What even is American Grade 1 Maths?

[dowie]

My missus just tore your post apart, but I'd get a holiday for writing what she said. She advised you to go read the maths curriculum then come back and comment. Rounding is one of the methods taught, as is tens and ones. It's about teaching a variety of methods as not all children will understand all methods and it gives them all a good base.

But this doesn't seem to be about teaching a variety of methods, this is part of common core and involves teaching the particular method they're specifying and explicitly showing the working/demonstrating the various steps of that method.

I think you've undermined your own argument there, if multiple methods were taught and/or acceptable then I suspect some of these common core problems that go viral on the net every so often wouldn't have done so.

I don't think this particular method is necessarily bad, it perhaps does approximate how some people solve this stuff in their head, though lots of this ought to be intuitive to some (smart) kids and could be incredibly frustrating/come across as very dumbed down:





That latter one is irritating as it is something that a smart kid can do in their head and/or intuitively know is the exact answer.

I think the question might have been clearer had the "estimate" not also been the exact answer (assuming that was the specified intent further up the question paper) but rather had been the actual estimate they were seemingly expecting the student to come up with, especially as the teacher is rounding to the nearest 10, not the nearest 5.

Alternatively, I wonder if the teacher has got it wrong too and the person setting the question expected them to round 28 to 30 and round 103 to 105 - don't know whether the rest of the question sheet has some instructions re: estimate by rounding numbers to the nearest 10 or nearest 5 etc.. presumably it at least specifies something about how this is an exercise along those lines.

I dunno, some of it just seems like it's going to just annoy kids who are already pretty good at maths or have other ways of working that suit them better. IMO as long as they can show their working then surely that's the key thing here.

 

[BallistixOnZ490]

That estimate crap is just annoying and any teacher that does that should definitely be sacked.

Also 'explain your answer' is not the same thing as 'show your working', and people are legitimately trying to say that maths is actually harder now?

CLOWN WORLD.

That number bonds crap like the thing in the OP is absolutely not maths and is again pseudo nonsense over just doing a normal long addition sum as I was taught at school.

'LOL BUT HOW DO YOU DO 12345 + 67890????!!!!1111PWNEDYANOOB' ...

You write one number over the other, and start adding from the ones and carrying over any remainders?

Yes I absolutely could do that with ease when I was 4. The majority of asian kids in fact could do so.

 

[Street]

But this doesn't seem to be about teaching a variety of methods, this is part of common core and involves teaching the particular method they're specifying and explicitly showing the working/demonstrating the various steps of that method.

I think you've undermined your own argument there, if multiple methods were taught and/or acceptable then I suspect some of these common core problems that go viral on the net every so often wouldn't have done so.

Like I said, go and read the maths curriculum. That question is just one example of a method children are taught. No argument, this is a fact from a KS1 maths lead. Tens and ones is also pretty effective method at getting children to grasp the concepts, hell I was taught the same way nearly 35 years ago, although we called it tens and units. These are 5 year olds we're on about here remember so keeping it simple is key, especially in schools where the kids might speak very little English and there may be up to 15 different languages in a classroom.

 

[BallistixOnZ490]

Like I said, go and read the maths curriculum. That question is just one example of a method children are taught. Tens and ones is also pretty effective method at getting children to grasp the concepts, hell I was taught the same way nearly 35 years ago, although we called it tens and units. These are 5 year olds we're on about here remember so keeping it simple is key, especially in schools where the kids might speak very little English and there may be up to 15 different languages in a classroom.

This. Is. Not. Simple. Long addition is easier and makes more sense.

And even if its only one method children are taught, it is the only method they are allowed to use to answer the questions.

5 years olds do not need maths dumbing down to whatever this is. This is a daft excuse and you are the one claiming that 5 year olds are incapable of learning normal and proper addition.

No one that I know of was taught this method. It was not used in any of the schools I went to or by anyone I knew, and we all managed fine without it. No one in this thread or any other elsewhere other than people who know teachers know anything about it either.

Stop making the excuse of needing to dumb things down for 5 year olds, this is completely unnecessary and unwarranted by any rationale.

Also why exactly was the correct answer for the second question marked incorrectly? Especially when the question didn't even specify to use estimates? How is this allowing kids to use multiple methods?

 

[BallistixOnZ490]

'Use number bonds / addends to make 10s blah blah blah'

.....

15+72=?

The second is easier for any 5 year old once they are taught the method for long addition.

Also I just realized that 'making 10s' is counter intuitive to the second rightmost digit in long sums being called a 10. How is this not going to confuse 5 year old kids if you present them with multiple methods where the same term means different things?

 

[dowie]

Like I said, go and read the maths curriculum. That question is just one example of a method children are taught. No argument, this is a fact from a KS1 maths lead. Tens and ones is also pretty effective method at getting children to grasp the concepts, hell I was taught the same way nearly 35 years ago, although we called it tens and units. These are 5 year olds we're on about here remember so keeping it simple is key, especially in schools where the kids might speak very little English and there may be up to 15 different languages in a classroom.

