Common Core Math - An Engineering Dad's Nightmare

I use my GPS every day going to and from work, but that's to get a 'rolling ETA,' and to look out for traffic problems I need to avoid. (Thank you Google Navigation, for being able to see congestion that is beyond my field of view.) There are often times when I look at the route it's chosen, and the alternate, say "Google, you're an idiot" and take the third option, and when it recalculates from my deviating off the 'flight plan' it shows that I just saved ten minutes by picking a route it didn't bother to check before.

I also like the 'birds-eye view' when driving, helps me to see when cutting down a side street will get me around a congested area and when a path just leads into a dead-end subdivision.

But you're right, everyone should know, by their early 20's, how to read a map, use a compass, find North without a compass, both during day and night, and know how to use a slide rule for multiplication and division⁽¹⁾.

Notes:

1. A basic slide rule is two identical Log scales you slide against each other. Remembering that the antilog of the sums of the logs of two numbers is the same as multiplying the numbers together, slide rules become very easy to use⁽²⁾.
2. I learned this in college, when testing the out put of this graph paper printer program to see if the log paper it generated was accurate. I tore the sheet in two then folded the margin of one half-sheet under, placing the sheets together in an offset to see if the 6 and 3 would line up if I lined up the 2 and 1. at that moment, I had the flash of insight that let me understand the relationship between log tables and slide rules.
   

And have log tables for situations requiring higher accuracy.

...and to survive in the wild; adders use log tables to multiply....

"Memorization is dehumanizing..."?

How did you first learn how to talk? How do people learn foreign languages?

For that matter what is CC math other than another form of memorization? Let's face it, if you don't know or understand the rules of a subject how are you to become proficient in it?

As another commenter noted earlier, math is the one art or science where there is only one correct answer; a"close" answer just won't cut it.

When looking at the word problems approach the task as you would a logic (as in logic a branch of philosophy) problem. All the answers are based on the assumption that there are only two possibilities true or false. There are no grey areas in formal logic. But you have experience of real life and know that a third answer can exist in most situations. That is what baffles you. Take the statements "A bus is a vehicle", "A bus has four wheels" and the statement "you are looking at a vehicle with four wheels" In the absence of any other information formal logic would lead you to conclude that you are looking at a bus. The fact that cars, trucks and skateboards also have four wheels is not information included in the statements so no answer can exist that includes these as possible things that you could be looking at. That may help you to solve your daughter's maths problems. Whether it helps your daughter to solve real life problems is less clear.

"Sure, in a year or two these wonderful, politically correct concepts can be taught, wiping put the two or three years "wasted" learning the old fashioned way."

Odd, I don't call it 'wasting the years learning the old fashioned way,' I call it 'building the scaffolding needed to construct the later knowledge.' You don't need the scaffolding after the construction is complete, but without the scaffolding, the construction would have been slower and harder.

Ironically, the lander was programmed to land in an area that would have destroyed it; if it weren't for Aldrin piloting to a better landing area, they may have as well missed the Moon!

Armstrong not Aldrin took over the controls manually for the landing after the computer error.

Aldrin the guy who punch out that hippie who claimed he didn't land on the moon.

Which was just as, if not as good, it was entertaining.

Going by that presentation, this is really bad news. However, we haven't seen the teaching that leads up to it; whether it would help matters is hard to say. After all, some critic might have chosen the stupidest examples.

Don't kid yourself.

First, these examples are typical.

Second, many teachers can't comprehend it either and just lean on their work books.

I'm not trying (at this point, anyway) to argue much one way or the other. Maybe those examples were typical, though I hope not.

Back in the days of the "new math" there was opposition, too, but the reforms then were more sensible than seems to be the case here. In a sense, my cohort got the best of both approaches, and we had a strong math contingent during high school and college.

I'm sure there are those who master this at first glance.

I'm not one.

In many cases, I know what they are supposedly getting at, but that doesn't necessarily mean that they are doing it well.

math is a pattern, as far as memorizing.... the same can be said about common core. Only in my opinion, more abstract

My professor I had in college told me, he will never grade on a bell curve in his classes, because you either know it or you don't. Math is a universal language

I did experience an exception to that, I had taken one of his courses that I felt I was failing, and was. I talked to him about dropping out, he told me not to, even though I told him, I have not receive one grade that showed I could or should pass.

