Google Find us on Google+

ENGINEER EXPLAINS WHY COMMON CORE MATH IS A DISASTER

Sep 29, 2014 by

[A state board of education member said this was one of the best articles against Common Core Math that she has read, and I agree with her. Cynthia Walker encapsulates all of the Common Core “warts” all in one article; and because of her extensive background as an engineer who has taught almost every math curriculum available, her conclusions cannot be doubted.  Common Core is what she calls a Big Mistake from which math and science in America will not survive. – Donna Garner]

9.28.14 – American Thinker

 


“Un-common – Not Core
by Cynthia Walker

 

I became a math teacher by a circuitous route.  My degree is in engineering.  I spent five and a half years refurbishing nuclear submarines, and then I quit work to bear, rear, and eventually homeschool our three children.

As a homeschool mom, I participated in co-ops, taking turns teaching groups of homeschooled children subjects such as nature study and geography. As our children entered their teen years, I began to teach algebra, trig, and calculus to small classes of homeschoolers at my kitchen table.  And as our children left home for their four-year universities, two to major in engineering and one in art, I began teaching in small private schools known as classical academies.

This last year, I have also been tutoring public-school students in Common Core math, and this summer I taught a full year of Common Core Algebra 2 compressed into six weeks at an expensive, ambitious private school. 

I’ve taught and tutored the gamut of textbooks and curricula: Miquon and Saxon to my own kids and whenever the choice of curriculum was mine to make; Foerster, Saxon, Jacobs, or Holt when hired to teach at a school.  I’ve tutored out of the California state adopted texts: CPM, Everyday Math, Mathland, Houghton Mifflin Harcourt, McGraw Hill, Addison Wesley, and Holt.  I’ve had students come to me from all of the above plus Teaching Textbooks, Singapore, and Math U See.

This last year was my first experience first tutoring, then teaching Common Core, and I was curious.  I had read the reports of elementary-school children crying over their homework and staying up past midnight to complete it, so I expected Common Core to be like Everyday Math, Mathland, and CPM: poorly explained, abstruse, confusing.  I was correct on those counts.

What surprised me was that Common Core was also hard.

Now, I like rigor.  I have high standards.  My goal for my students is that they will become competent and confident mathematicians.  But I was stunned to see that my tutoring student’s pre-algebra work incorporated about a third of a year of algebra 1.  The algebra 2 text incorporated about a third of the topics I would expect to find in a precalculus course.  And so forth.

This did not mesh with the reports from Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Utah, or New York, where Common Core is alleged to lower standards – in one case, specifically, to move multiplication tables from third grade to fifth grade.  It appears that Common Core is not being implemented in a consistent (or common) way across the United States.  But I can only address pre-algebra through calculus in texts claiming to be Common Core in California.  These texts are shoveling about a third of the subsequent year’s topics into the current year.

This problem is exacerbated by the recent fad for accelerating students through their math classes.  Fifty years ago, algebra 1 was a ninth-grade course for fourteen-year-olds.  Now it is routinely taught in eighth grade, sometimes in seventh.  Algebra 1 in seventh grade means that pre-algebra is taught in sixth grade to eleven-year-olds, and few eleven-year-olds have achieved the cognitive development necessary to master the abstract logic of one third of a year of algebra.

Cognitive development proceeds not in a smooth curve, but in jumps and plateaus.  Just as most babies learn to walk at twelve months, so most adolescents become capable of logical operations such as algebra at twelve years.  And just as whether a baby walks at nine months or fifteen months has no bearing on whether he plays football in college, so whether a student learns algebra in 7th or 9th grade has no bearing on whether she becomes a National Merit Scholar…save that a child who is pushed and flounders and fails is unlikely to love an activity.

That is what I am seeing with my tutoring students: the math-bright ones are being encouraged to take honors pre-algebra at age eleven.  In prior years, this would have meant that they first had a thorough, final review of arithmetic: adding, subtracting, multiplying, and dividing whole numbers, decimals, and fractions; long division; changing fractions to decimals to percents and back.  Then for a treat, they would be introduced to the glories of algebra, the fun stuff: Rene Descartes’ brilliant invention, with plenty of lists of points that, if properly executed, form an outline of a fish or a dinosaur.  They would be taught signed numbers, order of operations, distributive property, and how to solve for x, and that would be about it.  They would finish the year happily aware that math is fun and that they are good at it.  If they were fortunate enough to be taught from Jacobs’s Mathematics: a Human Endeavor, they would learn about sequences and mosaics and logarithms and even networks, but all with a very concrete development, suited to the emergent logical thinker.