Nope, I think you're wrong here, Grade 1 is 6-7 year olds and common core is supposed to be a standardised way of teaching. Which US state does your missus teach in? Not all of them have adopted "common core" (because it was introduced by Obama etc../politics) - are you sure it is common core she's teaching?

http://www.corestandards.org/Math/Content/1/NBT/

http://www.corestandards.org/Math/Content/NBT/

Edit - in fact you've said KS1 - I think you're talking about what is taught in some school in the UK, not the US, your missus might well teach different methods there but that's not really relevant to common core/the "American grade 1 maths" the OP is complaining about.

 

[BallistixOnZ490]

Wait so I only just realized that US grade 1 is age 6-7, not age 5 as everyone in this thread has been claiming so far.

Are you absolutely ******* me that you think that this is the appropriate level of education that 6-7 year olds should still be at?

We would have been learning long multiplication and division by then!

 

[Thekwango]

Snip

You misunderstand me. I could not give one **** about teachers, curriculum or indeed the kids - won’t someone please think of the kids.

I’m solely here for more of your mentalist posts. In fairness they aren’t all mental, some actually have a degree of sense and sanity to them. They, however, are few and far between. And anyway, it’s the mental ones that make for the best fun.

Do continue though

 

[BallistixOnZ490]

You misunderstand me. I could not give one **** about teachers, curriculum or indeed the kids - won’t someone please think of the kids.

I’m solely here for more of your mentalist posts. In fairness they aren’t all mental, some actually have a degree of sense and sanity to them. They, however, are few and far between. And anyway, it’s the mental ones that make for the best fun.

Do continue though

You realize I am misdiagnosed imo with a personality disorder?

I am currently finally after years of chasing being assessed for Autism.

Slipping in-between sanity and insanity is an hourly struggle for me.

 

[Thekwango]

You realize I am (misdiagnosed imo) with a personality disorder?

I am currently finally after years of chasing being assessed for Autism.

Slipping in-between sanity and insanity is an hourly struggle for me.

That probably explains a lot about your posts and threads.

might I politely suggest that for your mental well being you step away from the keyboard a bit. You’re only going to receive negative and likely stressful replies given how out there some of your posts are.

Regardless, I sincerely hope you get the correct diagnosis you hope for and relevant treatment.

 

[BallistixOnZ490]

That probably explains a lot about your posts and threads.

might I politely suggest that for your mental well being you step away from the keyboard a bit. You’re only going to receive negative and likely stressful replies given how out there some of your posts are.

Regardless, I sincerely hope you get the correct diagnosis you hope for and relevant treatment.

May I remind you that I love getting negative replies and they turn me on a lot. I'll be thinking about you while I sleep tonight

 

[Angilion]

That estimate crap is just annoying and any teacher that does that should definitely be sacked.

I disagree. I think it serves a useful purpose as a check. A person following a method (especially a child learning maths) can make a mistake and get the wrong answer. Making a simplified estimate first can help them pick up on that error. e.g. if you make a simplified estimate and get a result of "about 80" and then get a result of 843, that should alert you to the fact that you've made a mistake somewhere.

Having thought about it, I do make a simplified estimate before most of the maths I do in my head. I've been doing it so long that I do it without thinking about it.

Also 'explain your answer' is not the same thing as 'show your working', and people are legitimately trying to say that maths is actually harder now?

CLOWN WORLD.

That number bonds crap like the thing in the OP is absolutely not maths and is again pseudo nonsense over just doing a normal long addition sum as I was taught at school.

'LOL BUT HOW DO YOU DO 12345 + 67890????!!!!1111PWNEDYANOOB' ...

You write one number over the other, and start adding from the ones and carrying over any remainders?

Yes I absolutely could do that with ease when I was 4. The majority of asian kids in fact could do so.

Because the method you were taught works. No gimmicks, just a method that works. I was taught the same way, probably at about the same age. When I was so young I fitted in the kiddy seat on a shopping trolley, I was occupied during shopping by keeping a running total of the cost of the items my mother put in the trolley. I used to announce the total cost to the cashier at the checkout and be very proud at having impressed a grownup when I was right. I thought it was a good game. It wasn't until later I realised that (a) my mother was teaching me basic maths before I went to school and (b) she was keeping me occupied during a time when a young child could easily get bored and stroppy.

But I think there's a place for teaching young children some simple methods for very simple maths, something to demystify numbers.

 

[BallistixOnZ490]

I disagree. I think it serves a useful purpose as a check.

But the question did not ask to use an estimate!

Even if I saw that question today, I would not know or realize it requires me to use an estimate as this is not stated in the question.

I would simply do a long subtraction as a 'show your working', and that would get marked wrong?

Why? How is a correct answer ever a mistake? If that had actually happened to me at any of my schools, tiger parent asian daddy would have turned up to school the next day and gone ham on the teachers face with his fists.

 

[Rroff]

"Reasonable answer" depends - how accurate do you need to be?

 

[Werewolf]

I'm sort of sat here enjoying the "old man waves at cloud" type thing that is going on as someone can't understand that teaching methods change.