And I told him, that I'd much rather get a 'W" (withdrawal) on my record (Transcripts) and retake the class, than a 'F'

He told me, that the final answer was not my problem, All the proofs showed that I understand the 'pattern' of solving the problem.

My biggest problem was that I would have missed a sign change in my proof. That's all, which was correct.

For some reason, I believe common core is responsible of the change coming.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=jitw0tZsEm0

When was the last time you minded your kids and got them to "think" how advantageous it was for them to pick up their toys and put them where they could be found most easily?

At certain stages of development memorization trups "thinking".

For the math I learned it was not enough to have the correct result.

It was always required to show the path that leads to the results. One reason is that math as it is logical you need to show your logic and not just the result. The second reason is more profane because kids that looked at their neighbours work could probably grab the result but could not proof how they got there.

.

I have seen some of the examples and the reason they make you cry is that there is easier ways to solve it. The examples I have seen almost defeat logic.

Only I know that some kids learn it that way. I never could understand how somebody cannot understand math. And I found the best teachers where those that had difficulties them selves and established ways to get to the result in a different way. This new math looks like this.

We tend to think that math is binary, you either got the logic or you dont. But in fact there is multiple levels of logic. And for school we have to realise this and make room for the multiple levels. Call 4 + 8 = 12 a linear logic and 4 + 8 is 6 in 10 and 2 over the a cluster logic.

Looks like we have the cluster logic approach now.

Wait ten years and the fashion will change.

I guess our kids will be looking the same way at the school material of their kids like we do now!

It is no longer good enough to show your work or your logic. You HAVE to do it the common core way, or it's wrong - even if you show your work and arrive at the correct answer. It's stifling creative thinking. Here's an example. My daughter had a problem last year on a test - she showed all of her work, and got the correct answer, but forgot to write down the generic formula that she used to solve the problem (which was the correct one, by the way). Instead of writing the formula with the variables, she just plugged the numbers in to the formula. She got the ENTIRE problem marked wrong - no partial credit, nothing.

So what is this teaching the kids? She knew how to solve it, and solved it in the method they wanted. She showed her work as well, but because she omitted the generic formula, it's wrong? WTF?

Fashions of teaching do change, but not always for the better. There will always be new "fads" that are thought to make it easier for children to learn. As with many of the contributors, you can call me old school. It works for me.

The most inane fad in basic elementary school math I recall were "rods". I was fortunate enough to miss that one as it was introduced in earlier grades which I had already completed. Well, some kids did master "rods"(even behind their backs), but without them, they could not do simple arithmetic.

Here we seem to have another "new math". I'll stick to what works for me.

I agree that teaching methods change, sometimes for the better, and sometimes not. I think too often that people associate change with something good. Change means different, not necessarily better.

Common Core is a progressive move to gain more power and control thru federal mandates. Period.

The closer the decisions are made to the local level the better off all would be, even to the point that home schooling should allowed wherever the family thinks it is the best approach for their family, without interference from a federal bureaucracy.

I just heard a state government official in talking about allowing guns in schools on NPR, the governor of the state wants the individual school districts to decide, this official stated "well, we can't trust district school boards to make decisions about the 2nd amendment to the U.S. constitution."

The 2nd amendment is mine dude. It was put there to protect me from government officials like you, if a local school board cannot make decisions on our own guaranteed rights, then we certainly cannot allow them to decide how to educate other peoples' children, we will tell them how to do that.

It is just more conditioning for "Cradle to the Grave dependence on the Federal Government". And we all know how that is going to turn out.

When my daughter was in grade school, it was new math. I see it's gotten worse.

The problem back then was that they were trying to feed kids math concepts before they had mastered the mechanics of manipulating numbers. It's like trying to expect a new driver to understand thermodynamics and mechanical engineering * before learning to drive the car.

