• Due to ongoing issues caused by Search, it has been temporarily disabled
  • Please excuse the mess, we're moving the furniture and restructuring the forum categories
  • You may need to edit your signatures.

    When we moved to Xenfora some of the signature options didn't come over. In the old software signatures were limited by a character limit, on Xenfora there are more options and there is a character number and number of lines limit. I've set maximum number of lines to 4 and unlimited characters.

Gates Foundation admits Common Core Mistake. What now?

This video describes the main common core math hoax:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r40ZRax6lxg

The hoax is that Gates' committee had to find some difference between the present math pedagogy and the as-yet unwritten common core approach.

We taught that 10 is the number one unit larger than nine. We did not introduce the concept of "tens" vs. "ones" in second grade for Christ's sake. The only two mathematicians on the validation committee voted no on this and produce protest videos now on how developmentally inappropriate it is.

The education degrees on the committee were the ones who came up with this. None of them had degrees in math.

Now textbooks have been written, computer software programs produced, and teachers trained in this idiotic developmentally inappropriate approach to counting numbers.

The Asians use an abacus. It is the same thing as counting on your fingers. And they are kicking our ass in mathematics.

Now that Bill Gates and the federal government have abandoned you and left you with these texts, computer curricula and so forth - what are you going to do? Billions upon billions have been spent putting this in place and the ship is adrift.

One of the effects of this bad pedagogy is to stress the kids out. They don't understand it so it causes all kinds of physical manifestations of stress.

It is a malicious, manipulative lie to say kids do not "understand" what 5 + 8 is until they learn base 10 math formally. This lie was designed to justify making some arbitrary change to math pedagogy. To be seen as "doing something". So they made this up, thinking that most people are going to be too stupid to understand it is a con job. I do not believe a single member of the math committee actually buys their own propaganda about how this means you "understand" better.

The states adopting Common Core, the parents and teachers, had no idea this was coming. The educational bureaucracies accepted grant money with strings attached. ESSA removed those strings.

You do not have to teach math this way in order to get federal money now. You are not compelled to adopt textbooks that teach it this way. You do not have to mark students wrong when they say 13 but do not see it as one group of tens and another group of ones.

So are you going to keep teaching math this way?
 
Last edited:
Isn't math all about memorising?

Yes, exactly.

That is why memorizing that ten is one unit of tens and one unit of ones is developmentally inappropriate when you are learning to count.

You can count to 100 just fine without being forced to memorize anything about "tens" vs. "ones".

The bizarre thing about the math standards is that in the beginning they force this developmentally inappropriate memorization upon students but at the upper end they have actually lowered standards. Algebra II for high school diploma.

That is not college ready. It is remedial math ready. 2% of college students who enroll in STEM programs but have to take exactly this kind of remedial math fail to obtain their degree.

So it is a 98% college not-ready standard. Massachusetts requires Algebra beginning in 8th grade. States that want quality education programs need to wake up to the fact they have been abandoned.

A big tornado flew through the country called Common Core and it then vanished, leaving a wake behind it of bewildered states. Nobody has to adhere to it now. No money is contingent on it. The money power behind it has quit.

So what now?
 
That is why memorizing that ten is one unit of tens and one unit of ones is developmentally inappropriate when you are learning to count.

It's also incorrect. One unit of tens and one unit of ones would be eleven.

This aspect of common core seems natural and useful to me.
 
It's also incorrect. One unit of tens and one unit of ones would be eleven.

Yes, happily corrected.

This aspect of common core seems natural and useful to me.

and you are just saying that to be purposefully argumentative. I have enough experience watching how you post to understand this about you.

Generally, what you do is invent some kind of "contra" comment. You are probably female. Conversation is more like ping pong, no logical or rational thought need be attached.

You don't believe it to be natural nor do you think it useful. Were that the case, you would have been able to explain why. You can't. But go ahead and try.

Just as you said before that this somehow makes you "understand" better. You can't offer any proof of that and it is logically absurd.

11 is the number one unit past ten. There is nothing else needing to be understood about it when learning to count. These are the names of the numbers. The first time you see the name "11" you do not need to also memorize that it is one unit of tens and one unit of ones in order to either count that far or correctly add numbers to 11.
 
The hoax is that Gates' committee had to find some difference between the present math pedagogy and the as-yet unwritten common core approach.

You keep saying "as yet unwritten." Again, the standards were finalized by June of 2010. You're now saying the "common core approach" to math was not yet written at that time, but the documents show otherwise.
 
