core method to you, either. But I also haven’t attended a workshop to learn it and/or had a teacher explain it to me, and so I wondered how many parents can actually say that they *have* done that. The point I hoped to convey with my post was let’s remove the anger and emotion momentarily and try looking at it from all angles with logic and reason. Maybe it does make a short problem longer initially, but if learning that method helps you solve longer, harder problems down the road much more quickly and easily, then that would certainly pique my interest enough to make me think maybe there is some merit to doing it this way and would at least make me want to learn more before I take an absolute stance against it.

LikeLike

Sorry for the auto corrects, I do know grammar. I was angry and typing too fast.

LikeLike

I can explain it. It’s counting up from 12 to 32 in small increments. This example just isn’t the smartest way to count up. If I had to guess, small increments are being used in case the student/s are not comfortable making larger leaps yet.

From 12 to 15 is 3. From 15 to 20 is 5 more. 20 to 30 is 10 more. And then 30 to 32 is 2 more. In total the the difference is 3 + 5 + 10 + 2 = 20.

As I said earlier, it isn’t the smartest way to count up. A student who understands our number system should be able to count up by tens (or maybe multiples of ten) or just use place value to see that the two numbers are 20 apart.

LikeLiked by 1 person

I agree, that image really isn’t the best example, and I came across a well-written post at http://huppiemama.com/common-core/ that speaks on that specific image. I was enlightened reading both the post and many of the comments which provided solid reasoning on why it actually *is* important for students to understand the “why” and not just the “how”, hence why equations are broken down as such.

LikeLike

Ok, so here is the thing. They’ve been working on addition and subtraction for months now. So, first they were taught them how to add with little dots or circles so whenever they added, they had to use dots and sticks to reflect the tens and the ones. Fine. Then, they introduced the number line so each time they added, they now must draw a number line starting with 10 and draw loops that start them at 20 for instance and takes to 73. Well, OK, but some children find this confusing because they’ve already been taught a method, now they are being asked to learn another for “reasoning” purposes. So then they have to use number charts. The number chart obviously takes you from one number to the next and they are asked to use the ones provided to solve addition and subtraction problems and at one point were asked to draw their own, then draw a number line in addition to the chart. Ugh!!!! It is the same thing! So NOW, they ask them to use sticks and dots again, but to regroup with them. Meaning they must now draw their sticks and dots reflecting each side of the equation, cross out ten of the dots to show that you have regrouped, and then draw sticks and dots reflecting the result. By now, she obviously has complete confidence in the concept of addition, UNTIL you add all of the extra steps. Some children don’t have the reasoning ability to see an equation through in multiple ways. It’s not a productive way to teach every child. We are both overwhelmed with the amount of homework she has and he length of time it is taking to get it done. I can see how this may be helpful for algebra or trig, I would have loved for my high school and college level math courses to have broken things down in a way that helped me to reason through the problems. but for basic math concepts, it is overkill and confusing to everyone. There is a reason why psychiatrists say you need to keep directions to young children simple and concise…because all of that extra is confusing to them.

LikeLiked by 1 person

I totally see what you’re saying. I’m thinking back to my own school days when I was very often completely lost in math class, and it seems like some of these methods would definitely have helped me actually grasp the concept and learn how to work the equation. But you’re quite right in that I also probably would have then been confused if I found a method that made sense but was then forced to learn multiple other ways on top of that which may not have worked as well for me. I’m probably oversimplifying this greatly, but I’m thinking of how we were broken down into different reading groups in school and wondering if a similar concept could be applied in the math class based off what method works best for you. Or at least *introducing* all the methods so that every student has a chance to learn them , but then they have the choice to use whichever one fits them best. I agree it doesn’t make much sense to require them to show 5 different methods every single time for one math problem.

LikeLike