*(Actually, today, add electronics and computer programming)

My older daughter learned the "new" math. Trust me, it's gotten much worse. It's not just about having standards, or holding teachers accountable. If that is all this was about, I might understand, but this is a complete redo on methodology. It seems to me that there were a lot of pointy headed academics who didn't think our kids were smart enough to learn the old fashioned way.

The other big mistake is switching kids to common core who didn't learn this way when they were younger. It's like speaking one language all of your life and then being taught in a different one when you're 16.

I'm reasonably sure that once my daughter is in college, none of her professors are going to care about common core, let alone understand it.

Here we go again. My granddaughter is taught "common core', my children went thru "modern math" in the sixties before they threw it out. My older brother said there is nothing modern about and gave me a math book printed in the thirties essentially the same as "modern math of the sixties".

Today's schools fail miserably at teaching kids how to read (teaching, period) so it's understandable that they have difficulty mastering word problems.

I went through this with our 4th(Now 6th) grader, who can read well enough.

Oh, and the kid excelled (as in awards) at math until they threw the common core noose around his neck. Now he's just getting by.

Sure you do know how to help your daughter. She needs to know how to get to the answer. If how you learned gets her there do it. Isn't that the idea of teaching to have them understand how to get to the answer. All the rest that they want is up to the teacher. Just be sure to back her up. You will find teacher can be pretty demanding up until the parent gets involved.

ozzb, one of my college instructors, one who was;

• never prepared for his classes,
• didn't even understand the fundamentals himself
• spend most of his time copying out of his notebook he used from the previous years and writing it on the chalk board, only to get it wrong and realizing it 30 seconds before the class was dismissed.
• etc....

was one of my best teachers, Why you might ask? Because he taught me after I'm out of college, I'm on my own.

He taught you to be prepared.

To know the fundamentals

And to double check your work.

Because he didn't do it.

Everyone in the class laughed and ridiculed him behind his back. They strove to not have it being done to them. He may have well been you best teacher.

He wasn't my best teacher, but I did rank him pretty high, iIn a non-direct way. (so by default).

Anyways, after I graduated, I was selected as an alumni to evaluate the program years later. He was still teaching,

Other's alumni who had him, or had people they managed requested to the selected alumni where they worked to crucify him.

I actually stood up for him, and was the only one, using that same premise, or in this case defense of him.

Even taking his classes in college, the other students were bitching about him, they signed petitions and the like to remove him, and they spent so much time bitching and complaining, sure I signed it, I think I was in the library, (studying strengths of materials that he taught) when I signed it that petition. (only because I thought I could have gotten more out of the class with a more competent instructor.

I thought it was bad then, You look at the college students now, and listen to them bitch on how tough they have it, poor li'l fella's.

Sorry, but that just isn't going to work. First, it's been drilled into her head that she has to do it the way she is being taught in school or she won't get credit for it. She knows it's the right answer, but they need to show their work in the common core method to get it marked correct. There is no wiggle room on this, and I can talk to the teacher until I'm blue in the face and it isn't going to matter. Getting to the answer just isn't god enough anymore. THAT is one of the main sources of my frustration. Remember, these teachers aren't teaching common core because they want to or believe in it. They are being forced to teach this way. Most of them don't like it, and many of them don't understand it very well.

You cannot apply logic to the Common Core teaching edict.

The right answer is no longer required. It is better to have used flawed reasoning (and to be able to cite that reasoning) to arrive at an answer that is "close" than it is to use old math to get an answer that is right.

Then little Billy or little Cindy can feel good about themselves.

This is a little off topic,.... but in the same path as in different learning or techniques methods in teaching,.... there are others.

there are savants, but I thought it was interesting, that a person who is will versed in sorovan (abacus) can quite easily perform better than an accountant with a calculator.

Which in conclusion, to each their own.

And there are others, seems though some are fads because it never really took off. I recall this one when my nephew was in junior high they introduced this method.

I always felt what good is the ability to do this, when finding trying to find an application to apply this.

