COMMON CORE REQUIRES FRIENDLY ANSWERS TO MATH PROBLEMS

29 comments

Posted on 26th March 2014 by Administrator in Economy |Politics |Social Issues

, , ,

If your 2nd grader can add and subtract the way you learned to add and subtract, they will be told they are wrong. How did it come to this? When did we let the inmates take over the asylum? When did we allow our children to be brain washed with gibberish taught by mediocre union government employees?

The propaganda spewing government educators want our kids to be more friendly with their answers. We are so fucked as a society.

Via The Daily Caller

Friendly problems / Twitter screenshot and Paint

This Common Core math problem asks kids to write the ‘friendly’ answer, instead of the correct one!

Posted By Robby Soave On 10:06 PM 03/25/2014

A second grader’s answers to a Common Core-aligned math worksheet were marked as incorrect because they weren’t “friendly” enough… even though they were the right answers.

A screenshot of the worksheet was posted to Twitter. The teacher wrote that even though the questions — addition and subtraction problems — were solved correctly, the student used the wrong technique to arrive at the answers.

View image on Twitter

“Correct answers, but let’s find the ‘friendly’ numbers,” wrote the teacher.

The teacher wanted the student to solve “530 – 270 = ?” in the following manner: First, add 30 to both numbers, changing the problem to “560 – 300 = ?”. These numbers are the “friendly” numbers, because they are supposedly easier to work with.

The student, however, simply subtracted 270 from 530 the good old-fashioned way, arriving at the same answer. Unfortunately, this is not a Common Core-approved technique.

Though friendly numbers can be useful, the worksheet illustrates the weird priorities of Common Core, according to Twitchy:

In Common Core math, it often is not good enough to get the correct answer. Instead, students are required to show “higher order” thinking skills — in this case, use of the associative property. Yes, the associative property is important and should be taught at some point. Unfortunately, we suspect that many 7-year olds will not be able to understand this particular assignment. With limited days in the school year, wouldn’t second graders — second graders! — be better off spending their time attempting to master the traditional subtraction algorithm?

The Daily Caller readers know that this is not the first Common Core worksheet to baffle young children and infuriate adults.

(RELATED: EPIC FAIL: Parents reveal insane Common Core worksheets)

(RELATED: ANOTHER impossibly stupid Common Core worksheet sure to make your kid a moron)

(RELATED: This Common Core math worksheet offers a glimpse into Kafkaesque third-grade hell)

(RELATED: Can you solve this grammatically incorrect, impossible Common Core question?)

(RELATED: ‘Why are they making math harder?’ More absurd Common Core math problems)

(RELATED: Is this Common Core math question the worst math question in human history?)

Follow Robby on Twitter


29 Comments
  1. Wyoming Mike says:

    They’ve been employing this method in our middle school for years. Currently, our 6th graders are struggling with 3rd grade math. We’re doomed.

    26th March 2014 at 12:44 pm

  2. Zarathustra says:

    I was in around 3rd or 4th grade when we were forced to learn “New Math.” I think that stupid experiment lasted about a year and it set my math education back a year.

    Then in 7th grade (Jr. High) they introduced modular scheduling. That was the dumbest fucking thing ever. Did they really believe 13 and 14 yr old kids were going to go study quietly in the library until 3:30 PM after their last class finished at noon, rather leave the building and go smoke dope, drink and/or have sex and then come back later to catch the bus?

    26th March 2014 at 12:55 pm

  3. Thinker says:

    I often drive a Loyola student home to her family in Indiana when I go back on the weekends. She’s a senior now, one of the top 10 students in education there.

    We had an interesting discussion about Common Core on our 3-hour drive. She said it’s the only teaching method she’s learned, so has nothing to compare it to. And she focuses on English and writing, not math, so she couldn’t answer any questions about the teaching method for math. Why that is, I don’t know… you’d think they’d learn everything so they understand what students are doing throughout all subjects.

    The standards for English are fairly innocuous; they’re intended to improve literacy, comprehension and critical thinking skills. Sounds great, right? The problem is, test scores keep dropping in all these areas, prompting many to ask whether the methods used work at all.

    I fear we’re going to have a generation of kids so poorly-served by Common Core that it will affect our economy and society for years to come.

