We got to the RightStart math lesson on fractions and I thought it was so neat! It tickled me all day and maybe that makes me a dork! I handed John the broken apart and mixed-up pieces of the fraction chart, him having never seen it nor heard of "fractions" (just quarters from the other day). I asked him what he could make of this pile of stuff and could he see any pattern among all the pieces.
Immediately he put together one whole next to four quarters.
Then he grabbed the one-halves and we discussed where they might go in order and he figured that out. I asked him now that he was one (whole), one over two, and one over four, what might be missing? And he saw there should be a one-over-three, which he hunted for and found three of.
Then I asked him how many were there of one over two (two), how many of one over three (three), and one over four (four), so what should he be looking for next and how many will there be? Five of one over five! He was really excited now, hopping in his seat!
He flew through the fractions chart (and next the fractions "stairs"), we talked through all the names, I asked him how many fractions there could be, how small they could get. "They could go on forever! They would be soooooo small!"
I have so enjoyed how much Socratic method on my part and figuring out concepts on his part there has been in this math curriculum! The fractions lesson was totally cool, just like the prior's day lessons on tesselations (no dumbing down to the word "tiling" here, apparently!).
On the subject of math, this 2007 video on where math education is headed seems even more concerning now when the Common Core standards I've learned about are the methods she is describing: Math Education: An Inconvenient Truth (15-minute video). (This critical reply I came across does not have me convinced. Nor this.)
Meanwhile . . . Margaret (2) was becoming demanding about wanting to play with the fractions chart herself (while John was still using it), so I grabbed the nearest book (a history book) and asked her to check inside it for any pictures of spiders. She is very concerned about pictures of spiders in books. Immediately she set to work very quietly and it occupied her long enough for me to finish the math lesson.
 |
| Checking for pictures of spiders |
We really liked the fractions at the end of RS A too! Granted my kids are pretty math-y and haven't strictly "needed" the Righstart method, but even so I'm just amazed at the foundation built with this program, especially the mental math. Looking through Level C, though, I can see it's not going to challenge us much at all, so I'm looking at other options to supplement.
ReplyDeleteI've seen that CCSS video circulating, but I haven't had a chance to watch it. I will add it to my list ASAP.
What I cannot fathom is why anyone with *high* standards cares that the "common core" or whatever has *low* standards. Isn't it easier to "qualify" or whatever if everyone your level is way behind you? I just don't get it. At all. OK, now I understand that it's a national standards program, but still. I have absolutely no idea why everyone is harping on this math thing like it means anything. I MUST be missing some crucial piece.
ReplyDeleteYes, Sarah. Here's some more of the scoop . . .
ReplyDeleteOne, it's not like they are "standards" in the probably more true sense of the word: standards to be met or exceeded. Then our smart kids, taught well would simply exceed the standards. No, they are ways of teaching and content of teaching to which all the students will be subjected. When the math classes are all taught as collaborative learning and the answers are "what are some answers that could exist for this math problem and why do you think?" without actually explaining the algorithm and the real answer, all our smart kids will be required to answer that way. When the national standardized tests (that even home schoolers must take if they want to advance to college) are aligned to the Common Core, how will our home schooled students be able to answer nonsense questions?
Even Catholic private schools and many home school curricula packages are choosing to align to the Common Core.
And there are all the other areas than math. For example, English now has a cap for how much literature can be taught, and it's capped at something like 30%. So only 30% of what the child reads will be classic literature and the rest will be texts like Obama's Presidential order on such-and-such liberal cause (these are all designated right now, I'm not just presuming) and How Manuel Stacks Cans in the Grocery Store. The Standards will be dumbing down our children to be worker bees who cannot achieve higher because they haven't been taught to think.
Lastly, there is the aspect of data collection. For years we have been protected by a law that disallows data collection attached to a child's name. So, we could collect data only such as test scores among this income level, but not Joe Smith's test scores. But President Obama overturned that law by Presidential Order (no voting, no fanfare). Now, the Common Core Standards include data collection of our children, something like 500 points of data per child attached to his or her name put into a governmental database. It includes things like his emotional status as judged by his teacher, whether he has pee accidents in the first grade, whether his parents vote, etc., etc. It's quite frightening to me.
Thanks for the rundown. That makes more sense.
ReplyDelete