Posts
This 4th grader is afterschooled at home, is advanced beyond 4th grade TERC Investigations, and has learned to "work the system." As such, he memorized the easy stuff a long time ago.
Notice how he finesses the question on the Pearson worksheet.
In case you can't read the handwriting, it says
"I just knew but if I didn't i'd use 9 x 3 + 9 x 3 = 54."
He knows he's being clever.
26 comments:
I like that kid. With a few more years, he'll have deadpan down cold. And that's a skill with wide applicability.
yes, well, we now have writing in math and science
the teachers attended a two-day professional workshop sponsored by the district last summer on the subject of writing in math and science, so now they can teach writing in math and science
two days is all it takes
two days and you're a writing instructor
I'm going to have to take issue with this, needless to say.
The funny thing is, C's teacher told the kids, on the first day of school, that he used to be an ELA teacher and he can teach writing better than anyone, and he's going to!
The guy hasn't given a single writing assignment this year to date, and I'm going to guess we may not be seeing a whole lot of writing assignments coming home from math.
btw, my own cohort of parents is like the Class of '68, or has come to be
at least, that's the way it feels sometimes
The sad part on the homework shown is that a true TERC baby wont know 6x9 and if they didnt, they would try the combination of
6+6+6 +6+6+6 +6+6+6.
and they'd be drawing pictures.
Sadly I am sure the teacher didn't get the response as it was written and delivered.
Actually, the child did not explain how the alternate method helped find the product. I'll bet you could write almost anything and get a "Great". Of course, what they wanted to see was
6 X 10 - 6
because multiplying by 10 and subtracting 6 shows that you have deep understanding. (Where are my hip boots?)
Forget the fact that this is fourth grade and that the question proves that they have extremely low expectations.
Oh gosh, my 5th grader just completed a section in her new NSF Think Math program that covered the many ways to solve problems like 27 x 29. It was an eye-opener for me to see how many patterns and charts they used. They seemed to have spent much of last month teaching this.
Meanwhile, my kid has already mastered three-digit multiplication through Kumon.
I seriously doubt that this classroom instruction has helped her "deep conceptual understanding” of multiplication. In fact, I’m certain it has not.
Steveh, I'm not so sure about that. TERC philosophy is "anything goes" as long as it's different than what your mommy learned in school.
In our school they're big on having "personal strategies."
Any combo that gets the right answer apparently demonstrates "understanding."
This kid was smart to say "but if I didn't..."
Makes me laugh.
I'm impressed that he wrote in cursive. I thought that was a lost art.
If he truly wanted to do it right he would have drawn 9 groups of 6 bunnies or cars, or something like that, since that will be closer to what the state tests want.
And yes, his cursive is much better than my middle-schooler's. I'm very jealous.
This reminds me: we are supposed to be remediating handwriting this year, too.
Of course, now that we're going to be doing countless hours of Extra Help (Math A, Earth Science) .... we probably won't get to it.
Extra Help appears to be the core high school curriculum here in Irvingtonland.
I think that "alternate strategies" can sometimes be useful shortcuts, provide that the student has a very solid understanding of the basics first.
An analogy - I've lived in Atlanta for 15 years. Atlanta is famous for street names that change suddenly, and repetitive use of certain street names. If I need to give directions to someone, I always consider what they know first. If they are a newcomer or otherwise unfamiliar to the city, I use the standard algorithm - the interstate, even if it means they are going to hit traffic or go a little bit out of their way. I know that they are not going to get lost. If someone already knows the city, an alternative strategy may be helpful - take this short cut, but not between 4 and 7 pm, turn left where the middle school used to be, if there is a train on the tracks, cut down three blocks so you can cross underneath... These strategies are useful to someone who already has internalized the city map, but create chaos for someone who is just learning their way around. The same applies to math - once someone has a solid understanding of the fundamentals, those "shortcuts" or alternative strategies will become apparent - if they are truly useful methods. Teaching them first, or at the same time as standard algorithms leaves kids hopelessly lost.
How do they know that their invented strategies work? In the above example, the kid already knew the answer, but what about this situation.
3/4 + 1/5
In a Terc classroom how would this error be addressed?
(3 + 1)/(4 + 5)
I agree with Molly, but it's a matter of degree.
The problem with TERC is that it's ALL alternative strategies, and no drill.