    26th March 2014 at 1:09 pm

  4. Dutchman says:

    It’s really pretty simple: The gubmint / establishment MUST be in charge of EVERYTHING.

    So by using these dumb ass methods it puts them in charge, and delegitimzes the the parents.

    The gubmint would like to have people weak in math – that way they can’t question the $85 billion of QE each month, nor the BLS stats that fail to count 16 million people who can’t get a job, nor the CPI that says inflation is only 2%.

    26th March 2014 at 1:28 pm

  5. Billy says:

    I swear to God Almighty, I spend at least two hours a day UNDOING the damage Commie Core does. My son comes home and just hands me his math homework with a doleful look on his face.

    Out comes the chalkboard….

    Thing is, he’s NOT stupid. I have him do the problem on the board and then point out what’s bullshit and what’s not. I then tell him to “forget all that Commie Core shit” and I show him the correct way to do math problems… and he picks it up quickly. Not just mimicking what I do, but demonstrating an understanding of the concepts we’re talking about…

    Thank God for my old man… he saved his middle school and high school maths books (which are a fraction of the size of that overpriced piece of crap my son lugs around). I break those out and find the appropriate section and we go over those old math problems…

    Just to be clear, my son pulled an “A” in maths last semester… NO FUCKING THANKS TO COMMIE CORE!

    26th March 2014 at 1:36 pm

  6. Mark says:

    It would seem that Common Core would preserve union jobs of those taught in Common Core. Any mathematician would have to go back to school and get his head fucked up in order to be eligible to teach. In other words, the only ones that will be eligible to teach are to stupid to learn math.

    26th March 2014 at 1:39 pm

  7. Dutchman says:

    Saxon Math – good old fashioned math books. We homeschooled, and these are great.

    26th March 2014 at 1:45 pm

  8. harry p. says:

    for fucks sake, my head is about to explode

    common core is to education as obamacare is to healthcare

    26th March 2014 at 1:45 pm

  9. Persnickety says:

    Reason #8744 why we homeschool.

    All this destruction of US schools is being imposed by people with an agenda – seemingly to neuter and destroy the US by rendering the vast majority of its people too stupid to accomplish tasks that were normal for 8th graders in the 19th Century.

    Just say no.

    26th March 2014 at 1:48 pm

  10. TeresaE says:

    At least once a week my third grader – whom fully understands the underlying math – is in tears because she can’t “figure out how to show it right!”

    They are having multiple “theories” thrown at them on a daily basis, today we subtract with “friendly” numbers, tomorrow we only use carrying (the old-fashioned way), the next day we are on to “blow up” numbers.

    Instead of spending the time focusing on the basic addition/multiplication tables, the kids are now being shown 50 different methods while mastering NOTHING.

    Which is the point.

    They are teaching hatred of math (and learning).

    Math is NOT HARD.

    It is logical, and simple, and has only been made difficult by over-educated morons that are still trying to produce scientists and engineers out of the dna of ditch diggers and waiters.

    Segregation is not always a bad thing. In education the ability to segregate people by talent, IQ and skill level, then teach to the similar group, is part of the reason our country created so many talented, smart, inventive, citizens.

    This mess called Common Core couldn’t have done that. And won’t.

    Unless WE take it upon ourselves to be our kids’ first teachers, then their is no hope.

    26th March 2014 at 1:55 pm

  11. harry p. says:

    billy,
    i feel for you man, my boy is 2 1/2 and there is no fucking way I am going to unteach and reteach him math, history etc… i don’t have the time. they can keep the money, just don’t brainwash my kid. public schools are such a horrible product i am willing to pay extra to keep it away from those i love.

    have you and your wife realistically considered home-schooling and is it an option in your state?

    my wife was a college track athlete and became a elementary school teacher, hated it after 5 years and stays home now. i am mechanical engineer who took atleast 2 years of each of the following, german, spanish, latin and japanese and has a good grasp of history. i work on cars, firearms and strength train. we have a great background to homeschool, not many things are not covered by at least one of us.
    there is no thing in existence i hold more dear than my son and there is no fucking way i would put him through this crock of shit. no hyperbole, public (govt) schools are child abuse as far as i am concerned. the only institution i despise more than the public school system is the federal reserve.