During my recent visit to USA I have come across coaching institute for Maths- KUMON Math & Reading Centers. I do not know details of this institute. You can check in the web site www.kumon.com

OK, here is a new example. My daughter just sent this to me. She got a point taken off in Algebra for a problem that she did correctly because she didn't include a parentheses in her formula. Here is the image. First, the teacher is inconsistent. If she needed a parentheses for the second half of the formula, she should have also needed one for the first half. Second, and more importantly, I don't think she needed the parentheses at all. I think it is correct as written. Note that she showed her work and got the correct answer. This is total BS in my opinion.

I agree about her 8s. I've never noticed it before, but I had a hard time figuring out that it was actually an 8 and not the letter E. That aside, I just don't get this. If she had written the problem the way you did, I agree that the parentheses would be needed, but she did NOT write it that way. Also, this is high school, so there are no parent teacher conferences. We have an open house at the beginning of the year, but you get no time to talk to the teacher, and it's so early you really don't have anything material to talk about yet. After the open house, there really is no communication with the teacher at all, unless you send an email (most of them tell you to send emails as opposed to calling). Unfortunately, this is our second go around with this teacher (my older daughter had her also, but fortunately was old enough to escape the CC nightmare). We know from experience that there is very little to be gained by reaching out with this particular teacher.

Also, for the record, I would like to mention that my locality has an excellent school district, and I am very happy with the overall education my children are getting. Common core has been thrust upon them, and I think they are trying to do the best they can. Of course there are some teachers I like more than others, but this is the case everywhere.

There are teachers and then there are TEACHERS. I suspect that these days, most are just in it for the paycheck and the inordinate amount of time they do not have to be "at work". Who wouldn't like a couple of month vacation with pay every year?

As for what or how they teach, they likely have little or no say in the matter. If they don't try to make the best of what they are instructed to do, refer to my first paragraph.

"Who wouldn't like a couple of month vacation with pay every year?"

I'm sure the teachers would like that. They normally don't get paid for Summer Break unless they're teaching summer classes.

Not sure of the U.S. payment scheme, but look at the salaries teachers are paid, and take that over the full year. Okay, instead of getting paid for 12 months you only get paid for 10, but the $ value is the same (here teachers are salaried, not paid by the hour). Teachers here are in negotiations now, I will have to keep my eyes open for what they get paid, but, compared to "others" who work the full 12 months, less their vacation of course(minimum of 2 weeks after one year of employment and the "statutory" holidays), I think you will see that when calculated as an "hourly" wage like most get, it's a pretty good rate of pay.

Now, for teachers who put in the extra effort, I say welcome to it, you are shaping the lives of everyone's kids, for those teachers who just want to have a job, I don't know what to say.

Shows how out of tough I am with the educational system, not realizing that algebra was a high school subject, not grade school.

But if she's in high school, then she needs to FIX HER BLANKETY-BLEEP 8'S, she's had enough time to practice them, and learning to write numbers quickly and legibly is vital in the modern world. A misspelled word can lead to confusion, a mis-written number can send Apollo 11 off to a lonely grave in deep space instead of landing on the Moon. Again, I know the problems of poor penmanship firsthand: my cursive, when written at what would be considered a 'typical' writing speed, is bad enough to get me mistaken for a medical doctor writing out prescriptions. My printed lower-case letters also leave much to be desired when not writing slowly, so all my hand-written notes are written in block capitals. By the way, I also do caligraphy, and that looks gorgeous. The difference is measured in characters per minute versus minutes per character.

So, let her know that her math was right, even if the teacher is an idiot. Also remind her not to call the teacher an idiot while outside the house, she just needs to keep her head down and learn her algebra, not antagonize Ms. Crabapple and end up on the Special High Intensity Training list.

Since when does x²+2x-8 equal (x-4)(x+2)?

Yeah, you're right about that. It seems the teacher was so fixated on the parentheses that she missed what was really wrong with this, and I was so fixated on the teacher's markup that i missed it too. Or maybe she was trying to show her, but didn't communicate it properly.

it should have read (3X+12)/((x+4)(x-2)) - (4X-8)/((x+4)(x-2)) = 20-X/(x+4)(x-2).

I guess we're lucky she only got the one point off here.

"I guess we're lucky she only got the one point off here."

