Is this math problem 3rd grade appropriate?

[jodifla]

Tests should be reasonable and yes, they should be written in a way that most kids pass. Here's the inside scoop from someone actually in the testing rooms in NY

http://dianeravitch.net/2013/10/07/common-core-tests-in-ny-build-opt-out-movement/

NYS Teacher
October 7, 2013 at 11:47 am

I administered both last April. I know why NYSED is afraid to release the Pearson/CCSS tests in their entirety.

The fundamental flaw of the exam schedule itself should not be overlooked. Six days. Nine hours. Unless you’re an extended time student: Six days. Eighteen hours. The test fatigue we witnessed was more than palpable – many simply quit because it was just too much. CCSS tests test are more demanding than high school Regents exams (true high stakes tests that determine graduation) as far as perseverence and test taking stamina are concerned. Cuomo wouldn’t dare go near either exam because he couldn’t pass either one.

 

[nugov2]

Ok, let's go right after these standards. This is first grade:

Mathematical Practices
1. Make sense of problems and persevere in solving them.
2. Reason abstractly and quantitatively.
3. Construct viable arguments and critique the reasoning of others.
4. Model with mathematics.
5. Use appropriate tools strategically.
6. Attend to precision.
7. Look for and make use of structure.
8. Look for and express regularity in repeated reasoning.

6 year olds are concrete thinkers. That is how they are developmentally wired. You can't just say "Think abstractly, Sally!" And critique other people's
reasoning? At 5 or 6?

Yakety yakety yakety yak.


These kids should be getting the foundations, which are concrete.

If the teacher walks in and lacks the common sense to talk at the child's level and speaks exactly the way you just explained that is the teacher's fault.

When they want you to critique other peoples work they want them to look at 5+5=6 and explain why that wouldn't make sense or 5+5=10 does make sense. Not unreasonable for even a preschool age child. example of applying it to a really young child. Lets fill this Dixie cup with the water from this 10 gallon bucket. Do you think that will work? No, why? It is too much water. Why do you think it is too much water. The bucket is much bigger than the Dixie cup...good job. What could we fill up with using this big bucket? A pool...good job. Why do you think a pool would work? You're right! It is much bigger than the bucket. Good thinking.

Really not that out of the realm of reasonable

 

[gottaluvPluto]

That's us. We aren't at 3.5 hours yet but we are at half to one hour per night right now in first. It's not his homework that's causing that. It's me doing extra stuff with him to make sure he's getting it all.

That is what these parents do as well. They do the homework and then they do extra problems. The next night mom or dad quizzes the child on the homework from yesterday and then start the new homework.

 

[sam_gordon]

Tests should be reasonable and yes, they should be written in a way that most kids pass. Here's the inside scoop from someone actually in the testing rooms in NY

I totally disagree with the bolded. Instead I'd say "Kids should be taught so most pass the test".

 

[jodifla]

If the teacher walks in and lacks the common sense to talk at the child's level and speaks exactly the way you just explained that is the teacher's fault.

When they want you to critique other peoples work they want them to look at 5+5=6 and explain why that wouldn't make sense or 5+5=10 does make sense. Not unreasonable for even a preschool age child. example of applying it to a really young child. Lets fill this Dixie cup with the water from this 10 gallon bucket. Do you think that will work? No, why? It is too much water. Why do you think it is too much water. The bucket is much bigger than the Dixie cup...good job. What could we fill up with using this big bucket? A pool...good job. Why do you think a pool would work? You're right! It is much bigger than the bucket. Good thinking.

Really not that out of the realm of reasonable

My child had very little receptive language in 1st grade, as is the case with many special needs children. In a classroom setting, he couldn't speak more than two words at a time. He couldn't even answer -- in words -- what he had for lunch most days.

He COULD however, do math that was presented to him in visual form, and math became a strength for him.

This is part of why 95 percent of special needs kids are failing the CC testing.

 

[nugov2]

Your link got bit by the filters.