Isn't math all about memorising? "Why does 12 x 4 = 48" can only lead to the answer "because that's the way it is."

'Course, this isn't the same for other subjects, but math is pretty much the king of "you have to know this", outside of languages.

I don't think it is.

Yes, knowing multiplication tables makes a lot of it easier but you can get around it.

Anecdote alert: I went to a grammar school (i.e. state-run and selective via the 11-plus test), some of my friends were far ahead of me in maths ability - I was in the top stream. For our mock exams after the first term of the lower-sixth (age 17, now called year 12) we had been taught 80% of the 2-year syllabus, so we were given a past paper and given 80% of the time and told to answer 80% of the exam, which, unsurprisingly was then normalised.

One guy in my year got 88% (unnormalised) on that paper - in other words he derived the approach to some of the syllabus that we hadn't yet been taught whilst sitting the mock exam. He certainly wasn't memorizing it.
 
This is such a great point. I'm very glad to be reading such reasoned arguments for and again, especially by folk who are on the front lines.

Lol. These melodramatic teacher-worship lines may make you feel better but we are getting our asses kicked by people who we call third-world.

I see your kid won an award. You must be so proud. We have all kinds of ribbons, medals, and awards at our public school too. Everyone gets a ribbon.

They score approximately 18th percentile on the PISA scale. How is your kid doing on an actual standardized international test?

You just admitted you don't know how your son is doing math. We find that irresponsible. A grown adult who doesn't know how his own child does elementary math.

We have come to understand that the public school parents are the ones who care the least about their kids and that is why you get all this defensiveness and attack on parents who put so much time into it.

You are lazy, and don't care. That is why you don't know. You turned your back on your kids. It isn't good enough to use school as your babysitting service.

You defend common core math without knowing how it works. It is just a defense mechanism. It must be better because I don't want the shame and guilt I deserve for paying no attention to how my kid is educated.

But now the impetus to common core has quit. The requirement for adherence has been removed with the ESSA.

That would leave you defending whatever your state does next for the same reason: you can't be bothered to know, but your self-esteem requires that whatever is happening to your child must be the best.
 
You keep saying "as yet unwritten." Again, the standards were finalized by June of 2010. You're now saying the "common core approach" to math was not yet written at that time, but the documents show otherwise.

lol. All you know is that "something" was written in 2010. Obviously you have never seen it.

Like every other proponent of it. That is why you can't understand. Because you've not seen it.

Tell me I am wrong. :)
 
11 is the number one unit past ten. There is nothing else needing to be understood about it when learning to count. These are the names of the numbers. The first time you see the name "11" you do not need to also memorize that it is one unit of tens and one unit of ones in order to either count that far or correctly add numbers to 11.

This part I disagree with. What you seem to be advocating is a name, a label. What we really want to teach is a concept.

Feynman had a great little bit on the difference.

Now, I can't really say what I'm describing should be taught to kids - that's a question for educators. But I certainly see a meaningful difference and prefer the concept-centered approach over the rote.

I assume everyone follows the path I did - at some point, rote no longer works. Maybe it's algebra when the formulas start to stack up. Maybe it's trig, or physics. Somewhere in there memorization needs to have more support - the "why" behind the curtain. You want to be able to derive these things, see what makes them tick.

ETA: Here's a quote from part of the Feynman thing...
“You can know the name of a bird in all the languages of the world, but when you're finished, you'll know absolutely nothing whatever about the bird... So let's look at the bird and see what it's doing -- that's what counts.”
 
Last edited:
Yeah but calculators have existed for a long time, so is the problem that math is too hard or that kids nowadays just don't have the patience for it because of their upbringing?

They do lack patience, but they also lack a sense of when to use which tool. Many in the HS where I work don't have the multiplication table memorized, or have not absorbed such truisms that -1 x 10=-10. So they drag out the calculator early on, and want to turn all fractions and irrational numbers into decimals. Being told "I'm looking for a fraction answer" helps. The kids who went to middle school in Mexico are a little bit ahead.

It's not that the calculator is bad, just that over-reliance on it IMO keeps students from mastering basic "number sense" that would help them across the board.
 
He sat back for a moment, thought about it, and provided a wrong answer. I told him to try again, and he said, "Oh, I forgot to add the four back in," then he provided the correct answer. I don't know what "four" he needed, but whatever the process they've taught him, he gets it.
Making mistakes and comprehending why is powerful. He may have gotten this from Common Core, or he could just be one of those kids with better number sense. He was already thinking about numbers when he undertook subtracting one 4-digit number from another.

