The people at Everyday Math have submitted comments on the draft math standards called "Common Core Standards" that were recently released for public comment. You may find them here. It may be me, but it appears that the people at Everyday Math are openly stating that "teaching by telling" is a bad thing. I seem to recall that they denied the charge that their program was dictating to teachers how to teach. Just for the record, I have objections with the CCSSI "Common Core standards" as well and am preparing comments with some others. My objectons are not the same as Everyday Math's, however.
Here are Everyday Math's comments:
On March 10, 2010 the National Governors Association, the Council of Chief State School Officers, Achieve, and other organizations issued draft Common Core Standards (CCS) for K-12 mathematics and reading. We at CEMSE have examined the mathematics standards for Grades K-6 and have found them to be seriously flawed.
If we are to have national standards, then those standards should be designed to prepare students for life in the 21st century. We believe that the proposed CCS standards for mathematics in Grades K-6 would promote a back-to-basics curriculum that ignores the profound changes that have taken place in the last 50 years. CCS’s largely paper-and-pencil approach to mathematics in K-6 is obsolete.
We believe CCS’s K-6 mathematics standards have seven serious shortcomings:
1.An overemphasis on paper-and-pencil arithmetic.
2.Inadequate exposure to concepts of data and probability.
3.A disregard of existing and emerging technology.
4.An outmoded approach to geometry.
5.A neglect of applications of mathematics.
6.An interpretation of “focus” that ignores how people learn.
7.An overemphasis on teaching by telling.
We urge the CCS Initiative to revise its 3/10/10 draft standards to address arithmetic, data, probability, technology, geometry, applications, and pedagogy in more forward-looking and research-grounded ways. Elementary school children need a broader approach to arithmetic, a useful grounding in basic data and probability, realistic and interesting applications, access to technology, a geometry curriculum based on research and enabled by technology, and a pedagogy that fits how they actually learn.