conuly

So, this person doesn't like the Everyday Math curriculum, nor... some other math series.

And she might have a very good point about that - the nieces' school went off Everyday Math because the teachers said they jumped around too much and it was confusing the kids. This is an opinion I can trust - it makes sense to me, and the people saying it presumably know what they're talking about.

Unfortunately, I can't trust this presenter's opinion. Her argument against these two curricula aren't "Kids find them confusing" or "I don't think they're teaching math" but "They aren't teaching math the way I learned it, and I don't understand how they're teaching it, so it's wrong wrong wrong!" So, of course, she demonstrates these methods... and it's obvious to me that she's clearly taking the slowest, most round-about method of doing this in order to prove her point. But she *doesn't* prove it.

The lattice method? That one that everybody derides as "who invented this"? I'd guess that if you know what you're doing and aren't unfamiliar with it (and no, "parents aren't familiar with other methods" is not a good reason to only do what you've always done) it's just about as fast as the more common method. (And it's not exactly new. A method that's been around since the 13th century CE and that appears in the very first printed arithmetic book? I'd say it has some staying power.) She says that her preferred method of division is "the most efficient" method, but it's only, in my view, more efficient when writing with pencil on paper. If you have to work something out in your head? Reasoning - which she thinks is just wrong wrong wrong - is the way to go, and, indeed, is how I do most of my math... and which is why, unlike most people I know, I never *do* reach for a calculator or a pad of paper if I come across a necessary math problem in the course of my day. (And nobody ever yet has explained to me how you can use long division to divide, say, 31 into 2000. Not without memorizing the 31 times table, that is....)

It may be that these two programs aren't teaching kids well. In fact, I've heard a lot of bad stuff about Everyday Math specifically, so I'm inclined to believe that. But unfortunately, she let the facts lie to the side while she spoke about her opinion that one form of problem solving is superior - so much that the others shouldn't be taught.

I was so annoyed by that detail that when she said what really should have been her shocker - a quote from the Everyday Math teacher's guide stating that of course, calculators are readily accessible (and so not all algorithms for basic arithmetic need to be mastered) - I started wondering why she didn't answer that important question - why IS it necessary to know how to do basic calculation? (Judging from the comments, most people don't know. I read a lot of "People who do this method would fail all their tests!!!" or "How can you show math on a test using that method? You wouldn't get any credit!!!!" or "If you don't learn the right method, how can you compete in college?" or "This is why students in other countries do better than our students" but not once did I see a comment explaining when math comes up in day to day life and it's better to use THIS method over THAT method. I find this much more disturbing than the original comment about calculators!)

And, really, thinking it through, I can think of a few ways to justify the calculator comment anyway. One person in the comments went "Well, math is easy when you strip it of the clutter, all those word problems". But who is better at math? The child who can tell you that 12 x 12 is 144 and that 6 x 12 is 72, but has no idea why he's memorized that or that the numbers exist outside of the book? Or the one who needs to use a calculator but who can work out all the right steps to find out how much paint you need to paint the walls (but not the doors or windows) of a given room? (All while the first child absentmindedly fills the room up with paint!)

Actually, what's even worse than the fact that the commenters didn't seem to know what we use math for is the fact that few of them realized she was selling something. They took her deliberately confused approach to these "alternative techniques" and assumed that meant that nobody can do any form of calculation using them. (I'm doubtful many of them understand why the standard algorithms work, to be honest, but I suspect none of them understands why it matters if they understand or not.)

Here's somebody's reply to it.
And here's part two!

Apparently he's since found a copy of (some of) the books to review, so I'm going to look that up to see what he says. It really irked me watching the first video (the firstest one, the one at the top) she talks about how at the end of the 4th grade curriculum there's a "world tour" project and "Where's the math?" Well, I don't know where the math is, honey, you're the one holding the book, you tell us! Off the top of my head I can think of any number of ways applied mathematics could go into planning a world tour, but without a copy of the book I can't tell you if they did that well or flopped miserably. Her implication, of course, was that connecting math to any other subject (such as geography or social studies) was wrong wrong wrong! because, after all, it's not how SHE was taught. (And maybe there IS no math there, I wouldn't know, but I'm interested in seeing another opinion because that first video was so obnoxious.)

