Is Common Core Math Good or Bad?

[The_J]

The best way to develop up strong conceptual understanding of the numbers is to count in different bases, unfortunately most people don't.

That might be true, but TBH you only need one form of counting to do your normal every day tasks.
I regularly program, and don't even use binary, octal or hex during that.

The deal for splitting up a problem into easier sub-problems is only necessary when reaching out formula in other math bases where you aren't familiar with, thus able to calculate pretty much in all the bases.

I'll disagree.
Unless you can easily calculate 23 * 57 without using a calculator.
(yes, I easily can if I go with the principles here)

 

[Truthy]

Different bases give you a sense of how numbers and their representations work. But I don’t find it to be directly useful, even in programming, very often.

You need to understand binary and hex to understand how computers work and represent data. You need to understand hex on occasion when poking around in a debugger like GDB and inspecting memory and registers. What else? I dunno... coding interviews sometimes make you manipulate numbers in binary or hex.

 

[Birdjaguar]

Good: If you and your kids are frequently counting in binary, octal, dozenal and hexadecimal, Common Core Math offers the potential abilities to convert in between bases without using the calculators. Convert 1 dozen inches to 1 foot back and forth very quickly. Convert pound to ounce using hexadecimal methods.

Bad: If you are a decimalist who only count in 1 single math base, Common Core Math will cost you and your kids triple to quadruple amount of time to finish simple equations while not harvesting the best fruits out of it. Much like requiring someone who doesn't play video games to buy a $1,000 Video Card.


Example 1: [Decimal] 12 + 7 = 12 - 2 + 7 + 2 = 10 + 7 + 2 = 17 + 2 = 19 (much more complicated than just 12 + 7 = 19)

[Octal] 12 + 7 = 12 - 2 + 7 + 2 = 10 + 7 + 2 = 17 + 2 = 20 + 1 = 21 (convert math base in a smart way.)


Example 2: [Decimal] 254 - 87 = 3 + 10 + 100 + 54 = 113 + 54 = 167 (much more complicated than just burrowing digits)

[Dozenal] 254 - 87 = 5 + 30 + 100 + 54 = 189 (smart way to figure out dozenal subtractions)


I can totally understand why Bill Gates support the entire Common Core Math programs and invest in large amount of funds and efforts to develop it because he's the master of all the computers.

If the goal is to teach a more varied form of math, maybe. But if your goal is to educate kids to be better at STEM subjects and think more clearly, then you need to be teaching physics in grade 1-8. It will provide a more rounded approach to thinking and problem solving. When you look at the countries that produce the most and best prepared STEM students, they are the countries that teach physics early and often.

 

[rah]

I dunno... coding interviews sometimes make you manipulate numbers in binary or hex.

In the old days when storage was expensive you needed to code multi-punch data. Now that it's inexpensive they just spread the data to multiple columns.

 

[Truthy]

If the goal is to teach a more varied form of math, maybe. But if your goal is to educate kids to be better at STEM subjects and think more clearly, then you need to be teaching physics in grade 1-8. It will provide a more rounded approach to thinking and problem solving. When you look at the countries that produce the most and best prepared STEM students, they are the countries that teach physics early and often.

I feel pretty skeptical about this. There’s not much physics you can even teach elementary school students. They at least need trig and then “real” physics needs calc.

Honestly, if you look at successful STEM graduates coming out of top US universities, I doubt many learned any physics until high school, where many did well in AP physics. They’re smart and they had the math skills, so it was fine and many can skip college physics. And on that note, American AP physics students and college STEM graduates are across the board highly competitive internationally.

 

[Birdjaguar]

I feel pretty skeptical about this. There’s not much physics you can even teach elementary school students. They at least need trig and then “real” physics needs calc.

Honestly, if you look at successful STEM graduates coming out of top US universities, I doubt many learned any physics until high school, where many did well in AP physics. They’re smart and they had the math skills, so it was fine and many can skip college physics. And on that note, American AP physics students and college STEM graduates are across the board highly competitive internationally.

