Here's Some Homework - Common Core Style
From a mom in NY State: My son's KINDERGARTEN homework.
I hold a Master's Degree and have won multiple Emmy Awards and my husband is a Lieutenant in the NYPD. We couldn't figure it out. It's a SAD SAD SAD state when two well educated parents can't help their child with their KINDERGARTEN homework.
This is what you have to look forward to in the future. Data walls and homework you may not be able to decipher and, if you can, will you be able to help your child the Common Core "way?"
Comments
(from the wikipedia entry)
There are 5 cubes (though they look like squares to me) in the stick, so presumably, you color 1 or 2 red or blue and 4 or 3 blue or red and then fill in the circles. Then, guess you cover up one of the circles, look at the pairs, and show the missing number on your finger.
Yes, it was incomprehensible to me, too, but I think we have to be careful not make too much of our own lack of knowledge of a constantly changing terminology ("number bond" = "addition fact").
zb
PS: I don't think you're supposed to color in the fingers :-) -- at least I would have imagined that you're just supposed to hold up numbers of fingers.
-Math mom
-HS parent
and I agree no homework in K. in fact, with our son, we refused to do it when he was in K.
Mom of 4
* The jargon is horribly tangled, written by an academic, and incomprehensible to the average person. I don't dispute that. But I also think that the jargon is the textbook/curriculum author's fault, not Common Core. Unless Common Core specifically describes number bonds and all the rest. If it does, I take back my defense of CC.
How are parents supposed to partner with the schools to support children with such poor curriculum (like this one showed?
-FedMomof2
One thing that's clear to me... now... unless you're already well grounded in math, speak english very well, have good access to the internet for deciphering.... this math home work is unintelligible. ( I can untangle the principle, but boy is this the hard way to get there). Imagine if you're trying to help your child do this in a language not your native one. Oy Vey. The achievement gap will widen by the day!
parent
An incredibly frustrating aspect of psychology & social sciences. I think they think they are making up new words because it better defines the fundamental concept, but it also excludes everyone not in the loop from understanding.
Marketing/business/economics people do it too, to some extent.
zb
The problem is that the mathematical language is proprietary and based on some publisher's made-up math language. Feh!
We all better pray that the Math Adoption Committee adopts Singapore Math (Math in Focus).
I Teach Math, Therefore I Dream Apple Pi
I have made a promise to my now-grown sons - if this is what school is to be - testing on this curriculum - I"m paying for private school for my grandchildren.
Don't do that. Make sure they go to North Beach, Mercer (Hamilton if they can get Pounder), and Ingraham. :-)
And good clear math books will be a lot cheaper without all the bells and whistles and hard-to-fathom pictures. American math books are tomes compared to the efficient and lean (and much cheaper!) programs coming from other countries. At least my experience with Singapore and with a Romanian program suggests that.
Ah, America - where it is all about marketing.
I know its popular to hate on common core and love Singapore Math on this blog, but this is a little out of hand. This type of worksheet comes directly from the Singapore Math way of teaching fluency for addition/subtraction. When I taught we called them fact families, but whatever.
Is the worksheet poorly worded? Yes! Absolutely.
Is the common core way to understand math? No! It's the Singapore way.
Honesty
The goal of Singapore Math is "automaticity" within a mental math framework. Counting on fingers is inefficient. Coloring blocks is a holdover from the original TERC Math texts. Slow, and lacking rigor.
The point is that the assessment cited by Melissa W. is too wordy and inefficient, devoid of standard mathematical terms. If you wish to use that jargon with your students or children…more power to you. However, it is still inefficient math intended support the lowest level of mathematical fluency. The highest level is "automaticity." At any level of proficiency, the example from the blog posting is remedial at best and corporate in its most cynical assessment.
Singapore - 10 Years and Counting
First, my response was in no way a criticism of Singapore methods. The mental math automaticity is incredibly important. Bringing a curriculum like that to SPS after EDM would be very beneficial.
Second, yes the worksheet is crap as I said. Counting on fingers is just bad practice.
However, fluency and automaticity with fact families/addition facts/number bonds etc is (as you said) incredibly important. Activities that establish that 5,4, and 1 (or 10, 7, and 3) go together (initially through physical items like manipulatives) is important for kindergarten students, with or without common core. I'm with Eric B here.
Honesty
Color the middle finger of your imaginary friend, is my solution.
One has to do with invented jargon. All communication should strive toward clarity. Textbooks have a special duty to be clear. Jargon is the enemy of clarity.
Second, the inability to get the real terminology right. Those are squares, not cubes.
Third, what is the lesson here? Surely there is a better way for students - even kindergarten students - to name the missing element of a math fact other than holding up fingers. I'm thinking they could just say the name of the number. After all, we want them to associate the name of the number with the numeral and with an actual count of things, but we already have the things represented with the squares. We don't need fingers as well. What we need now is the spoken name of the number.
Tell me, did your parents help you with homework when you were a kid? Mine didn't. (I might have asked an older sib but maybe a question, not help.)
All this deeply involves parents. There is NO way a kindergartener could read and understand it on their own. As I learned from the NPE conference, Common Core is widely believed to be developmentally inappropriate for grades K-2 (or 3).
I think it is.
mathy parent
EDM is exhibit A. Much of the homework assumes an English speaking parent is home to work "with" the child. I simply wouldn't send the "Take Home Sheets" home.
If the child can't do the homework without an adult sitting there, then there is not equity in the homework.
Also, jargon is the currency for inane systems. Status is measured by the usage of the jargon du jour, not by effectiveness and work that matters. Susan Enfield was a jargon master. That's probably why her picture is on the wall.
--enough already
X
Unifix cube worksheets
mathy parent
Should we say that because we can't guarantee an english-speaking adult at home for every student that no students should have help with homework? I wouldn't say that. There should be homework clubs available after school at least from middle school on, and they would include an adult, probably a teacher. That should partially reduce the inequity.
Just venting.
I send home homework, but it is intended to reinforce, not teach for the first time. I am speaking of younger children, here, BTW.
Students are practicing, not getting parents to do the work I'm supposed to be doing.
Homework clubs are great for those who have them.
--enough already