The reform mathematicians who put together Common Core are ignoring cognitive development.  My Common Core pre-algebra students are hurried through the arithmetic review and taught the coordinate system.  They graph lines and parabolas.  They do transformations, exponents (including zero and negative exponents), and a truly horrendous percentage of percentage problems.  The homework can be finished in an hour if the student’s parents can afford to hire a BS mechanical engineer to sit at his elbow and remind him when he takes a wrong turn.  Otherwise, he is up ’til midnight.  Students work hard at tasks beyond their strength; they flounder; they fail; they learn that math is no fun.

This isn’t education. This is child abuse.

Another aspect of Common Core that surprised me was the emphasis given to parent functions and transformations. People over forty years of age, even techies such as physicists, chemists, engineers, and mathematicians, won’t know what parent functions are.  People under thirty-five who have been educated in reform mathematics textbooks will be surprised that is possible to learn mathematics without learning about transformations.

Fifty years ago, transformations were not taught, although math-bright students would figure them out for themselves in analytic geometry (second-semester pre-calculus).  Today, they are taught systematically beginning in elementary school.

The treatment of transformations reminds me of the New Math debacle of the 1960s.  The reform mathematicians of the day decided that they were going to improve mathematical education by teaching all students what the math-bright children figured out for themselves.

In exactly the same way, the current crop of reform math educators has decided that transformations are an essential underlying principle, and are teaching them: laboriously, painfully, and unnecessarily.  They are tormenting and confusing the average student, and depriving the math-bright student of the delight of discovering underlying principles for herself.

One aspect of Common Core that did not surprise me was a heavy reliance on calculators.

The main problem I see with my algebra students is that they have poor number sense.  They can’t tell whether the answer their calculator shows is reasonable or not.  They cling to the notion that 1.41 is somehow more precise than square root of two.  They also can’t add fractions or do long division, which puts them at a severe disadvantage when they must add rational expressions or divide polynomials.

Common Core exacerbates this problem.  At every level, the problems are designed to be too hard to solve by hand.  A calculator is necessary even in elementary school – unless a child is to spend 5 hours a night on homework.  A graphing calculator is necessary for algebra – calculating correlation coefficients by hand is not a viable option.  My students are whizzes with their calculators.  But they reach for them to square 1/3…then write it as 0.11.

Common Core advocates claim that they are avoiding that boring, rote drill in favor of higher-order thinking skills.  Nowhere is this more demonstrably false than in their treatment of formulas.  An old-style text would have the student memorize a few formulas and be able to derive the rest.  Common Core loads the student down with more formulas than can possibly be memorized.  There is no instruction on derivation; the formulas are handed down as though an archangel brought them down from heaven.  Since it is impossible to memorize all the various formulas, students are permitted – nay, encouraged – to develop cheat sheets to use on the tests.

The second-biggest problem with Common Core is the problem of Big Mistakes.  Pretend for a moment that a homeschool family did something as asinine as giving their eight-year-old a calculator instead of teaching him his times tables.  That child would be a calculator cripple.

But that would be a small mistake, affecting one child.  Now consider what happens when a state made such a mistake.  We don’t even have to pretend.  In 1986, California adopted Whole Language Arts, which proved to be a disaster.  Within a decade, California plunged to 49th out of 50 in reading performance.  Millions of children were affected.  Big mistake.

If different states have different curricula, we can observe what works and what does not, and improve thereby.  But Common Core is being pushed nationwide.  This could be the Biggest of all possible Mistakes.

But the worst problem with Common Core is its likely effect on the educational gap between rich and poor in this country.  The students I tutor have parents who would describe themselves as “comfortable.”  No one likes to admit to being rich.  But the middle class and poor cannot afford to pay a tutoring company $50 to $100 per hour so that someone will sit with their children and explain trig identities.

The oft-repeated goal of Common Core is that every child will be “college or career ready.”  Couple that slogan with the oft-expressed admiration for the European system of education – in European countries, students are slotted for university or a dead-end job at age fourteen, based ostensibly on their performance on high-stakes tests, but that performance almost inevitably matches the student’s socioeconomic class.  Do we really want to destroy upward mobility and implement a rigid class structure in the United States of America?

To recapitulate: Common Core teaches about a third of algebra 1 in pre-algebra, a third of pre-calculus in algebra 2, et cetera.  Common Core teaches unnecessary abstractions as essential principles.  Common Core creates calculator cripples.  Common Core fails to derive mathematical expressions, instead presenting them as Holy Writ.

I predict that if we continue implementing Common Core, average students will drop out of math as early as they are allowed.  Even math-bright students will hate math.  Tutoring companies will proliferate to serve wealthy families.  The educational gap between rich and poor will widen.  If we want to destroy math and science education in this country, keep Common Core.

http://www.americanthinker.com/2014/09/uncommon_not_core.html

Donna Garner

Wgarner1@hot.rr.com

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

9 Comments

  1. Avatar
    Tim

    NCLB started the increased use of the calculator. Students where forced to use them on the standardized tests and the SAT. Elementary Teachers spent time teaching calculator skills instead of math concepts .