Yeah - I was scratching my head on that as well... the parentheses mark-up was incorrect but the problem was done incorrectly and not caught.

I'm curious, when we did Algebra, we had to also do 'Checks' and take our solution and work it back to the original problem. I don't see evidence of that here. Do they not make them do the Check Process anymore?

Apparently they don't have to do it anymore. If they did, she surely would have caught her mistake (at least I hope she would have).

Yeah, she got lucky it was only one point off, her own penmanship screwed her up and led her down the wrong path.

Cancel my earlier suggestion of the consoling ice cream, and the comments about the teacher being an idiot. Let this be a lesson to your little girl that she needs to write more clearly when running through the equations. The 8's are bad, and distracting, but her slanted divisor line caused her to read -(4-8) as -4-8.

For this being a 'don't come to us to do your homework for you' site, sometimes it's really fun and rewarding to help people figure out the problems with their homework.

"...the teacher being an idiot"

True, the teacher may not be an idiot for the reason you stated....but the teacher was not helpful in how they marked the problem. He/She should have taken the time to annotate the mistake. Not necessarily explain it...but give the student an idea where to look.

As graded, the teacher mislead the student and the parent as to the nature of the mistake. Not good instruction in my book.

When the teacher marks a correct problem as wrong, the teacher is an idiot.

When the teacher is unclear in what her correction means, she is simply a poor teacher.

Both are 'less than perfect' situations, but in the latter, the teacher is still doing her job correctly, if not accurately.

Well, (x-4)(x+2) = x(x+2) -4(x+2) = x²+2x-4x-8 = x²-2x-8

Wait, you're right, that *IS* wrong. It should be (x+4)(x-2), shouldn't it?

(x+4)(x-2) = x(x-2) +4(x-2) = x²-2x+4x-8 = x²+2x-8

Guess she *DID* deserve that point off after all. I'd better go back and look at the original problem.

The original problem is (x+4) and (x-2)

but for a final answer I keep getting (x+20) on the top.

for the top I get (3x+12)-(4x-8) which equals 3x+12-4x+8=-x+20

The parentheses are needed because there is a negative there.

Drew K

"The parentheses are needed because there is a negative there."

Not if written legibly. Parenthesis are used for grouping a set together, and the division bar does the same thing. A negative in line with the division bar beans the result of the division is multiplied by -1, A negative above the division bar is part of the dividend, a negative below the division bar is part of the divisor.

If she has written clearly, the negative would have been inline with the division bar, and when redoing the problem to double-check, that is where it would be placed.

If she had written out the step where a/c - b/c becomes (a-b)/c, she would likely have caught her mistake, but my doing that stem in her head, she got tripped up by her own handwritting skills.

Wait, WAS that the correct answer?

3/(x-2) - 4/(x+4) = (3(x+4))/((x-2)(x+4)) - (4(x-2))/((x-2)(x+4) =

(3x+12)/((x-2)(x+4)) - (4x-8)/((x-2)(x+4)) = (3x+12-4x+8)/((x-2)(x+4)) =

(-x+20)/((x-2)(x+4)) = (-x+20)/(x²+4x-2x-8) = (-x+20)/(x²+2x-8)

Could someone double-check my math for me; I think I did it right, but my answer doesn't match hers.

I agree with that. Yours came in while I was composing mine.

I don't get this at all.

I agree with multiplying fraction 1 by (x + 4)/(x + 4) and fraction 2 by (x - 2)/(x - 2), to get the same denominator for each, (x - 2)*(x + 4).

Hard to tell whether the numerator in the 2nd line says 3x + 12 or 3x - 12. It should be 3(x + 4) = 3x + 12, but to get something like - (x - 4) in the 3rd line it seems to be 3x - 12. But that gives (3x - 12) - (4x - 8) = - x - 4, not - (x - 4). (3x + 12) - (4x - 8) = - x + 20.

So the answer is (20 - x)/[(x - 2)*(x + 4)]. The numerator could be written as (- x + 20), or - (x - 20) etc.

What is the - 1/(x + 2) with the ring round it?