    26th March 2014 at 2:02 pm

  12. ss says:

    There’s a word for all of this everyone here already understands – it’s called “indoctrination”. Make the masses clueless, uninformed, drunk, high, addicted to sports and entertainment and finally make as many as possible financially dependent on government and those in power end up with a majority of slaves they can endlessly manipulate, control, and exploit to enrich themselves.

    The best slaves are those who don’t know they’re slaves.

    26th March 2014 at 2:55 pm

  13. TPC says:

    I frequently use this method of math, the difference is that I was taught the simple and easily repeated way. The other came after years of doing math in my head as a shortcut.

    These idiots are wanting to teach the shortcut, but without giving them the tools necessary to actually explain what they are doing.

    The reason they are struggling with this shit is that you can’t explain the new math without couching it the language of the “old” style. Sheer idiocy.

    26th March 2014 at 5:29 pm

  14. Hollow man says:

    Job security for older folk. Death for Americas future.

    26th March 2014 at 6:02 pm

  15. NickelthroweR says:

    Greetings,

    I agree with Hollow Man as I have nothing to fear from the up and coming generation. Any parent that is foolish enough to send their child to a public school deserves the lifetime of failure that it will bring.

    26th March 2014 at 6:31 pm

  16. COMMON CORE REQUIRES FRIENDLY ANSWERS TO MATH PROBLEMS | Mind Control Rebellion COMMON CORE REQUIRES FRIENDLY ANSWERS TO MATH PROBLEMS | Awareness Is Key… says:

    […] Administrator If your 2nd grader can add and subtract the way you learned to add and subtract, they will be told […]

    26th March 2014 at 6:38 pm

  17. llpoh says:

    Damn, I do not get it.

    When I was helping my kids, I taught them to count and subtract using fingers and toes. Shit, I used that system myself for years. And I am a math wizard. These fucks take something that is basic and fuck it up beyond all recognition.

    I guess the old fashioned system of stacking the bigger number over the little number, and teaching the kids to carry the ten, etc., is just to damn hard.

    What I suspect is that the moron teachers are too stupid to learn to subtract, so they have to try to figure out a way to bypass that little problem.

    26th March 2014 at 6:45 pm

  18. Zarathustra says:

    Millennial college students certainly have their priorities straight:

    watch?feature=player_embedded&v=yKaYnHlpD9M

    26th March 2014 at 7:16 pm

  19. Stephanie says:

    Isn’t this essentially counting up? While waitressing that is how I was taught by much older servers. 530-270 or 270+30=300 then 530-300=230 and then add 30+230= 260. I had to learn this system to calculate my money, seeing as I had to do this in my head to be quick and if I was wrong I lost my own money.

    26th March 2014 at 9:28 pm

  20. gilberts says:

    All you need to know on this subject is http://www.johntaylorgatto.com. He was a 30 year NY public school teacher who quit in disgust and wrote about it in The Underground History of American Education(available free on his site!). He also wrote this:

    John Taylor Gatto
    Six Lesson Schoolteacher

    “Call me Mr. Gatto, please. Twenty-six years ago, having nothing better to do, I tried my hand at schoolteaching. My license certifies me as an instructor of English language and literature, but that isn’t what I do at all. What I teach is school, and I win awards doing it.”

    “Teaching means many different things, but six lessons are common to schoolteaching from Harlem to Hollywood. You pay for these lessons in more ways than you can imagine, so you might as well know what they are.”

    The first lesson I teach is: “Stay in the class where you belong.” I don’t know who decides that my kids belong there but that’s not my business. The children are numbered so that if any get away they can be returned to the right class. Over the years the variety of ways children are numbered has increased dramatically, until it is hard to see the human being under the burden of the numbers each carries. Numbering children is a big and very profitable business, though what the business is designed to accomplish is elusive.

    In any case, again, that’s not my business. My job is to make the kids like it – being locked in together, I mean – or at the minimum, endure it. If things go well, the kids can’t imagine themselves anywhere else; they envy and fear the better classes and have contempt for the dumber classes. So the class mostly keeps itself in good marching order. That’s the real lesson of any rigged competition like school. You come to know your place.

