
Ask HN: Common Core Math, Better? Or Worse? - eglover
What do you think of common core math? I&#x27;m not a fan of common core at all, but I love how it teaches math. Instead of counting by ones, or doing crazy right to left carry the 1 nonsense it concentrates on going left to right.<p>For example, normally 14 + 17 would be:<p>7+4=11 -&gt; Put the 1 in the ones place to &quot;carry&quot; it -&gt; 1+1=2, plus your carried 1 = 3 -&gt; Answer: 31<p>At higher levels it becomes harder to do math in your head with this foundation and students are more likely to depend on slow paper methods or calculators.<p>With common core 14 + 17 is:<p>(Tens place) 10 + 10 = 20 -&gt; (Ones place) 7+4 = 6+4+1 = 10+1 = 11 -&gt; 20 + 11 = 31.<p>This can indeed be harder to learn when on paper, but with the help of a teacher this is incredibly easy, and very fast. Most of you are probably already doing this in your head, and you probably taught it to yourself because what you learned in school is slow and taxes your personal RAM.<p>I don&#x27;t get all the up and arms about it. As I understand it, this is how Asian countries do math (based on the abacus). When you look at the statistics, US schools do better at lower levels but cliff dives when it comes to middle school and beyond.<p>Some links:<p>Khan Academy: https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.khanacademy.org&#x2F;commoncore<p>Google Image Search for &#x27;common core math&#x27;: https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.google.com&#x2F;search?q=common+core+math&amp;newwindow=1&amp;safe=off&amp;es_sm=122&amp;qscrl=1&amp;source=lnms&amp;tbm=isch&amp;sa=X&amp;ei=TusQVMn3Bo62yATlnoH4CQ&amp;ved=0CAkQ_AUoAg&amp;biw=1920&amp;bih=965
======
joeclark77
> "Most of you are probably already doing this in your head"

This is the cargo cult thinking behind common core. What the self-appointed
geniuses behind common core have done is, they observed that high performing
students use various mental shortcuts so they don't have to do addition the
formal way, or refer to multiplication tables. So they said, "let's not teach
students to do addition the formal way, and let's not make them memorize
multiplication tables", assuming this would make all the students high
performers.

But the reason high performers are high performers is that they _did_ learn
addition the formal way and they _did_ memorize their multiplication tables,
then proceeded _beyond_ that to adopt mental shortcuts. You can't just skip
the foundational stuff.

~~~
eglover
1\. You can't shortcut your way out of not knowing the multiplication table
and basic arithmetic. Nobody does this.

2\. The "formal way" as you put it is complex and unnecessary. It makes things
harder, especially once you hit algebra. If you can't do simple two digit
addition in your head by the time you start learning things that involve
larger processes like inequalities and quadratic equations you WILL slow down
and possibly become frustrated and lose confidence. If you want to get by in
these subjects you have to start to depend on the calculator.

But guess what? Now you want to be a computer science major and all of the
sudden you have to learn how to graph trig functions and find the
instantaneous rate under a curve. Calculators can't help you now. In fact,
everything you've just spent 4+ years cheating on must be fully understood at
the manual level to even begin to grasp what you need to know now....

What you see in common core is not some magic a genius cabal created out of a
Darwinian spite for the rest of mankind. It is an easier process that is used
to create a much stronger foundation in mathematics. Nobody is telling kids to
not know their multiplication tables, what they are saying is that there is an
easier and quicker way to learn math.

That being said, I don't like monopolies and putting one on education is a
dismal thing to do. With privatisation (real privatisation down to the
accreditation level) you allow different things to be tried rather than one
state staying, "This is how things will be done, hopefully we won't all be
retarded in 20 years. If not, let's take credit and ignore that thing called
the internet. If so, blame the current administration."

If enough people honestly believe "new math" (good song by Tom Lehrer) is the
way to go, they can teach it to their kids. If people think what is proven to
be better is... well... better, let them do it. When major differences appear
in children from the same generation with one group knowing math and another
not (like Asia vs. America), there'll be no complaining to do.

~~~
joeclark77
> The "formal way" as you put it is complex and unnecessary. It makes things
> harder, especially once you hit algebra. If you can't do simple two digit
> addition in your head by the time you start learning things that involve
> larger processes like inequalities and quadratic equations you WILL slow
> down and possibly become frustrated and lose confidence.

But how do you _learn_ to do two digit addition in your head? You learn by
doing two digit addition _on paper_ over and over again. Students who are good
at this will begin to notice patterns and develop shortcuts. __You cannot just
skip the learning and go right to the shortcuts. __

This is the kind of stuff they 're peddling under common core:
[http://ace.mu.nu/archives/346625.php](http://ace.mu.nu/archives/346625.php)
[http://twitchy.com/2014/04/10/common-core-insanity-for-
six-y...](http://twitchy.com/2014/04/10/common-core-insanity-for-six-year-
olds-nyc-mom-knows-garbage-math-when-she-sees-it-pic/)

~~~
eglover
Nobody is talking about shorcuts.

You learn by starting with the tens place and moving on to the ones place.
LEFT to RIGHT. NOT right to left.

27+38

30 + 20 = 50

7+8 = 5+8+2 = 5+10 = 15

50 + 15 = 65

This is a lightning fast process that you do on paper to understand, and in
your head in practice. Carrying, as I've said 3 times now is inefficient,
slow, and harms the future possibility of doing well in upper level math.

BTW, I'm no stranger to the alternative media. Hell, I still watch the
Infowars feed. (I would also say that the english side of common core is
appalling.) But you have to recognize that the stuff is 99% bullshit, just as
with the case with FOX and CNN. (Note that math can NOT be memorized, you're
dealing with infinity.) These sites pander to a specific audience just like
everyone else. Hateful/scared people love hateful/scared sites. Its a shame
everyone has to spin everything into something bigger than it actually is.

Just the facts. This kind of math is faster, easier to learn, and easier to
do. It's results (already proven) create a higher confidence in math and a
better ability to perform at the higher levels. This stuff isn't new in any
way. It's the same as using an abacus. (You know, those things they used in
old one room schoolhouses where you slide the ones and ten places?) And tell
me, how well do you think modern Americans compare to children in the 19th
century with math? You sell yourself as someone who might know about a certain
book by Charlotte Iserbyt, so I assume you know where I'm going with this.

Check out the Khan Academy site listed in the OP and do a little for yourself.
Learn it in order to understand it.

