Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Sorry, but some kids aren't going to get it in 7 hours. Seriously!
Drill, drill, drill. Basic facts are huge.
Read my posts about the kind of homework load my kid is carrying. I'd love to have more time to focus on basics, but the sooner is better mentality his elementary embraces makes it extremely difficult.
As it is, I've got a kid who is so freaked out about homework that he routinely asks to skip soccer practice, a sport he absolutely loves and which I think is essential for his physical and emotional health. (Before anybody takes me to task for overscheduling, it's a low-pressure rec league that practices for 60 minutes 2x/wk.)
I drill multiplication with him over breakfast, and it frosts me that he can't even eat his cereal in peace. I keep track of the amount of time we spend on school-related activities, and he works longer hours than his dad!
His middle-school aged sister doesn't have the kind of workload he does, nor did she have hours of homework every night at his age -- she went to third grade in a different district -- yet she is doing very well in the same rigorous middle school her brother will eventually attend.
At this point, I'm just counting the days until the school year is done. Then, we can spend the summer working to fill in the learning gaps. Yipppeeeee!
After I watched this, I B**ch-slapped myself, then I cried for about half an hour.
So what exactly was wrong with the standard method in the first place and why is it we need some "genius innovators" to come up with NEW ways to teach kids math?
This is scary.
Syracusa, I thought the same thing when I watched this video. It's almost like these mathmaticians have too much time on their hands and they're just coming up with math tricks and games that are not going to do the average child any good in the long run. It's very bizarre.
Read my posts about the kind of homework load my kid is carrying. I'd love to have more time to focus on basics, but the sooner is better mentality his elementary embraces makes it extremely difficult.
As it is, I've got a kid who is so freaked out about homework that he routinely asks to skip soccer practice, a sport he absolutely loves and which I think is essential for his physical and emotional health. (Before anybody takes me to task for overscheduling, it's a low-pressure rec league that practices for 60 minutes 2x/wk.)
I drill multiplication with him over breakfast, and it frosts me that he can't even eat his cereal in peace. I keep track of the amount of time we spend on school-related activities, and he works longer hours than his dad!
His middle-school aged sister doesn't have the kind of workload he does, nor did she have hours of homework every night at his age -- she went to third grade in a different district -- yet she is doing very well in the same rigorous middle school her brother will eventually attend.
At this point, I'm just counting the days until the school year is done. Then, we can spend the summer working to fill in the learning gaps. Yipppeeeee!
Ok, so how did WE ever learn to multiply, add, subtract, divide??
Read my posts about the kind of homework load my kid is carrying. I'd love to have more time to focus on basics, but the sooner is better mentality his elementary embraces makes it extremely difficult.
As it is, I've got a kid who is so freaked out about homework that he routinely asks to skip soccer practice, a sport he absolutely loves and which I think is essential for his physical and emotional health. (Before anybody takes me to task for overscheduling, it's a low-pressure rec league that practices for 60 minutes 2x/wk.)
I drill multiplication with him over breakfast, and it frosts me that he can't even eat his cereal in peace. I keep track of the amount of time we spend on school-related activities, and he works longer hours than his dad!
His middle-school aged sister doesn't have the kind of workload he does, nor did she have hours of homework every night at his age -- she went to third grade in a different district -- yet she is doing very well in the same rigorous middle school her brother will eventually attend.
At this point, I'm just counting the days until the school year is done. Then, we can spend the summer working to fill in the learning gaps. Yipppeeeee!
Formercalifiornian,
While I completely empathize with you regarding the homework load children get nowadays (much of it utterly useless, apparently), it would be my humble opinion that soccer would have to go before math drilling, come H or H water.
Quite a bit of drilling could be done in those 2 hours a week of soccer (which probably end up being more by the time you get ready for the practice, travel to the destination, etc).
Coming from a culture where extra-curriculars mean basically nothing, if they even exist, it is hard for me to relate to the IMPERATIVE NEED of many American families to keep the soccer practice before those multiplication tables are learned better than the child know his own name.
I know that youth sports are very important for many American families but unless people realize that academic basics (like Math, Reading, Writing) MUST come before anything else (including organized sports or inane homework like gluing lady-bugs on a poster for a supposed "research project" in elementary school)...they are bound to get in trouble somewhere down the road.
All of those volunteerista moms who fuss over 1 million activities in schools would do everyone so much good if they rallied for a cause along the lines of "more time spent on Academic Basics, less time on Anything Else".
Music, Arts of various sorts are wonderful to have in schools, but certainly not during the time when the Basics should be drilled.
To see "innovators" come up with such "mental" ways of doing a basic multiplication, simply because...students didn't learn their tables??? ...or why in the World?)... was beyond painful to me.
Maybe not. Let's look at the data a little more carefully. One of your links said the following:
In a five-year study, researchers at SRI International found that technology-using students in Challenge 2000 Multimedia Project classrooms outperformed non-technology-using students in communication skills, teamwork, and problem solving. The Center for Learning in Technology researchers, led by Bill Penuel, found increased student engagement, greater responsibility for learning, increased peer collaboration skills, and greater achievement gains by students who had been labeled low achievers.
Some issues with this data right away that jump out at me:
1. Tiny sample size. Two classrooms is a relatively insufficient sample.
2. Notice what's emerging as "better": communication skills, teamwork, and problem-solving. The problem-solving might be the best argument here, but I notice --and so should others -- that this information is not quantified. What problems? How were they solved?
3. Notice how it's "greater achievement gains by students who had been labeled low achievers"? This suggests by omission that students who had not been labeled low achievers -- that is, the majority of students -- did not make those gains.