    “….Individuality is a curse to all systems of classification, a contradiction of class theory….”

    Nevertheless, in spite of the overall blueprint, I make an effort to urge children to higher levels of test success, promising eventual transfer from the lower-level class as a reward. I insinuate that the day will come when an employer will hire them on the basis of test scores, even though my own experience is that employers are (rightly) indifferent to such things. I never lie outright, but I’ve come to see that truth and [school]teaching are incompatible.

    “….surrender your will to a predestined chain of command….”

    The lesson of numbered classes is that there is no way out of your class except by magic. Until that happens you must stay where you are put.

    The second lesson I teach kids is to turn on and off like a light switch. I demand that they become totally involved in my lessons, jumping up and down in their seats with anticipation, competing vigorously with each other for my favor. But when the bell rings I insist that they drop the work at once and proceed quickly to the next work station. Nothing important is ever finished in my class, nor in any other class I know of.

    “….Rights may be granted or withheld, by authority, without appeal….”

    The lesson of bells is that no work is worth finishing, so why care too deeply about anything? Bells are the secret logic of schooltime; their argument is inexorable; bells destroy past and future, converting every interval into a sameness, as an abstract map makes every living mountain and river the same even though they are not. Bells inoculate each undertaking with indifference.

    The third lesson I teach you is to surrender your will to a predestined chain of command. Rights may be granted or withheld, by authority, without appeal. As a schoolteacher I intervene in many personal decisions, issuing a Pass for those I deem legitimate, or initiating a disciplinary confrontation for behavior that threatens my control. My judgments come thick and fast, because individuality is trying constantly to assert itself in my classroom. Individuality is a curse to all systems of classification, a contradiction of class theory.

    Here are some common ways it shows up: children sneak away for a private moment in the toilet on the pretext of moving their bowels; they trick me out of a private instant in the hallway on the grounds that they need water. Sometimes free will appears right in front of me in children angry, depressed or exhilarated by things outside my ken. Rights in such things cannot exist for schoolteachers; only privileges, which can be withdrawn, exist.

    The fourth lesson I teach is that only I determine what curriculum you will study. (Rather, I enforce decisions transmitted by the people who pay me). This power lets me separate good kids from bad kids instantly. Good kids do the tasks I appoint with a minimum of conflict and a decent show of enthusiasm. Of the millions of things of value to learn, I decide what few we have time for. The choices are mine. Curiosity has no important place in my work, only conformity.

    “….We’ve built a way of life that depends on people doing what they are told because they don’t know any other way….”

    Bad kids fight against this, of course, trying openly or covertly to make decisions for themselves about what they will learn. How can we allow that and survive as schoolteachers? Fortunately there are procedures to break the will of those who resist.

    This is another way I teach the lesson of dependency. Good people wait for a teacher to tell them what to do. This is the most important lesson of all, that we must wait for other people, better trained than ourselves, to make the meanings of our lives. It is no exaggeration to say that our entire economy depends upon this lesson being learned. Think of what would fall apart if kids weren’t trained in the dependency lesson: The social-service businesses could hardly survive, including the fast-growing counseling industry; commercial entertainment of all sorts, along with television, would wither if people remembered how to make their own fun; the food services, restaurants and prepared-food warehouses would shrink if people returned to making their own meals rather than depending on strangers to cook for them. Much of modern law, medicine, and engineering would go too – the clothing business as well – unless a guaranteed supply of helpless people poured out of our schools each year. We’ve built a way of life that depends on people doing what they are told because they don’t know any other way. For God’s sake, let’s not rock that boat!

    In lesson five I teach that your self-respect should depend on an observer’s measure of your worth. My kids are constantly evaluated and judged. A monthly report, impressive in its precision, is sent into students’ homes to spread approval or to mark exactly – down to a single percentage point – how dissatisfied with their children parents should be. Although some people might be surprised how little time or reflection goes into making up these records, the cumulative weight of the objective – seeming documents establishes a profile of defect which compels a child to arrive at a certain decisions about himself and his future based on the casual judgment of strangers.

    Self-evaluation – the staple of every major philosophical system that ever appeared on the planet – is never a factor in these things. The lesson of report cards, grades, and tests is that children should not trust themselves or their parents, but must rely on the evaluation of certified officials. People need to be told what they are worth.