(And I still want to see more examples - charts, I guess - of how script is taught in other countries. Just because.)

One thing I keep seeing is the statement that up until the 30s or so, cursive was what was taught in the first grade - not print. (And of course some schools changed over sooner than that, and some later - or not at all!) Many of them also say that that's how writing is taught in other countries as well, with the possible exception of Great Britain. Any insight here from people who know what they're talking about would be useful :)

If this is true, all of a sudden that scene in To Kill a Mockingbird makes sense!

See, it was weird enough that Scout's father was criticized for "teaching" her to read when he'd done no such thing (she picked it up on her own), but I never understood the bit about how she was taught to write. It seemed strange to me that they taught her to write in script but not print (and that this was referred to as writing but print wasn't), but stranger that this should be a problem.

But now it makes sense, if teaching print first was somewhat novel - the teacher, new to teaching, felt she'd just had her pedagogy insulted. She's got this idea of how you're nowadays supposed to teach reading and writing, and they did this old-fashioned thing that was ditched to make things easier for kids, this being the newish era of look-say reading as well, I suppose, though technically Scout learned that way anyway. (And it had worked, too!)

~~~~~~~~~~~~

Today, as we walked to the library, I noticed some rosemary in another person's yard, and challenged the kids to find "a plant we can eat" in there. (They did!) I also pointed out that person's impatiens.

Evangeline: Why are they called that?
Me: I don't know.
Evangeline: Maybe they don't have patience?

Now, you all saw that coming, but listen. I don't think we've ever expressed patience as having or not having it. We tell them to BE patient, sure, but not to have patience. I would have expected her to say "Maybe because they're not patient" or even "Maybe because they're impatient" instead.

So now I want to gather up im- words and see what she makes of them. This is probably a bad idea.

Here's one on the intelligence of fishies

Now, we all hear a lot about goldfish. People get goldfish for their kids because "they're easy to take care of, and die soon anyway". They put them in bare bowls because "well, they don't need more, and they die soon anyway, and they're not that bright". They don't do anything about stimulation because "well, they're not that bright, and they die soon anyway". These statements would be troubling, except that the premises are totally flawed to begin with! When properly cared for, goldfish live decades - so all those fish that "died soon anyway" did so because they were killed by incompetent owners. And given that you can teach a goldfish to do a variety of tricks, I'm not so sure they're as unintelligent as all that. It's cruelty to have an animal and not give it any form of stimulation at all, it's like locking them in solitary for their whole life!

( Read more... )

Two articles on two different kindergartens.

One on a charter school that "justifies" its trip to the farm by calling it "test prep".

Some of the comments are disgusting, blaming parents for kids not going "to the zoo". When are they supposed to go to the zoo? On a weekday, when it closes at 5? On the weekend, when it costs $12 per person and is crowded besides and you have to do your shopping and your cleaning and visit family and go to church? Uncool, guys.

( Read more... )

And one about an absurdly expensive private school for gifted kids

( Read more... )

An article on zero waste facilities and communities

( Read more... )

And finally, one on problems faced by African immigrants in the Bronx

( Read more... )

This is the coolest method of multiplication I've ever seen. I knew, of course, that you could grid multiply, but I figured any big number would mean doing 123 lines up and 321 lines across or whatnot!

Also here. Taken from here.

Here's one on Texas schools being required to teach the Bible. I'm sure it'll collapse soon enough.

You know, my father was from Texas. It was a big part of his identity. He's actually buried over there. Must be spinning in his grave. I wouldn't be surprised if he got up and started walking to march on the capital either!

And here's one about a bunch of whiners complaining that people wonder WHY, exactly, they felt the need to bring guns to a presidential event.

"I still have some freeeeeeeedoms!" they declare. I think the following comment sums it up:

Let's make sense of this. Wear a John Kerry shirt to a Bush rally and get arrested. Carry an assault rifle to an Obama rally and you are a Freedom Fighting Revolutionary.

This'll take up multiple entries, I'm sure.

Cricket helps the police forge ties in immigrant communities

( Read more... )

Rain collection is now legal in Colorado

( Read more... )