Quite a few people avoid thinking about numbers if they can.
 
This part I disagree with. What you seem to be advocating is a name, a label. What we really want to teach is a concept.

Twaddle. I hear this kind of excuse-making ******** from underperformers. I had over two decades of university teaching and it was pretty clear the kids were picking this crap up from their public school teachers.

Yeah, those Asians, all they can do is memorize. Whereas the American students - boy they learn CONCEPTS. Our bad scores on those tests don't really show how great we are at math!

Of course, our graduate schools, most especially STEM areas are being taken over by foreign students because the Universities are so dumb they think these Asians actually know what they're doing.



I prefer the concept-centered approach over the rote.

Repeating this twaddle doesn't make it true. It is a false dichotomy in the first place.

You memorize concepts too. Your brain is not prohibited from understanding a concept when it is ALSO capable of remembering 2 + 2 = 4. These are not mutually exclusive. Your position is absurd on the face of it.

Shanghai is finishing YEARS ahead of your local school district in math. They are doing calculus and you are probably doing nothing more than Algebra. They've had trig, analytical geometry, etc.

Here you are pretending these Asians, knowing the concept of the first derivative, principles of finding maxima and minima, physics - that American students know "Concepts" whereas all they are doing is memorizing. When the truth is they've had YEARS more math than their American counterparts.

It's inexcusable. For bad attitude.

That's why they are kicking our ass. We have lazy, excuse-making attitudes. A sense of entitlement. I'll just make up some ******** excuse for why they are doing so much better. That will get me admitted to college ahead of them. That will get me the job ahead of them.

It is bizarre that despite the sunset of common core - over and done with two years after it was finally rolled out in field testing - people are proponents of it still.

It's over. ESSA is one epitaph. The Gates Foundation quitting another. Key states going their own way another. Math scores falling on NAEP exams another.

States who were manipulated into Common Core with Race to the Top money are now left holding the bag. Every state can do exactly what it wants, no funding can be made contingent on a national standard.

So why do it.
 
States who were manipulated into Common Core with Race to the Top money are now left holding the bag. Every state can do exactly what it wants, no funding can be made contingent on a national standard.

So why do it.

Common Core? I don't know. But teaching concepts over rote has a real objective: a concept captures more and allows students to generate their own rules.

It's a false sense of accomplishment when we point to the kid who can multiply 6 X 5 and on up to 10 X 10, rapidly and without error if all they are doing is a kind of sing-song mimicry. What happens when 12 X 12 comes up?

* Memory is finite in a way that concepts are not. That's why you do it.
* Rote relies on an appeal to authority, concepts on discovery. That's why you do it.
* We value thinking above answer production. That's why you do it.
* Memorization stresses span and stimulus/response over engagement; concepts push for meta-cognition. That's why you do it.
* Memorization allows students to handle known problems in known contexts. Concepts allows for broader pattern-matching and innovation. That's why you do it.
* Memorization gives you regurgitated talking points. Concepts promotes analysis and depth. That's why you do it.

ETA: We might do better separating the politics from the educational objectives, since they might pull in different directions.
 
Last edited:
Making mistakes and comprehending why is powerful. He may have gotten this from Common Core, or he could just be one of those kids with better number sense.

He got the wrong answer. So you two just drone on about how wonderful that is.

I'll stick with my kid getting the right answer.

So will the Japanese, the Chinese, Hong Kong, Singapore, all the top academic countries. They're into getting the right answers, which is why they will outscore our little Johnny here by 2 standard deviations on an international math exam.

Your opinion is irrelevant to the education and job market. They want correct answers. Bridges that hold weight, estimates of materials needs working out exactly, etc.
 
T

But teaching concepts over rote has a real objective:.

You are the worst student in the class, making up stupid sophistry for why you did so badly on the exam.

Everyone else just memorized. You understood the CONCEPTS, with your "F" grade. The fallacy of false dichotomy: The choice between being a whiz at your math tables and "understanding" it. Using that argument shows what little logic skill you have. There is an extremely strong correlation between math competency and drilling. That's why you do it. Repetition becomes instinct in the same way drilling in sports does.

I know that you were a poor student. No good student has your attitude. This really has a lot to do with public school teachers being such poor examples to their students: inculcating laziness and excuse-making.

I don't know how you can do this to those kids. Send them off to the maw of international labor market competition teaching them that incorrect answers is okay, don't worry about drilling your multiplication tables, etc.
 
Last edited:
Guy who is predicting a Trump landslide makes a big deal out of red states rejecting a politicized program championed by one of the most popular liberals on the planet.