For those not familiar with TERC, it's page after page of pictures and regroupings and reflective thinking and lots of writing. Very little math.
This kid was ready to move on long ago.
Ultimately, simple strategies for multiplication should only be in place temporarily, until the kid's got it memorized. That's how it's done in Singapore, the top-scoring country in the world.
With TERC, they beat to death the "understanding" aspect of math to the point of nauseau.
"I'm impressed that he wrote in cursive. I thought that was a lost art."
I've seen sixth graders who couldn't read cursive, let alone write in cursive. Unreal!
What is also becoming a lost art is the use of the conditional as illustrated by a phrase like: "I just knew but if I didn't i'd use 9 x 3 + 9 x 3 = 54."
Apparently, saying "...but if I hadn't known I would have used..." is rapidly becoming an alien form like the subjunctive. I see this inability to say "if I had..." in all likely and unlikely places. OJ's book title is a case in point.
What is also becoming a lost art is the use of the conditional as illustrated by a phrase like: "I just knew but if I didn't i'd use 9 x 3 + 9 x 3 = 54."
Okay but part of the problem with reform math is that it's too demanding of a little kid to think mathematically and write prose all at that same time.
"How do they know that their invented strategies work? - That's why they need a solid foundation first. I know which shortcuts will work in my hometown, but I also know that they won't work if I move to Boston. The problem with teaching shortcuts or invented strategies before kids understand fundamentals is that they have no basis for determining when a shortcut is valid and when it isn't.
"NSF Think Math program"
Created by Prof. Harold Hill? I knew that the Think Method was useful for more things than marching bands.
"I knew that the Think Method was useful for more things than marching bands."
Good one. I didn't catch it. Prof. Hill is the patron saint of constructivism.
"I'm impressed that he wrote in cursive. I thought that was a lost art."
My sixth grade son writes very nicely in cursive (because we, not the school, require it), but his printing is poor. I believe we talked about this sort of thing long ago. I think cursive forces him to slow down.
In my son's case, he has OT issues. One symptom of certain OT issues is that it's easier to write in cursive than to print. That's why he writes well in cursive. But even cursive has been a grind for him.
Every year since Grade 1 I've asked about OT, and every year they've said "no no he's just fine."
Finally, this year, in fourth grade, I pounded harder. I finally got the OT to observe him, and, lo and behold, she noticed he was gripping the pencil wrong.
For four years? And nobody noticed? This kid has been underachieving, not wanting to write, because his hand was always tired.
What WILL our school district get right?
In an extreme constructivist environment, it seems that a school district gets light on the details.
Yes that was a sarcastic understatement.
I'm exasperated.
OMG Doug, now I’m going to have “76 Trombones” running through my head whenever Think Math comes up.
I came across a negative review by Rick Pender of a Cincinnati stage production.
The Music Man . . . tells a clever story of a traveling salesman who bamboozles a tiny Iowa town into thinking its kids can become a razzle-dazzle marching band if he sells them instruments and uniforms. They'll learn to play by the "think system": Think about the tune, and you'll be able to play.
[snip]
The producers were hoodwinked by the "think system." They put hardworking (but wholly inexperienced) talent onstage and asked them to think hard about the vibrant show audiences loved on Broadway. Thinking, however, isn't the same as performing.
Wow! Art imitating life.
Yes, there's Trouble in River City alright...
I personally loved the Grecian Urn performance.
I may have to go dig that up again.
Anon,
I understand and sympathize with your exasperation. The flippant attitude I've observed in the constructivist environment is down-right obnoxious.
I am glad your pleas were finally heard. Now, will your son receive services right away?
"Now, will your son receive services right away?"
Nope. Because he doesn't have an IEP, they are under no obligation to pay for an eval. I have to pay for that myself.
If we were in another state, I could maybe get him a gifted IEP, but our state doesn't require IEP's for gifted education, and my district doesn't offer them.
Funny that research shows that OT issues are common among gifted boys.
I could possibly get him services under Section 504 instead of special ed, but I still have to pay for the eval myself or get my insurance to pay for it. Section 504 is for medical, not special ed.
I'll be checking with my insurance this week. It's my understanding that if I get the eval myself, I should be able to get OT services for him from my school.
It's never simple.
Post a Comment