The denominator is correctly multiplied out in line 2 to get x² + 2x - 8 but then factorised wrongly to get (x - 4)*(x + 2). And there was no need to multiply it out and then factor it again anyway.

I agree that if all the teacher can find wrong with it is what she's marked in red she doesn't know what she's doing.

I suppose everybody has moved on from this now, but I just looked at it again and realise where the circled - 1/(x + 2) comes from.

In line 3, if the numerator was - (x - 4) and if the denominator was (x - 4)*(x + 2), the (x - 4) cancels, as indicated by the sloping line, giving - 1/(x + 2). Of course, neither of those ifs is correct. Presumably the teacher thought that was the right answer. She has a problem!

"Presumably the teacher thought that was the right answer. She has a problem!"

Or she saw the one mistake, and saw that the rest of the work was correct if the mistake were the actual result, and gave the girl credit for knowing the proper steps.

It's hard to tell if she was saying "you ran your formulas correctly, but you made one mistake here," or "You forgot to enclose this in parenthesis and I stopped checking the problem after this."

Poor communication on the teacher's part. If the teacher sent a post to CR4 with that level of info, AP#1-4 would tear her apart with biting sarcasm and ridicule.

But there isn't just one mistake.

If line 2 is 3x - 12, line 3 should have 3x - 12 - (4x - 8) = (3 - 4)x - 12 + 8 = - x - 4 = - (x + 4).

If line 2 is 3x + 12, line 3 should have 3x + 12 - (4x - 8) = (3 - 4)x + 12 + 8 = - x + 20 = - (x - 20).

Then there's the wrong factoring. If she (that's daughter, not teacher) hadn't multiplied the brackets out there'd be no need to factor it back and the mistake wouldn't have happened.

The only thing teacher's picked up isn't really a mistake at all. As somebody else said, it's OK to write it like that without brackets. The handwriting doesn't help, but it's clear to all of us here what it means.

As a father I would step back and look at the whole picture. We are in an age that is progressing so fast that us older folk can't keep up. Our kids need to learn new methods to cope with new things and the best we can do is to provide a sound home base from which they can learn new things without being distracted.

I think our job is to equip them with social knowledge to mix and survive amongst their peers during and after leaving school, and let the schools teach the 'technicalities' and the 'science'.

Back in my days at school we had the British Imperial system to learn by rote to become proficient enough in the 3 R's to make your was in life when leaving school at the age of 15, unless a good grounding in the 3 R's at the age of 11 got you into grammar school, then you left at 16, or went to a university.

I left at 15 and continued my technical studies at evening classes. We were soon introduced to the MKS system (that had started to replace the CGS system) and when asking mum and dad to help, they said they couldn't because they had never been taught these foreign measurements it at school.

Dad said "...Son, that's why we send you to school - to learn things we know nothing about..we just feed you, and cloth you, and provide a safe and secure home for you so that you have nothing else to do except concentrate on learning without having to worry about earning a living whilst you do it..".

So 8320, by all means help your daughter, but to learn the 'new' ways by adapting your known, tried and trusted ways to help make sense of the new system. If you can make sense of it then so can you daughter. She has already shown she knows what she is doing. Teachers do get things wrong - so don't worry too much.

Having said that, I have a long lasting lingering memory that p....d me off about a 'mistake' a teacher made. The only maths here was to calculate some simple but awkward angles for an isometric technical drawing of a scaffold stand (of all things!). It took me about three goes to get it right, where rubbing out and redrawing made a bit of a mess.

I got less marks than my classmate who drew the angle wrong. I asked the teacher why and he said although my classmate drew the component parts wrong and got the drawing 'wrong' he actually wrote the degrees in the angle correctly, and he got full points for awarded for neatness, whereas I lost points for a 'scruffy' drawing. Don't worry - 96% is an excellent mark.

He did say some time afterwards that a 'wrong' drawing should not be able to get more marks than a correct one, especially in a technical drawing exam, and that the marking system was being revised to avoid this happening in the future - but it was too late to do anything about my marks.

I complained to my dad. He was a Clerk-of-Works on prestige building projects and he knew all about drawings and how to read them. He asked if a scaffold stand built in exact accordance with the 'wrong' drawing would collapse of fail when they hung somebody? I had to admit that they would realise there was an error as soon as they came to cut the parts and assemble them.