    In lesson six I teach children that they are being watched. I keep each student under constant surveillance and so do my colleagues. There are no private spaces for children; there is no private time. Class change lasts 300 seconds to keep promiscuous fraternization at low levels. Students are encouraged to tattle on each other, even to tattle on their parents. Of course I encourage parents to file their own child’s waywardness, too.

    I assign “homework” so that this surveillance extends into the household, where students might otherwise use the time to learn something unauthorized, perhaps from a father or mother, or by apprenticing to some wiser person in the neighborhood.

    The lesson of constant surveillance is that no one can be trusted, that privacy is not legitimate. Surveillance is an ancient urgency among certain influential thinkers; it was a central prescription set down by Calvin in the Institutes, by Plato in the Republic, by Hobbes, by Comte, by Francis Bacon. All these childless men discovered the same thing: Children must be closely watched if you want to keep a society under central control.

    “….Without a fully active role in community life you cannot develop into a complete human being. Aristotle taught that. Surely he was right; look around you or look in the mirror: that is the demonstration….”

    It is the great triumph of schooling that among even the best of my fellow teachers, and among even the best parents, there is only a small number who can imagine a different way to do things. Yet only a very few lifetimes ago things were different in the United States: originality and variety were common currency; our freedom from regimentation made us the miracle of the world; social class boundaries were relatively easy to cross; our citizenry was marvelously confident, inventive, and able to do many things independently, to think for themselves. We were something, all by ourselves, as individuals.

    It only takes about 50 contact hours to transmit basic literacy and math skills well enough that kids can be self-teachers from then on. The cry for “basic skills” practice is a smokescreen behind which schools pre-empt the time of children for twelve years and teach them the six lessons I’ve just taught you.

    We’ve had a society increasingly under central control in the United States since just before the Civil War: the lives we lead, the clothes we wear, the food we eat, and the green highway signs we drive by from coast to coast are the products of this central control. So, too, I think, are the epidemics of drugs, suicide, divorce, violence, cruelty, and the hardening of class into caste in the U.S., products of the dehumanization of our lives, the lessening of individual and family importance that central control imposes.

    Without a fully active role in community life you cannot develop into a complete human being. Aristotle taught that. Surely he was right; look around you or look in the mirror: that is the demonstration.

    School is an essential support system for a vision of social engineering that condemns most people to be subordinate stones in a pyramid that narrows to a control point as it ascends. “School” is an artifice which makes such a pyramidal social order seem inevitable (although such a premise is a fundamental betrayal of the American Revolution). In colonial days and through the period of the early Republic we had no schools to speak of. And yet the promise of democracy was beginning to be realized. We turned our backs on this promise by bringing to life the ancient dream of Egypt: compulsory training in subordination for everybody. Compulsory schooling was the secret Plato reluctantly transmitted in the Republic when he laid down the plans for total state control of human life.

    The current debate about whether we should have a national curriculum is phony; we already have one, locked up in the six lessons I’ve told you about and a few more I’ve spared you. This curriculum produces moral and intellectual paralysis, and no curriculum of content will be sufficient to reverse its bad effects. What is under discussion is a great irrelevancy.

    None of this is inevitable, you know. None of it is impregnable to change. We do have a choice in how we bring up young people; there is no right way. There is no “international competition” that compels our existence, difficult as it is to even think about in the face of a constant media barrage of myth to the contrary. In every important material respect our nation is self-sufficient. If we gained a non-material philosophy that found meaning where it is genuinely located – in families, friends, the passage of seasons, in nature, in simple ceremonies and rituals, in curiosity, generosity, compassion, and service to others, in a decent independence and privacy – then we would be truly self-sufficient.

    How did these awful places, these “schools”, come about? As we know them, they are a product of the two “Red Scares” of 1848 and 1919, when powerful interests feared a revolution among our industrial poor, and partly they are the result of the revulsion with which old-line families regarded the waves of Celtic, Slavic, and Latin immigration – and the Catholic religion – after 1845. And certainly a third contributing cause can be found in the revulsion with which these same families regarded the free movement of Africans through the society after the Civil War.