Children: Self-Control Presages Math Gains in Young

( Read more... )

Fragile Tanzanian Orphans Get Help After Mothers Die

( This one is fascinating )

Political Shifts on Gay Rights Lag Behind Culture

( Read more... )

I feel this is massively unfair, especially to such young children. Why? Because one kid in her class, N, brought in 700 boxtops in the past few months. He has a big family, clearly, but the point is that nobody else could possibly compete with that. If they're going to have a competition with a reward for this, they ought to discount his contribution, or put an individual cap. It's like running a race where your opponent is on steroids.

Of course, 700 boxtops is also shocking because, dude, the only way we were able to bring in our... *thinks a bit* five is because we happened to have some ziploc and hefty bags in the house. We don't eat any of that stuff, and we don't even use disposable menstrual stuff anymore! Oh, wait, for Ana's class birthday party I brought in some disposable plates. So, uh, six boxtops. A whole 60 cents. Yay!

But anyway, not to dis other people's diets, but 700 of these foods in a year? Wow. That's a bit shocking. (Maybe they make a lot of garbage. Maybe he has a lot of sisters - that'd use up Kotex AND Hefty bags every month.)

Well, at any rate, I ask again what I asked way back in the beginning of the year. If you happen to buy this stuff already, and don't have any use for the little clip-off boxtops, I'd be glad to get them for Ana's school. Just save them up and send them to me in one big bunch. Or if you're, like, buying from one of these places online already, that sort of thing.

Ana was doing her TH worksheet. Due to somebody's bad choice, the hardest word (thermometer) was the one without a picture. Seriously? They couldn't've put "thumb" there instead? (I suppose thermometer follows the rules better than thumb with that silent b, but it's long and intimidating.)

Ana diligently divided it up into syllables and sounded it out. THER MO MEEE TER.

Me: Thermometer, honey.
Ana: But why is there a METER in it?
Me: Uh... because it's an unstressed syllable and in English unstressed syllables reduce to a schwa*.
Ana: Oh.

I hope I didn't go too far over her head, but like my mother always says, 10% sticks. (Eventually.)





*Actually, the way I say it, it's more like a schwi. YES THAT'S A REAL WORD.

I made the mistake of reading the comments (some of them, anyway) where I first picked up this link.

Let's just say they were appalling and leave it at that. Two things, though.

1. While the school's actions may not be censorship in the strictest definition, they were acting as an arm of the government to specially restrict where, when, and to whom this one child could share her knowledge. This sends a clear message about Harvey Milk in particular and gay people in general, and let's not talk about what it says about the pursuit of knowledge! (And don't give me that "sex" line. If you think you have to talk about this guy's sex life in order to talk about him, I suggest you get your mind out of the gutter. I know some of our politicians lack any sense of discretion, but seriously, we don't *have* to talk about it.)

2. I am so *sick* of reading about how "OMG, the ACLU only ever attacks Christians and Christian values and hates Christianity and is ebil!!!!!111" Aside from the exceedingly narrow view of who can be Christian, it's just flat-out wrong. Unless of course I'm imagining their defense of....

A Christian prisoner's right to preach (at least twice!)

A Christian church's desire to put their money where their mouth is and uphold their Christian morals by housing the homeless

The right of a Christian man to protest Wal-Mart for "supporting gay lifestyles and marriage". (I don't agree with his statement, but I sure do agree with his right to say it!)

The right of a second-grader to sing a religious song at a school talent show

I'll grant you, most of the ACLU's press releases on their work related to religious freedom is about non-Christians, usually being pressured by Christians. This, however, is not because the ACLU wishes to silence Christians, or because society oppresses Christians so much that very few of them can even make cases. What nerve! It's because Christians are the majority and often casually (and usually unintentionally) do things which harm other's religious rights! Well, of course. It's much easier for the majority to do things which harm the minority than the other way around, how could it be otherwise? Christians certainly aren't being persecuted as a group in the US. What an idea! And attempts to take away the special rights Christians often have really aren't the same as attempts to remove their/your religious freedom. No, really.

So, if any of you were interested in spouting that old ACLU canard about how they hate Christianity and traditional values (what is more traditional in this country than the first Amendment, I ask you!), please - educate yourself.

Go Ana!