Did you sent this out as a chain email too?
 
Haven't you heard? A students work for C students.

Once we decide that rote memorization and puppetry is the goal, we are still left having to decide what exactly we want them to memorize. Bible verses anyone? Cursive handwriting? State capitals? Impressive poetry they don't understand?

Dance for us little monkeys, dance.
 
Tens place and ones place - seems like it was introduced very early in my school career. It was called regrouping. I'm not sure why this is considered inappropriate for second graders. You don't have to make a big deal out of it being base 10, though, if that's the issue.
 
Then he corrected himself.

Does this bother you?

Nope. I'd be happy for him and even retract everything I said in order to get it back on topic.

States are in all manner of difference relative to the so-called Common Core. Some had nothing to do with it. Some have partially implemented. Some fully, but in cases like Massachusetts have withdrawn.

ESSA prohibited making federal funds contingent on compliance to a standard. That is how they got over 40 states to sign up for Race to the Top money. But there is no more stimulus bill money. Bill Gates quit. There is no Common Core.

Sorry I have mixed up a couple of standards between K/1 and 2. Look at the video above, and there are more by the same Stanford Prof who was on the validation committee.

At the lower level, in just counting, you don't need to know tens vs. ones. Later on, yes. And counting by tens.
 
One hopes that in a discussion the participants have some tiny morsel of initiative, some ability to look things up for themselves.

I'm familiar with the PISA scale. The purpose of my question was to demonstrate your double standard. You are endlessly critical of Common Core but you accept PISA uncritically. Have you done anywhere near the amount of research into PISA to determine how accurate of an assessment it is or whether it's appropriate for evaluating student performance and different grade levels?
 
Yes, exactly.

That is why memorizing that ten is one unit of tens and one unit of ones is developmentally inappropriate when you are learning to count.

You can count to 100 just fine without being forced to memorize anything about "tens" vs. "ones".

That's what happens when you want nobody to fail, lowing the standards rather than creating specialised classes for those who can't follow the regular courses.
 
Then please explain how I can "understand" that 12 x 4 = 48.

12x4 = 10x4 + 2x4.

40 is defined at 4x10. That's a definition.
So 12x4 = 40 + 2x4.

2x4 is defined as 4+4.
4+4 = 4+1+1+1+1
5 is defined as 4+1
6 is defined as 5+1
7 is defined as 6+1
8 is defined as 7+1
So 2x4 = 8

So 12x4 = 40 +8
48 is defined as 40 + 8
So 12 x 4 = 48

It's easier to memorise 4x10 and 4x2 and add them together, though. But we don't need to memorise 4x12. Once you understand how multiplication works you can multiply much larger numbers easily.
It may still make sense to memorise 4x12 or higher numbers because to a point it can help with speed of calculation. A certain amount of memorisation can get you calculating (simple calculations) faster than a calculator, which I think is still a good skill to have.

So I think understanding concepts and memorisation go hand in hand.
 
So I think understanding concepts and memorisation go hand in hand.

This is obvious on the face of it, but thank you for a demonstration.

Adam you aren't asking me a coherent question. Just complaining I mentioned PISA scores. I fail to see the conclusion you are drawing. Common Core is good because I am not critical of PISA tests?

Those are the international tests we have. In domestic standardized testing we have ACT, SAT, the NAEP and some others - but there aren't a lot of international tests historically. How else am I to compare our international performance if not on international tests?

And we are getting our asses kicked, especially on a per dollar spent basis. When you spend more than anyone and come in at the back of the pack - it is a national tragedy. We were once a world leader.

So now that Common Core has been abandoned by the party principals and quality education systems, now that ESSA makes it plain nobody is subject to it...what now?
 
Those are the international tests we have. In domestic standardized testing we have ACT, SAT, the NAEP and some others - but there aren't a lot of international tests historically. How else am I to compare our international performance if not on international tests?

You are saying that it's very important that there is a common test that everybody agrees to use so that we can compare performance between different locations.

That's an interesting argument. Where have I heard that before? :)
 
12x4 = 10x4 + 2x4.

40 is defined at 4x10. That's a definition.
So 12x4 = 40 + 2x4.