My mum helped at a school for nearly 20 years and she had to relearn how they expected the kids to learn to read compared to how she'd been taught it something like 50 years earlier, and how I'd been taught it 20 years earlier...

I remember getting thoroughly annoyed when I changed school at the new maths teacher wanted me to work through things in a different manner to how I'd learned/been doing it, especially as I could work it out in my head my way, but they wanted me to do it another way and show my workings, which meant it took a couple of extra steps and I'd forget to show part of it at times.

However I can see exactly why there are different methods of teaching something like maths, as some people can "Just handle" the numbers, some need to visualise them and some struggle with that but may be exceptional in another area. One of the kids in one class I was in mentioned something about he worked out maths at times by relating it to music (which he was very good at), but I can't remember any details.

Early on it's probably better to get kids used to handling the numbers and finding a method that works for them, as one of the worst things you can do when teaching is put children off what you're teaching by forcing them to try and use a learning method early on that doesn't work for them.

But the main thing I'm getting from this thread is that the great Tom Lehrer was joking about "new math" back in the 60's, so might well have mocked the way Ballistix was taught it compared to the way he learned it in the 30's and 40's and then taught it in the 50's...

 

[dowie]

However I can see exactly why there are different methods of teaching something like maths, as some people can "Just handle" the numbers, some need to visualise them and some struggle with that but may be exceptional in another area. One of the kids in one class I was in mentioned something about he worked out maths at times by relating it to music (which he was very good at), but I can't remember any details.

Early on it's probably better to get kids used to handling the numbers and finding a method that works for them, as one of the worst things you can do when teaching is put children off what you're teaching by forcing them to try and use a learning method early on that doesn't work for them.

That kind of is what is being criticised here, teaching particular methods that all the kids must follow when working out these problems (often with rather more steps involved). Other, quicker, approaches like vertical addition or subtraction are out.

To be fair there might be some merit in these methods if they do turn out to be a useful way of teaching kids how to think about these problems but, it does seem overly rigid, especially if a kid is finding they're learning better via some other techniques.

To add in more silliness plenty of primary school teachers often struggle with maths themselves (https://www.jstor.org/stable/40248135) which can add another layer of nonsense too - this is another viral one:



Presumably, in the example they've seen of this strategy, the teacher has noted that the left-hand operand was the number of times the right-hand operand was added but failed to appreciate that this is not important given that multiplication is commutative. The kid has also used the required strategy and in fact made a more sensible choice when using it but has lost a mark because the teacher is a dunce.

 

[wolfie138]

that make ten **** is the most convoluted nonsense i've ever seen. when i was at school we were taught to add, simple as that.

 

[BallistixOnZ490]

"Reasonable answer" depends - how accurate do you need to be?

Again these are 5 year olds. Why are they expected to be able to understand a long string of nonsense words any more than being give simple sums and being taught how to do long sums?

This is not a maths thing then is it? Its an English test with numbers?

 

[BallistixOnZ490]

I'm sort of sat here enjoying the "old man waves at cloud" type thing that is going on as someone can't understand that teaching methods change.

My mum helped at a school for nearly 20 years and she had to relearn how they expected the kids to learn to read compared to how she'd been taught it something like 50 years earlier, and how I'd been taught it 20 years earlier...

I remember getting thoroughly annoyed when I changed school at the new maths teacher wanted me to work through things in a different manner to how I'd learned/been doing it, especially as I could work it out in my head my way, but they wanted me to do it another way and show my workings, which meant it took a couple of extra steps and I'd forget to show part of it at times.

However I can see exactly why there are different methods of teaching something like maths, as some people can "Just handle" the numbers, some need to visualise them and some struggle with that but may be exceptional in another area. One of the kids in one class I was in mentioned something about he worked out maths at times by relating it to music (which he was very good at), but I can't remember any details.

Early on it's probably better to get kids used to handling the numbers and finding a method that works for them, as one of the worst things you can do when teaching is put children off what you're teaching by forcing them to try and use a learning method early on that doesn't work for them.

But the main thing I'm getting from this thread is that the great Tom Lehrer was joking about "new math" back in the 60's, so might well have mocked the way Ballistix was taught it compared to the way he learned it in the 30's and 40's and then taught it in the 50's...

Show me where in any of the pictures posted of these exercises, the kids are being allowed to use multiple methods?

Where is the kid that simply answered 'Yes because 103-28=75' marked as incorrect for not using estimation being allowed to use multiple methods?

Where in all the 'make 10' questions are the kids being allowed to use multiple methods?

This is simply the worst possible method you can use to do mental arithmetic, it takes longer to reach your answer, takes more steps and is harder for most people to understand than simply being given a sheet of 20 sums to do daily and being taught the methods for long arithmetic.

Very very few children are unable to comprehend mental arithmetic and long sums. But because of the very few that can't, every other child needs to also be treated as being incapable 'because they are only 5/6/7???'.

 

[Thekwango]

May I remind you that I love getting negative replies and they turn me on a lot. I'll be thinking about you while I sleep tonight

Remind me? When have you told me this before?
What’s actually funniest about a lot of your posts is your attempts at being clever.

hope you had sweet sweet dreams about me.