    Look again at the six lessons of school. This is training for permanent underclasses, people who are to be deprived forever of finding the center of their own special genius. And it is training shaken loose from its original logic: to regulate the poor. Since the 1920s the growth of the well-articulated school bureaucracy, and the less visible growth of a horde of industries that profit from schooling exactly as it is, have enlarged schooling’s original grasp to seize the sons and daughters of the middle class.

    Is it any wonder Socrates was outraged at the accusation that he took money to teach? Even then, philosophers saw clearly the inevitable direction the professionalization of teaching would take, pre-empting the teaching function that belongs to all in a healthy community; belongs, indeed, most clearly to yourself, since nobody else cares as much about your destiny. Professional teaching tends to another serious error. It makes things that are inherently easy to learn, like reading, writing, and arithmetic, difficult – by insisting they be taught by pedagogical procedures.

    With lessons like the ones I teach day after day, is it any wonder we have the national crisis we face today? Young people indifferent to the adult world and to the future; indifferent to almost everything except the diversion of toys and violence? Rich or poor, schoolchildren cannot concentrate on anything for very long. They have a poor sense of time past and to come; they are mistrustful of intimacy (like the children of divorce they really are); they hate solitude, are cruel, materialistic, dependent, passive, violent, timid in the face of the unexpected, addicted to distraction.

    All the peripheral tendencies of childhood are magnified to a grotesque extent by schooling, whose hidden curriculum prevents effective personality development. Indeed, without exploiting the fearfulness, selfishness, and inexperience of children our schools could not survive at all, nor could I as a certified schoolteacher.

    “….Our kids have no time left to grow up fully human, and only thin-soil wastelands to do it in….”

    Critical thinking is a term we hear frequently these days as a form of training which will herald a new day in mass schooling. It certainly will, if it ever happens. No common school that actually dared teach the use of dialectic, heuristic, and other tools of free minds could last a year without being torn to pieces.

    Institutional schoolteachers are destructive to children’s development. Nobody survives the Six-Lesson Curriculum unscathed, not even the instructors. The method is deeply and profoundly anti-educational. No tinkering will fix it. In one of the great ironies of human affairs, the massive rethinking that schools require would cost so much less than we are spending now that it is not likely to happen. First and foremost, the business I am in is a jobs project and a contract-letting agency. We cannot afford to save money, not even to help children.

    At the pass we’ve come to historically, and after 26 years of teaching, I must conclude that one of the only alternatives on the horizon for most families is to teach their own children at home. Small, de-institutionalized schools are another. Some form of free-market system for public schooling is the likeliest place to look for answers. But the near impossibility of these things for the shattered families of the poor, and for too many on the fringes of the economic middle class, foretell that the disaster of Six-Lesson Schools is likely to continue.

    After an adult lifetime spent in teaching school I believe the method of schooling is the only real content it has. Don’t be fooled into thinking that good curricula or good equipment or good teachers are the critical determinants of your son and daughter’s schooltime. All the pathologies we’ve considered come about in large measure because the lessons of school prevent children from keeping important appointments with themselves and their families, to learn lessons in self-motivation, perseverance, self-reliance, courage, dignity and love – and, of course, lessons in service to others, which are among the key lessons of home life.

    Thirty years ago these things could still be learned in the time left after school. But television has eaten most of that time, and a combination of television and the stresses peculiar to two-income or single-parent families have swallowed up most of what used to be family time. Our kids have no time left to grow up fully human, and only thin-soil wastelands to do it in.

    A future is rushing down upon our culture which will insist that all of us learn the wisdom of non-material experience; this future will demand, as the price of survival, that we follow a pace of natural life economical in material cost. These lessons cannot be learned in schools as they are. School is like starting life with a 12-year jail sentence in which bad habits are the only curriculum truly learned. I teach school and win awards doing it. I should know.

    John Taylor Gatto (born December 15, 1935) is an American retired school teacher of 29 years and 8 months experience in the classroom and author of several books on education. He is an activist critical of compulsory schooling, of the perceived divide between the teen years and adulthood, and of what he characterizes as the hegemonic nature of discourse on education and the education professions. He is the author of “Dumbing Us Down” and “The Underground History of American Education”.