"That's half my job - checking drawings - mistakes happen so no real harm done if spotted in time..!" said dad. "The architect takes ideas out of the sky and puts them on drawings and the builder takes them off the drawing and puts them on the ground - and it's my job to check the drawings and everything to make sure the buildings go up correctly and don't fall down...."

The point here for 8320, in the overall scheme of things, what have you learned from all this, that can be turned to good effect for you daughter.

Columbus made it to the New World with an astrolabe and no clock. The USA sent men to the moon and back with slide rules good to 4 decimal points. Today we have calculators in cell phones and can't get the proper change. Maybe we should put lead back in the paint and plumbing.

You're an engineer and parent but that only counts a one relatively insignificant voice. Get the backing of your company's HR department and the local Industry Trades Federation. Then find a medium difficulty but relatively common engineering problem. Send it to the School Board/School Principal/Head of Maths Department/Teacher and ask them all to solve it using only common core maths in front of witnesses who will time their attempts. Then solve the problem with conventional maths, timed in front of witnesses. (If you choose a problem where your solution is slower than theirs you're not playing this game the way it is supposed to be played) Applaud their efforts but point out that every day American industry needs to solve the type of problems you have set, and American industry is what ultimately pays their salary checks. Suggest they are trying to teach logic/problem solving and maths as a single subject but would achieve much better results by splitting the curriculum into two interrelated topics. Maths and logic are different disciplines and require the application of a different mind set.

Personally I cannot recall ever hearing of Common Core maths - until I read your post. I have gone to some the links to get some idea of the problem.

It seems to me that formal structure and teaching has been given to a basic technique I have developed myself since leaving school for much of my working life in order to make sense and progress in the small 'engineering' world I live in.

I've been retired for ages now, but during work in my own small company, I have never had the benefit of knowing anybody with superior knowledge able to help with technical matters in my field of speciality. I have had to do it alone.

One thing sticks out from Common Core advice is about getting students to talk amongst themselves, about methods, about alternative solution, about ideas - which is in direct opposition to the way we were taught maths back in the 50's.

We were told listen and learn - do as you are told - in silence - no talking in class - (with punishment if you did talk during lessons - write 100 lines "I must not talk in class...").

No advice to draw a picture of the problem in those days. In my case I find it difficult to solve problems unless I can visualise it in picture form.

If I can make sense of it then maybe CC has got something going for it.

If it is the new way, then today's children have to grasp if it is on the first rungs of new ladders to the top. Putting children on ladders we are familiar with might not help in the long run.

I've got to share this conversation between my daughter's common core math teacher and another math teacher. She overheard them talking in class about an upcoming assignment. This just illustrates how these teachers are not prepared to teach the common core curriculum. If they don't understand it, what chance do the kids and parents like me have? This is priceless. I'll refer to my daughter's teacher as Mrs. L.

Here's the transcript:

Mrs. L: "We're in trouble"

Other Teacher: "Why?"

Mrs. L: "The lessons coming up...I don't understand them at all."

Other Teacher: "Me either"

Mrs. L: "I don't get how they do this"

The conversation went on like this as they tried to figure it out. Imagine how the kids feel when they hear a conversation like this going on, especially if they are struggling to comprehend it themselves. My daughter is a high school junior, and this is Honors Algebra. She's always done well in math, and new concepts have come fairly easy - until this year, that is. Combination of a bad teacher (who is a horrible communicator) and the common core curriculum.

Common Core (CC) math is just another political stunt designed to weaken or break the parent-child relationship. My sister went through the same problem with "New Math" - neither of my parents could help her with basic math (arithmetic operations), nor could I, since we learned the "old way".

Ironically she wound up getting her Masters in math (probably knows more than I do) and taught secondary math until taking early retirement because of, you guessed it, CC (and the parents' attitudes when Johnnie or Janie didn't get their A's).

I recall in elementary school (5th Grade). They were going to have everyone work at their own pace. It was up to the each individual Student on setting their own pace.