2x4 is defined as 4+4.
4+4 = 4+1+1+1+1
5 is defined as 4+1
6 is defined as 5+1
7 is defined as 6+1
8 is defined as 7+1
So 2x4 = 8

So 12x4 = 40 +8
48 is defined as 40 + 8
So 12 x 4 = 48

It's easier to memorise 4x10 and 4x2 and add them together, though. But we don't need to memorise 4x12. Once you understand how multiplication works you can multiply much larger numbers easily.
It may still make sense to memorise 4x12 or higher numbers because to a point it can help with speed of calculation. A certain amount of memorisation can get you calculating (simple calculations) faster than a calculator, which I think is still a good skill to have.

So I think understanding concepts and memorisation go hand in hand.

I remember a certain amount of "relearning" math when I took up programming. The rote memorization had to be replaced with an algorithmic view instead. I can see how giving kids this perspective early would make programming much easier later on.
 
I have read the math standards, not the English standards.

Then cite the standard you want to talk about. As it was printed on the date you claim and not the 2016 website. The exact text. For your state or any one of them that stepped on board in 2010. We've used Kentucky as an example, but I am fine with any of them. Pick first grade or something. Mine will get to first grade in a couple months.

Hint: there's posts of mine dating to back then that will explain why you can't even complete this task. :)
 
Then cite the standard you want to talk about.

I want to talk about the claims you keep making that schools were trying to implement standards that hadn't been written.

So tell me what it is you claim a state was trying to do in math in 2010 that they couldn't do because they had adopted something that didn't exist?
 
You are saying that it's very important that there is a common test that everybody agrees to use so that we can compare performance between different locations.

That's an interesting argument. Where have I heard that before? :)

You have not made an argument. I can't complete it for you. That is your responsibility.

There is no common core, it never came to fruition and the force by which it was to be held together has been vacated by the Every Student Succeeds Act. The world's richest man, the energy and funding behind the movement has quit. His Foundation spent billions of dollars sustaining it in the past and what is the budget in 2016? Zero as a practical matter.

It's a bizarre propriety. The National Governor's Association and the Council of Chief State School Officers are Non-profits controlled by their membership. They hold the copyright to what is called the Common Core Standards. Gates paid them (grants) to act as vehicles for the copyright.

I don't know if Gates is still funding them, he's lost interest in the whole thing. It's why I have raised the subject. What states do remain on various versions or non-versions of the core have no driving force or money behind them. No Foundation or federal money. How do they modify it in light of falling math scores? It isn't clear who is in charge of Common Core without Bill Gates continuing to fund the NGA and CCSSO to do it, and he has announced his retirement. Nobody has to listen to whoever is in charge anyway.

The Common Core website assures us that any revisions will be based on "research and evidence". Wow, that's such a detailed assessment/revision program!
 
What now.

That's what matters to me.

Working with whatever resources we have we continue to teach children to count, add, subtract, multiply and divide, to recognize shapes and patterns, to sound out words, to begin rudimentary writing etc. They can only be taught partway using any given method or ideology. For example, using phonics and "decodables" requires lying to children as developmentally appropriate. We use materials designed to leverage phonics. If we start by bogging them down with all the exceptions in phonics we'd paralyze ourselves or go back to "Dick and Jane" whole-word torture.

If kids are fluent in counting to 20, they can use that many blocks or tiddlywinks or whatever to model addition in some scenario based on play. That's concept. Memorizing addition facts up to 20 seems doable in 2nd grade. That's all you need to transition to familiar borrowing-and-carrying algorithms which is a form of regrouping. It will make developmental sense to some kids earlier than others. Low-stakes drilling, letting kids hear, say and see the answer, fixing their own papers if we want. Reinforce the facts in several forms. Visual kids may visualize an equation; verbal kids may remember a sentence. I kind of envision digits hanging there, in the ones column, awaiting a decision: If we add 3 and 4 we are done with that column; if we add 9 and 8 we're not.

Common Core is not the first fad that's been jumped on and found to be flawed. The road to education reform is paved with good intentions. Every single approach is flawed. So don't use single approaches. Curriculum is a moving target almost by definition; course correction midstream is all but unavoidable. IMO.

Think how different it must be to teach Chinese students to write. Is there such a thing as phonics? Does the need to remember hundreds of characters contribute to the ability to memorize "math facts"? I constantly look up stuff like this and obviously love to discuss it.
 
I don't know if Gates is still funding them, he's lost interest in the whole thing.
I noticed a charter with a sign that said "A Microsoft school." It's the only place I've seen it directly trumpeted. I don't have an opinion on Bill Gates but at some point he was interested in trying out smaller pilot schools. It didn't sound like he was planning a takeover of the U.S. education system.

I reserve my wrath for John Dewey. He's responsible for the Turkish alphabet.
 
What now.

Hey! Someone showed up to the topic!