She's a hero. Today, as she was doing her homework on the porch, our neighbor came over and asked for her help. Her basement tenant had locked himself out, and his windows are tiny. So Ana climbed through, yes, we said, you can step on the bed! and she fetched his keys - and tried to bring them to us, prompting calls of "Just open the door!", which she did, and she SAVED THE WHOLE CREW! Hooray! What a day, when the babies key ran away.

I loathe goody bags, so we did a grab bag first (which the kidlets had apparently never done, though they were de riguer for christmas parties when I was a kid - but maybe it's a Brooklyn thing?) and we also gave some presents For The Whole Class: A set of lacing letters, two sets of alphabet stamps and a stamp pad, a dolphin stamp (because the school animal is the dolphin), several sets of letter stickers, a M&D birthday cake, and some construction paper. And two birthday-themed books. And, incidentally, some snacks, bowls, and cups that we didn't use for Ana's party. Some of them came with those special "box tops for education" on them, so win! Best part is that I can just repeat this present for Evangeline's pre-k and kindergarten birthdays. Go me! No idea what I'll do for Ana for the first grade, though - definitely some books (anybody want to suggest picture books of a more advanced level that talk about birthdays or feature birthdays prominently? Or chapter books suitable for a first grade library?), maybe a few games...? First grade is different. More craft supplies, for sure. (Which reminds me, I want to get some lefty scissors for the school, you know my feelings on that. I need to ask what teachers, aside from grade teachers, use scissors. Like, does the science teacher? The literacy teacher? Are they going to have an art teacher next year?)

To round out my stories, Evangeline was in her own personal horror film recently. She was wearing her clicky-clacky shoes (Ana is the language innovator, "clicky-clackies" for "plastic pretend dress-up shoes" is a term she invented. Evangeline picked speech up much faster, but Ana played with it more. This is an area of degree, of course) when I decided to be a tickle monster. I started to run towards her, but she cried in (mock) horror "I can't run in my c'icky-c'ackies!". I swiftly shifted to the lurching kind of tickle monster and she escaped in safety, closing a door in my face. Tickle monsters, like vampires, can't go where they're not invited, you know.

And they say such silly things. If you want your preferred writing style to be taught, try not to defend it with gems like "You need it to sign your name". Not only is that not true, but it's easily avoidable - people could learn cursive just for namesigning and not for anything else! Alternatively, learning to type isn't something that you can't do after a certain age. Unless your kid has serious motor control issues they can probably wait until they're 10 or 15 to do it, they really *don't* need to learn when they're six... although this article is fascinating, I must admit!

When I was in elementary school, the other gifted first grade class learned cursive that year. The rest of us learned in the third grade. I guess they sorta re-learned it? I didn't learn it at all, for various reasons. (A word to the wise? Attempting to bully a child into learning by saying they'll "need to know this next year" and "won't pass if they don't know it" is just not helpful. Especially when it's not true. My seventh grade English teacher should note that by high school (her personal benchmark) all my teachers didn't care and liked stuff typed anyway.)

And then we moved to Staten Island, where I became acquainted with a totally different style of penmanship than the one I'd failed to learn in Brooklyn. I'm not sure if the people using it developed it on their own, or if my school in Brooklyn just taught differently than their schools here, but it was different. No slant, and very round. The general shapes of the letters are the same (I'm having a fun time on Google looking at different examples of cursive script as taught for handwriting in different countries), but they're all round. It's very neat, and it's very careful, and it's a pain in the butt to read because all the letters look alike, like variations on os and as. (Picture that as an Ariel a, thanks.)

I think I could spend all day doing this - but! I just woke up (I had intestinal difficulties and didn't make it to bed until the birds started chirping) and wish to go *do* something today.

If you want, though, I'd appreciate images of your own handwriting (cursive or otherwise) and your handwriting if you were writing for a strict teacher. Just for my own edification. Location, times, etc. are useful.

Oh, also, a random video I found on the subject of overcrowding, from the 50s! It's absolutely fascinating for reasons I can't quite articulate, though surely the fact that "classes in boiler rooms" is a popular (and not altogether non-existent) boogeyman in NYC today helps with that.