The 'teacher' would give maybe a 5 minute instruction in the beginning of class. And if you needed more, you would go up in front and ask the teacher, and he'll give individual instruction. What actually happened, the teacher left the room for a smoke.

Well, the girls did fine, and maybe the more studious boys also. But the majority of boys, not so much.

being 10 years old?? myself, I never should have passed because I accomplished about 30% of the work that the girls did.

Fortunately, after about 3 years, that fad died out (Work at you own pace for a 10 year old) .... and probably replaced with something else.

It may not have hurt me that bad, because, as a freshman, I was in the advance math classes.

Oh, and the teacher I had in 5th grade.... I believe he died at a rather young age of all things,.... of lung cancer.

When I said 5 minutes, I was generous. The introduction usually amounted to no more that "Its time for Math, Are there any questions from yesterdays lesson?"

If none, then he had a date with a cancer stick.

On a another note in-line with your post.

I had a instructor in college, that loved to see how alert in details you were.

One was he had an instructions on the top of the tests. And at times, he'd plant in the instructions that all you had to do was sign your name, and not answer any questions.

So, if you signed your name, you were finished. Anyone that continued with the exam and finished the question, no matter if they answer all correctly, failed.

It taught me, to read directions..... unfortunately, at times, I still fail on that.

I appreciate your comment about reading the question correctly, but in exam conditions it takes a bit of courage to deliberately return a blank page with just your name on it. Albeit on occasions in my case, that seemed like the net contribution I would be able make having read all the questions.

In context of reading the question correctly, I recall a question set by our English lesson teacher.

"Answer in not less than two lines and not more than 5 lines what you learned today about when you should use capital letters".

I knew quite a lot already, so to some extent I had learned nothing that day, but not wanting to be unkind to Sir by saying 'nothing', where putting thoughts into a few meaningful written words was a problem for me (and still is) -and having run out of time - in panic I repeatedly and hurriedly wrote "noT a loT. noT a loT. noT a loT. noT a loT "...and I reached line 3 when the bell went.

Next day Sir called me over - expecting a telling-off - but instead a bit of praise - because he said the question asked my opinion, and although not what he had meant to ask, what I said had to be correct, where the punctuation of 'noT' being completely wrong, confirmed it!. So full marks.

I should say, they were not exams as much as 'pop quizzes'. That we had often.

But yes, turning in a quiz with just your name on it the feeling was questionable.

I always liked watching the kids who 'got it' giggle at the ones who were furiously scribbling away at the paper and I really liked watching the kids that picked up on what was going on and were desperately erasing!

Drew K

or after working on the paper for2-3 minutes, the look on their faces when you walk up and turn in your paper and leave.

I had a Math Professor that was a stickler for reading through the entire problem before starting it. He was notorious for putting in a group of rather expansive problems and buried deep within one or more of them was a nulling operation such as 'times zero.'

I remember a word problem once, typically they were multiple paragraphs with multiple potential problems to solve but the requirement was to find the root cause of the narrative and solve that, ignoring the ancillary stuff... Anyway, deep within one of the problems, there was a statement that you ended up going for lunch and the problem was solved in your absence, so no further effort was required.

He taught me more in how he structured his problems than the actual fundamentals of the math - something that is lost with common core, by the way.

I had a very influential math teacher also in college... He said a number of things that stuck with me.

One of which is, "Math, you either know it, or you don't"

We had a teacher like that at evening classes, although more of a mentor. He just held our hands through the formulas we learned during electrical and mechanical lessons. In his case he liked to make complex indices equate to 0, making the whole equation in the brackets =1.

Another trick was to write out an equation and give the answer. Then say the all the numbers were correct but one or more signs were wrong - and we had to find out which and why.

He liked to show how maths had to be used with care - how easy it was to become detached from reality. Like the tension and resistance of a catenary cable that only sagged by 3 inches in 5 miles - to save money on the number and height of pylons. And the supply voltage to reduce current and volt drop and distress across insulators. And for homework, come back next week with the name of a cable supplier....I couldn't find any back in 1959.

...any suggestions today?

Comcast? ;-)