    26th March 2014 at 10:09 pm

  21. Llpoh says:

    If these little shits cannot subtract three digit numbers ending in 0, no matter what you do, they are screwed.

    For instance, instead of 530 less 260, what if the question is 533 less 267.

    How many of the little bastards will be able to figure out to add 33 to 267 to get three hundred? Or add 33 to the 233 result of that?

    That is harder than subtracting 260 from 530.

    We are doomed.

    26th March 2014 at 10:48 pm

  22. El Gordo says:

    Dr. Pangloss said monks used to spend their lives figuring out math problems such as the square root of pi. What a waste, he said, give them a calculator…

    26th March 2014 at 11:52 pm

  23. El Gordo says:

    Two thumb down for suggesting that we’re lucky to have calculators, some can’t understand anything more subtle than a 2X4

    27th March 2014 at 8:54 am

  24. COMMON CORE REQUIRES FRIENDLY ANSWERS TO MATH PROBLEMS | Disaster Response Team of America says:

    […] from The Burning Platform: […]

    27th March 2014 at 11:20 am

  25. MuckAbout says:

    If I were young again – say of courting age and marriage minded – in this sad day and age, it would have to be understood and agreed upon that any offspring from the union would NEVER see the front door of any primary or secondary public (and most private) schools.

    Homeschooling would be mandatory from 18 months up – especially multiple language tutoring at a very early age. Math? Memorize multiplication tables thru 12X12. Long division? The old fashioned way. Cursive writing? Absolutely. Above all, by the age of 6-7, start teaching critical thinking and how to evaluate and solve problems from different points of view (essentially ROI – “I” being the amount of work involved and then costs).

    Also include – day by day – knowledge that the kids will need to know to live a life; skills of survival in the modern (and maybe not so modern world). That includes cooking for both sexes. MAKE SURE NO ONE gets isolated by home schooling. Take every opportunity to mix other kids with your own. If yours are taught right and the others are taught wrong, yours will notice it and tell you about it in no uncertain terms.. Might even make socializing a bit difficult for your kids because there will be areas of conflict in fact, manners and even content of relationships.

    The “Three R’s” and “H” (history) and “C” (civics) and, of course when the time is right (earlier than you think!) a little “S” (sex) needs to be mixed in.

    Nothing new here. Just common sense and ways that work.

    Smart Phones and Computers? Sadly, a required subject these days and be ready for all the pain and agony that goes along with them. “Social Sites”? Minimize it to the very least you can. Always assume the little bounders know twice as much as you think they do because a smart, inquiring mind will use the tools at hand to maximize knowledge no matter what you do.

    To those having kids or those who have them, lots of luck. You’ll need it.

    MA

    27th March 2014 at 1:43 pm

  26. gerryg says:

    Mainstream schools only cater for left brain learners i.e.. incremental pocessing. A right brain learner would simply write the answer.

    27th March 2014 at 2:06 pm

  27. Spinolator says:

    Holy fucking shit Batman! Better bust out the Batlube for the kids…I completely agree with Teresa. My wife was a math (HS algebra) teacher for two yrs. She quit bc it was too stressful. It always seemed to me that the idea they pushed on the teachers was to have every student to be proficient in it. I remember helping her grade and some kids were just much better at it than others. Some struggled with yrs of bad neglect and confusion. Trying to teach the ones who were up to par with the one that were behind was always difficult but she couldn’t separate them. Well, fuck… no matter how hard I try I’ll never be an astrophysicist, or at least not a good one, bc that’s not where my ablity is. The idea that we can have every single kid be good in math is completely retarded. God forbid a kid finds out he’s not good at something, that would damage his/her self esteem. After all, who needs character…

    27th March 2014 at 8:06 pm

  28. Father's Rant on Common Core goes Viral - Educational Technology Tips says:

    […] http://www.theburningplatform.com/2014/03/26/common-core-requires-friendly-answers-to-math-problems/ […]

    8th April 2014 at 3:54 pm

  29. Father's Rant on Common Core goes Viral - Educational Technology Tips says:

    […] http://www.theburningplatform.com/2014/03/26/common-core-requires-friendly-answers-to-math-problems/ […]

    8th April 2014 at 3:54 pm

Leave a comment

You can add images to your comment by clicking here.