But let's look further:
The project conducted a performance assessment designed to measure students' skills in constructing a presentation aimed at a particular audience. Students from Multimedia Project classrooms outperformed comparison classrooms in all three areas scored by researchers and teachers: student content, attention to audience, and design. The Multimedia Project involves completing one to four interdisciplinary multimedia projects a year that integrate real-world issues and practices.[/i]
So they tested their ability to make a presentation. What about their ability to do the following:
* Read
* Write
* Do math
* Speak a foreign language
* Understand history?
To be fair to PBL, I have most effectively seen it used in the sciences -- but rarely anywhere else, and it has by no means paid off in content what it took in time.
Bottom line, your data was not persuasive. Show me, if you will, a study that demonstrates the following data and I will be more convinced:
1. Large sample size
2. Long-term effect
3. Controlled comparison to "traditional" learning
4. Efficiency of time use
5. Improved understanding of concepts as compared to traditional learning with the same time investment
6. Improved retention of concepts as compared to traditional learning with the same time investment
7. Improved or broadened coverage of concepts as compared to traditional learning with the same time investment
When you can produce studies of this nature, please do alert me. As always, I am eager to see data and to consider it carefully. As of now, I am not convinced.
After I watched this, I B**ch-slapped myself, then I cried for about half an hour.
So what exactly was wrong with the standard method in the first place and why is it we need some "genius innovators" to come up with NEW ways to teach kids math?
After I watched this, I B**ch-slapped myself, then I cried for about half an hour.
So 1 what exactly was wrong with the standard method in the first place and 2 why is it we need some "genius innovators" to come up with NEW ways to teach kids math?
This is scary.
1--It doesn't provide enough marketing opportunities,
and 2--What Charles Wallace said.
Remember, in America, to know what is going on, ALWAYS follow the money. There is a lot of money to be made in schooling, and these programs cost a lot of money.
An effective teacher can teach multiplication the old-fashioned way, with flash cards, beans, and worksheets for less than $50 per child. Where's the money in that?
Maybe not. Let's look at the data a little more carefully. One of your links said the following:
In a five-year study, researchers at SRI International found that technology-using students in Challenge 2000 Multimedia Project classrooms outperformed non-technology-using students in communication skills, teamwork, and problem solving. The Center for Learning in Technology researchers, led by Bill Penuel, found increased student engagement, greater responsibility for learning, increased peer collaboration skills, and greater achievement gains by students who had been labeled low achievers.
Some issues with this data right away that jump out at me:
1. Tiny sample size. Two classrooms is a relatively insufficient sample.
2. Notice what's emerging as "better": communication skills, teamwork, and problem-solving. The problem-solving might be the best argument here, but I notice --and so should others -- that this information is not quantified. What problems? How were they solved?
3. Notice how it's "greater achievement gains by students who had been labeled low achievers"? This suggests by omission that students who had not been labeled low achievers -- that is, the majority of students -- did not make those gains.
But let's look further:
The project conducted a performance assessment designed to measure students' skills in constructing a presentation aimed at a particular audience. Students from Multimedia Project classrooms outperformed comparison classrooms in all three areas scored by researchers and teachers: student content, attention to audience, and design. The Multimedia Project involves completing one to four interdisciplinary multimedia projects a year that integrate real-world issues and practices.[/i]
So they tested their ability to make a presentation. What about their ability to do the following:
* Read
* Write
* Do math
* Speak a foreign language
* Understand history?
To be fair to PBL, I have most effectively seen it used in the sciences -- but rarely anywhere else, and it has by no means paid off in content what it took in time.
Bottom line, your data was not persuasive. Show me, if you will, a study that demonstrates the following data and I will be more convinced:
1. Large sample size
2. Long-term effect
3. Controlled comparison to "traditional" learning
4. Efficiency of time use
5. Improved understanding of concepts as compared to traditional learning with the same time investment
6. Improved retention of concepts as compared to traditional learning with the same time investment
7. Improved or broadened coverage of concepts as compared to traditional learning with the same time investment
When you can produce studies of this nature, please do alert me. As always, I am eager to see data and to consider it carefully. As of now, I am not convinced.
So many people are enamored with citing "research", so few seem to understand what quality research looks like.
That was nice.
An effective teacher can teach multiplication the old-fashioned way, with flash cards, beans, and worksheets for less than $50 per child. Where's the money in that?
As a point of note, soccer practice happens at the park across the street from our house, so there's minimal commute time. He runs it in less than two minutes. Despite our proximity to a beautiful park, we live on a street with no other children his age, so he has little outdoor time with friends barring soccer. (That's something I wish I had looked at more closely before buying our house -- nearly 40% of our students are enrolled from outside the neighborhood.) Practice also provides time with his father, who coaches the team.
Like most boys his age, my son needs a lot of physical activity, healthy food, minimal exposure to electronic games (we didn't even own a TV until this past Christmas and we maintain a no-TV household during the week) and a good night's sleep to perform at his best.
I'm absolutely with you about the insanity of American youth sports, which is why my daughter no longer plays and why we chose a decidedly low-key, no travel team for our son. I'm not about to give up something that he so obviously enjoys and also provides the physical activity he needs as a growing boy. I don't think it's healthy for him to sit indoors doing homework from school dismissal until bedtime with his only break being dinner before it's time to shower and get ready for bed. Even the school day provides time for recess!
And as I stated, I DO drill multiplication with him everyday. However, this is not required by his math curriculum nor is it apparently reinforced during math class, and I'm terribly bothered by that.
How did I learn my multiplication tables? I learned them from my third grade teacher, Mrs. James, through daily classroom review -- no flash card drill at home necessary.
Last edited by formercalifornian; 04-05-2011 at 10:35 PM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