There are always those who perform at the top. The goal is to lift all boats.

Go Here.

I know the guy who started this and have seen his work. It is very creative and cool. He already has the curriculum built and it is available now in your school!

 

[tuckerkao]

Unless you can easily calculate 23 * 57 without using a calculator.
(yes, I easily can if I go with the principles here)

Yes I can, even in Dozenal.

[decimal] 23 * 57 = (20 + 3) * 7 + (200 + 30) * 5 = 140 + 21 + 1000 + 150 = 1150 + 140 + 21 = 1150 + 150 + 11 = 1300 + 11 = 1311 -> (All I need to memorize is up to 9 * 9 = 81)

[dozenal] 23 * 57 = (20 + 3) * 7 + (200 + 30) * 5 = 120 + 19 + Ӿ00 + 130 = Ɛ30 + 120 + 19 = Ɛ30 + 90 + 50 + 19 = 1000 + 69 = 1069 -> (All I need to memorize is up to Ɛ * Ɛ = Ӿ1)

I must state it clear again, Common Core Math is a disaster to those decimalists and their kids who only count in a single base, but extremely beneficial to people who count in multiple bases which save lots of time not having to do the complicated base conversions, you should ask Barack Obama and the Democrats why?

I spent weeks calculating only using the Common Core Math formula, my decimal skills stay the same, my dozenal skills significantly improved.

 

[Truthy]

In the old days when storage was expensive you needed to code multi-punch data. Now that it's inexpensive they just spread the data to multiple columns.

I've read this post like 5 times and I have no idea what you're talking about

What do you mean "spread the data to multiple columns"? Columns of what?

 

[Birdjaguar]

I'm guessing multiple punch cards (pre 1982ish) have been replaced by spreadsheet columns.

 

[Hygro]

According to my teacher friend common core just means they teach the math in a variety of different ways so that they can hit the different learning styles of different kids. There is no one “common core” method.

 

[cardgame]

Why would we waste our time learning bases that nobody uses? The entire world operates on base 10 (decimal) or rarely in specialized (computer science) cases, hexadecimal. You don't need to learn hexadecimal if you're not going into computer studies.

Just looking at you write down 3/4 = 0.9 made me angry.

I imagine that's one of the biggest reasons parents hate common core.

I must state it clear again, Common Core Math is a disaster to those decimalists and their kids who only count in a single base, but extremely beneficial to people who count in multiple bases which save lots of time not having to do the complicated base conversions, you should ask Barack Obama and the Democrats why?

But who are these people, given that everybody has been trained in base 10?

I spent weeks calculating only using the Common Core Math formula, my decimal skills stay the same, my dozenal skills significantly improved.

Why?

 

[tuckerkao]

Just looking at you write down 3/4 = 0.9 made me angry.
Why?

TIme to look at your clock 9:00 am and 9:00 pm everyday. I never get late for my appointments after learning the dozenal math.

If you are angry, don't use foot and inch again, because that's where the dozenal conversions come in to place. ---> 3/4 of 1 foot = 9 inches.

So why the United States still use the Imperial System with miles, feet and inches while almost the entire world is operating on the metric system with kilometers, meters and centimeters?


Why? Common Core Math teaches subtractions using distance. The distance between 1 dozen and 7 is 5, so I can do that dozenal subtractions as fast as other decimal formula.

Not everyone was trained by decimal math, at least I know this group operates their everyday lives on dozenal base - http://www.dozenalsociety.org.uk/

 

[Manfred Belheim]

I feel pretty skeptical about this. There’s not much physics you can even teach elementary school students. They at least need trig and then “real” physics needs calc.

You don't need any maths at all to teach things qualitatively, and that's all that would be required at that sort of age surely. "This is how everyday things in the world work", followed by a few simple "experiments" that show some principles in action. Gyroscopes, Newton's Cradle, etc. You don't need to be sitting there working out how much force an electron applies to a electrostatically charged metal sphere at a distance of 1.7 metres or whatever.