    Transformations came into CC through Duncan, think Chicago and UCSMP.

    CCSS is a waste of Gates money it has and still is causing great harm to Mathematics Education!

  2. Avatar
    Elle Tee

    Common Core is not a curriculum, but a set of standards used for each class/grade level. Which curriculum was used by the author?

    • Avatar
      Dave

      Not exactly true. While they are innocently enough just a set of “standards”, the writers of the standards really pushed certain methodologies for certain problem solving. Look at Eureka Math used in New York State. THAT is what you can call Common Core Math. It is considered to be the best aligned program out there. It has all the funny math that this author talks about. And I have to teach Eureka everyday in my own fifth grade classroom, so I know.

      • Avatar
        Elle

        Dave, I know too, because I also teach Eureka math to my 8th grade, Algebra, and Geometry middle school students. The problem is that CCSS and the curriculums used were implemented so suddenly (at least in my district) that people blame the standards rather than the curriculum and implementation too. I am now seeing students who’ve used Eureka math for 3 years easily applying those “confusing” strategies that the author complained about. Just because a person doesn’t understand a strategy doesn’t mean it’s wrong, especially if it works for some kids. And a decent educator will allow students to use the strategies that work for them, and help others find a strategy that works for them if the first one doesn’t work, whether it’s aligned to the curriculum or not. It’s all about student learning, not “covering” material. I’ve often had to teach using non-Eureka methods first then go back to Eureka for many of my students to feel successful. And I think a lot of people just want math education to stay the same as it was when they were in school because it makes them feel safe.

  3. Avatar
    Christine Zirkelbach

    Law of the harvest? Interesting analogy because harvest is dependent on so many external factors such as soil, pests and weather. A great potential harvest can be ruined by drought, frost, or a whole host of external factors.

  4. Avatar

    Clearly, the writer understands math, but is not a trained math teacher. With all due respect, there is a tremendous difference. My daughter just finished a rigorous secondary math teaching degree and has already been teaching full time. 30+ students were in her university program at the beginning and only 2 finished. I feel these students gave up too easily. My daughter spent thousands of hours learning and coming to understand courses she will never teach in junior high, so some might consider it a waste, but she does not. She took classes equivalent to MIT and Stanford graduate school course work, all because her university aims to turn out the best and the brightest. She graduated magna cum laude and maintained her Presidential scholarship the whole 4 years with one of the hardest majors on that campus. She is excited about the math curriculum she is teaching because it opens students up to the possibility of life in a math-related field. It’s exciting to be able to do geometry work in 7th grade. Or early calculus. When the teacher understands how to teach the subject in creative ways, students’ minds are opened up to new ideas and dreams of doing things they wouldn’t have considered before. Parents and tired/lazy teachers are killing this with their bad attitudes they are passing to their children and students. My daughter and son were and still are excited about learning and conquering hard things because we encouraged that attitude in our home. This is the law of the harvest. You will get out what you put in. But stop blaming the curriculum. Please.

    • Avatar
      Rhonda Biles

      That’s all well and good for your daughter, obviously older and not taught common core math when she was eight. Try having an eight year old gifted child, who loved math and could figure complex equations in his head at the age of three, start hating math in third grade because the practices used are ridiculously confusing. As a parent, I’m not lazy, nor do I have a bad attitude towards my child working hard in school. But let’s make sure our young children get the basics down first before introducing them to standards and practices that are more complex than their young brains are prepared for. Kudos to your daughter for working hard to achieve her dreams, but don’t ever think that those of us that are opposed to common core don’t encourage our own children to work hard as well.

    • Avatar
      CommonSenseDuh

      Out of THIRTY students, only TWO finished, and you can’t possibly see a problem here? Okaaaaaay.

    • Avatar
      Dave

      I’m an elementary school math teacher forced to teacher common core math (Eureka Math, to be precise, as common core based as it gets). All I can tell you is there are many bright kids who are bogged down and bored by the insipid pace of the lessons and the constant need to express an understanding of a concept in words when they have obviously demonstrated their understanding in numbers. I’m all for developing greater ELA skills. But math is math, and we could actually be teaching more and in a developmentally appropriate way if we didn’t have to plod through long, long, (did I mention loooong?) lessons every day. If you’re creative as a teacher, there are work arounds. But unfortunately, most teachers give their admin exactly what they want–obedience to the curriculum–and it’s hard to think outside of the box when the fear of state testing is always hanging over your head.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

UA-24036587-1