~~~
joeclark77
First of all, I think that technique is nuts as an educational method. Five
and six year olds cannot instantly intuit that 27+38 = (20+30)+(5+8+2) in
their heads before they've ever had lessons on doing math the mechanical way,
carrying the one, etc. They need to know how to _add_ before they can start
doing intuitive pre-processing in their heads. They may be able to do the pre-
processing later, after they've seen a lot of math problems, but you can't
just skip the basics.

Second of all, did you follow the Twitchy link I posted? At the bottom of the
page they have about ten other links to other posts, each pointing to a
"technique" or "problem" in a common core math book more absurd than the last.
Your "abacus-like" method is less insane than some of them, but the sum total
is entirely consistent with what I'm saying: it's a cargo cult mentality.

~~~
eglover
"Five and six year olds cannot instantly intuit that 27+38 =..."

"... before they've ever had lessons on doing math the mechanical way,
carrying the one, etc."

Really? It's not OK to teach the easier way because you don't think it's
intuitive (even though it is much more intuitive), but it is OK to teach the
harder way that they won't use in upper level math when it's obviously not
intuitive? (put one digit at the bottom, subtract one from another, and add
three digits instead of 2? wtf? why can't I just add two numbers? children
don't have stubborn bias' that cause them to automatically hate everything
new)

I don't know if you've noticed but adding 20 and 30 is adding. They need to
know how to add? You're not trying.

You're too stubborn to pay attention to yourself and I'm not stupid enough to
keep talking to a brick wall.

~~~
joeclark77
One cannot _intuit_ until one knows the territory. Intuition is what the good
students will develop by the time they get to "upper level math". And they
develop it by seeing and solving a lot of math problems step by step. The
"hard way" is not as fast as intuition, but it has a set of instructions that
can be taught and followed. You cannot just tell the students in first grade:
you don't need to follow any instructions, just start intuiting the answers by
looking at the big picture.

What you call "the hard way" is the way people have learned addition for a
thousand years, and it works. It worked for Newton, Einstein, and the guys who
put men on the moon.

Aside: The day I see a Millennial kid make change from a cash register without
having to look at the computer screen is the day I might start taking math
education advice from your generation...

Aside #2: I too did an image search for 'common core math'. Look what I found!
I think they make my point for me:

[http://i1.wp.com/truthinamericaneducation.com/wp-
content/upl...](http://i1.wp.com/truthinamericaneducation.com/wp-
content/uploads/2013/03/Common-Core_13.jpg)

[http://greenecountyteaparty.ohlc.org/wp-
content/uploads/site...](http://greenecountyteaparty.ohlc.org/wp-
content/uploads/sites/30/2014/03/Common-Core-math-problem.png)

------
27182818284
> I'm not a fan of common core at all, but I love how it teaches math.

When the debate started heating up I took a course on common core. The amount
of misconceptions surrounding it are surprising. My favorite probably being
that the federal government is mandating it, when it was voluntarily adopted
by 43 states. Another is that the images being passed around on Reddit and
showing up in your search are the mandated way to teach math. They aren't. Nor
are Khan Academy's lessons. It is more about landings than the individual
stairs. By landing X student should be able to do Y. What stairs you took in
between is your business. Lesson plans are still derived by the teachers, some
are just awful at their jobs or themselves have misconceptions that they have
to follow a hideous thing done by another teacher in another state.

~~~
eglover
Sounds like laziness to me, which is of course rampant among teachers.

It does amaze me that googling "common core math" brings up the things it
does. Even in a world where we have access to all information, everyone seems
to be trying to bullshit everything. I find it very difficult to find the
facts on most things.

But when I saw that Khan Academies methods were starting to mirror "The Great
Courses" "Secrets of Mental Math"[1] and that it was a part of the common
core, I was impressed. Once I started learning things this way, I was better
able to handle all math. I used to hate it, dread it. But this kind of thing
makes it easy and fun. I'm glad kids are being exposed to it.

[1] [http://www.thegreatcourses.com/courses/secrets-of-mental-
mat...](http://www.thegreatcourses.com/courses/secrets-of-mental-
math.html?cid=1406)

------
alain94040
The great thing about common core is the disappearance of multiple-choice
tests. Anyone who grew up outside the US will tell you that having to show
your reasoning is much superior to picking between ABC and D.

~~~
eglover
I didn't know that, is that universal or only for math? It definitely makes
sense for math as you can get close and easily guess. So you can have no idea
what you're doing and still get a 70% or so.

~~~
AjJi
I can count the number of multiple-choice tests I had on the fingers of my
hands, and all of them were tests preparing for tech certifications.

When discussing the multiple choice format between students, we've always
thought that it's way easier to get the guess the right answer between choices
than to show how you got there.

It's even worse outside of math classes, say history, and you're asked "when
did $COUNTRY get its independence", obviously, it's much easier when you have
a list of choices to choose from.