 

[Truthy]

You don't need any maths at all to teach things qualitatively, and that's all that would be required at that sort of age surely. "This is how everyday things in the world work", followed by a few simple "experiments" that show some principles in action. Gyroscopes, Newton's Cradle, etc. You don't need to be sitting there working out how much force an electron applies to a electrostatically charged metal sphere at a distance of 1.7 metres or whatever.

What are the things about physics that supposedly improve critical thinking so much? Is it setting up Newton’s cradles? Is that really so different than what American elementary schoolers already do all the time when they make model rockets? Or is the critical thinking from solving hard math problems involving pulley systems and electrostatic forces and so on? Probably the latter

However, I doubt it actually increases “critical thinking” much. Mostly, you’d just find people who take physics/do well in physics have good critical thinking skills. “Problem solving skills”, sure, but that’s mostly in terms of trig, alg, and calc, which elementary schoolers can’t do.

 

[Manfred Belheim]

What are the things about physics that supposedly improve critical thinking so much? Is it setting up Newton’s cradles? Is that really so different than what American elementary schoolers already do all the time when they make model rockets? Or is the critical thinking from solving hard math problems involving pulley systems and electrostatic forces and so on? Probably the latter

I don't see how "hard math problems" would teach critical thinking. But just teaching the basics of how the world qualitatively works, demonstrating that there are repeatable mechanisms that can be understood, and giving them a chance to play with basic experiments, encouraging them to predict what will happen based on what they have learned so far... that's surely a very useful process to go through, and requires no maths at all, let alone of the hard variety.

 

[Truthy]

Because we’re talking about physics in particular. And those are the kinds of problems you need to work on to actually understand physical principles. The qualitative stuff all applies to everything else. Chemistry, biology, history, etc.

 

[rah]

I've read this post like 5 times and I have no idea what you're talking about

What do you mean "spread the data to multiple columns"? Columns of what?

I guess my age is showing.
You have to think of punch cards. In the old days a punch care would have a column of 0-9 and 2 others. For a nine you would punch the nine. etc.
For a multipunch question, like (check all that apply) you would punch all the answers in the same column. This saved a lot of space.
Now instead of recording them all in one column, it is stored as a series of yes no answers for each option. So a multi answer question would now be 10 individual columns of 1 "yes' or 0 'no' for each possible response.
I hope this explanation didn't cause additional confusion. I'm old so what may seem like it makes sense to me, may not to others.

 

[Farm Boy]

It's neat that they teach different ways to approach problems. But then they wind up responsible for demonstrating that they know how to solve a simple problem multiple ways, so at least at 2nd grade instead of picking the method that works best for them, they wind up getting hounded about performing competence at the way that trips them up the worst. The ways that work best for them get the least study time, and the ways that work the worst get the most. Not sure this is the specific application where that should be a goal? We just lost a family out of the district to homeschooling basically over exactly that. Lots of kids using number lines for addition and subtraction when a mad minute memorization excercise or two might have helped if there was any room in the curriculum left for that.

 

[Manfred Belheim]

Because we’re talking about physics in particular. And those are the kinds of problems you need to work on to actually understand physical principles. The qualitative stuff all applies to everything else. Chemistry, biology, history, etc.

Completely disagree. You don't need to be able to calculate the exact resultant force a bunch of electrons will have on a single proton to be able to understand the principle that positive and negative charges attract each other, and that like charges repel for example. You can show this with a simple demonstration with static electricity (rubbing a balloon on a woolly jumper for example). You don't need to know or do any maths to understand what is happening. That's qualitative and if it's not physics I don't know what else you'd decribe it as.

 

[The_J]

Not everyone was trained by decimal math, at least I know this group operates their everyday lives on dozenal base - http://www.dozenalsociety.org.uk/

That's at least better than the flat earthers .