Thank you.


Working with whatever resources we have we continue to teach children to count, add, subtract, multiply and divide,

....brevity snip...

Well we mean what now with the core. Are you in a partial implemented or full implemented state, have you left or what is your state if you don't mind saying?
 
Well we mean what now with the core. Are you in a partial implemented or full implemented state, have you left or what is your state if you don't mind saying?

No one ever invested in a bunch of materials. We have sets of the old textbooks and use them as resources sometimes. There's an emphasis on mixing things up - approaching problems different ways, trying new technology, peer-on-peer interaction, games, labs (the mental meatball experiment), combined with having to stay after school if they are making a C or D. So, a fair amount of Common Core-like ideas, but the curriculum coach has always done things this way. I am a paraprofessional and have the luxury of working with small groups. If I see their work I can spot misconceptions in real time which is helpful. This is a charter school; they have their pluses and minuses but in general I think they do a pretty good job.

There was a push toward online testing but I think it was only peripherally related to Common Core. The school wanted to leverage Khan Academy and IXL Math resources which is great as long as students are using scratch paper and doing the math instead of staring at the screen and trying to do it without scratch paper. The bubble sheets get used a lot too and a machine can scan them. I except to push the "show your work" idea as students seem somewhat resistant.

These guys need procedural fluency and a lot of practice with it. They pick up on concepts, but need to develop persistence with pencil and paper. There is a hell of a lot of testing. Some is good and necessary but a single-subject test should be wrapped up in one day. Straddling 2 days, 3-6 times a year, that sure adds up.

ETA: It's a charter school. There is more flexibility. Charters have their problems but they are usually smaller, somewhat stand-alone entities where 2 or 3 people in brief conference can iron out solutions without kicking things up the food chain.
 
Last edited:
No one ever invested in a bunch of materials. We have sets of the old textbooks and use them as resources sometimes. There's an emphasis on mixing things up - approaching problems different ways, trying new technology, peer-on-peer interaction, games, labs (the mental meatball experiment), combined with having to stay after school if they are making a C or D. So, a fair amount of Common Core-like ideas, but the curriculum coach has always done things this way. I am a paraprofessional and have the luxury of working with small groups. If I see their work I can spot misconceptions in real time which is helpful. This is a charter school; they have their pluses and minuses but in general I think they do a pretty good job.

There was a push toward online testing but I think it was only peripherally related to Common Core. The school wanted to leverage Khan Academy and IXL Math resources which is great as long as students are using scratch paper and doing the math instead of staring at the screen and trying to do it without scratch paper. The bubble sheets get used a lot too and a machine can scan them. I except to push the "show your work" idea as students seem somewhat resistant.

These guys need procedural fluency and a lot of practice with it. They pick up on concepts, but need to develop persistence with pencil and paper. There is a hell of a lot of testing. Some is good and necessary but a single-subject test should be wrapped up in one day. Straddling 2 days, 3-6 times a year, that sure adds up.

ETA: It's a charter school. There is more flexibility. Charters have their problems but they are usually smaller, somewhat stand-alone entities where 2 or 3 people in brief conference can iron out solutions without kicking things up the food chain.

You managed not to answer and are participating in a thread derail with Chinese. It is not a thread on Chinese.

It sure sounds like you are in some kind of Common Core state but the implementation is ratty. It is odd to say no-one invested in a "bunch" of materials. It is a way to minimize whatever the school DID invest.

Charter schools are huge amounts of effort to create and they are subject to the School District in the end anyway. When I was an elected official we funded them and watched parents kill themselves establishing the schools and then having their kids subject to the same School Board and district Administration. All you have to do is teach your kid to read. You can't change the whole system.

It is notable you do not want to be clear about the status of your state. Maybe part of the reason is that despite being common core, you do whatever you want anyway, which makes the principle of common core laughable. Hard to say when someone is being evasive.
 
You managed not to answer and are participating in a thread derail with Chinese. It is not a thread on Chinese.
You asked "what now," my answer is to look at good practices and build on them. If I find the numbering system in another language facilitates math learning I'll ask other posters about it.

At this school there are no Common Core textbooks, and charter schools do not answer to districts.

It is notable you do not want to be clear about the status of your state. Maybe part of the reason is that despite being common core, you do whatever you want anyway, which makes the principle of common core laughable. Hard to say when someone is being evasive.
My state isn't clear on the status of my state.

The basic skills to be mastered in high school math haven't changed. There's an ongoing effort to find and use the best practices for math instruction.
 
Back
Top Bottom