Rats!!! It is hard to read through all the language I posted without the pics. I do always find it amusing how long a simple lesson is written out. I remember writing 5 page lessons in college that would take 10 minutes to teach!!

Seriously, just google the standard and the grade level and there are tons of examples out there. Some good, some bad. Each teacher should assess their students and choose the lesson accordingly. As my kids would say easy peasy lemon squeezy

 

[jodifla]

I totally disagree with the bolded. Instead I'd say "Kids should be taught so most pass the test".

Yes, of course. But the jury is still out on whether children will be developmentally ready to pass the tests, which are created by 2 companies and have been roundly criticized for their sloppiness and inaccuracies.

 

[nugov2]

My child had very little receptive language in 1st grade, as is the case with many special needs children. In a classroom setting, he couldn't speak more than two words at a time. He couldn't even answer -- in words -- what he had for lunch most days.

He COULD however, do math that was presented to him in visual form, and math became a strength for him.

This is part of why 95 percent of special needs kids are failing the CC testing.

Is he on an IEP? I would imagine like here where I live they accommodate a child on an IEP. I had kids using number lines while the rest of the class couldn't or touch points. They could draw a picture to show why something makes sense and still be meeting that standard. You need teachers who think outside of the box.

 

[sam_gordon]

Yes, of course. But the jury is still out on whether children will be developmentally ready to pass the tests, which are created by 2 companies and have been roundly criticized for their sloppiness and inaccuracies.

But the jury ISN'T out. How many links have you posted from parents who have already convicted CC? How many people have posted on Dis in the many threads that CC is the worst thing to happen to schools? That doesn't sound like "the jury is still out", it sounds like they've voted unanimously to convict based on opening arguments from the prosecution.

 

[sam_gordon]

Is he on an IEP? I would imagine like here where I live they accommodate a child on an IEP. I had kids using number lines while the rest of the class couldn't or touch points. They could draw a picture to show why something makes sense and still be meeting that standard. You need teachers who think outside of the box.

I wondered about the IEP also.

 

[sam_gordon]

This is an extremely long article about CC in Kentucky (the first state to implement CC). IMO, it shows both pros and cons. http://hechingerreport.org/content/kentucky-pioneers-common-core-reforms-with-mixed-results_13297/

It talks about introducing concepts early. It talks about "not having the foundation" of facts and needing to learn new concepts. It has examples from a number of schools. I'm only extracting a couple lines, but it's so much more.

The first tests based on the standards were administered in 2012. Proficiency ratings were about 30 percentage points lower than they had been the year before. The same drop was seen in New York this spring when it became the second state to test under the new standards. Common Core supporters say the results are a necessary growing pain of shifting to more difficult, but still realistic expectations of students.

Test scores went up this year in most grades and subjects, but statewide only about 40 percent of students scored at least proficient in math and about 50 percent in reading.

Yes, the majority of kids "failed" the test. But I key in on "test scores went up".

 

[nugov2]

Yes, of course. But the jury is still out on whether children will be developmentally ready to pass the tests, which are created by 2 companies and have been roundly criticized for their sloppiness and inaccuracies.

You are talking about two different things though. The standards can be great, while the testing is horrible. I hate most standardize testing, so I doubt this latest one will be much better. With that said until my kids experience it first hand next year I cannot comment.

Once again we can all argue round and round, but there are districts doing it right. It isn't a bunch of words written down that are to blame, but the way teachers and administrators are deciding to implement those words. Even while we had a curriculum our school adopted I was free to teach any way(within reason) I felt my students would be most successful. As long as they met certain standards. I cannot see why schools are telling teachers you can only teach x by doing y...there are lots of ways to get to the standard and teachers should be able to implement any way that is best for the students. What type of school tells a teacher they can only teach one specific lesson to get students to understand the standard. I cannot believe people do not blame the administrators and teachers for this. Blaming words on paper makes no sense.

 

[Mickey'snewestfan]

My child had very little receptive language in 1st grade, as is the case with many special needs children. In a classroom setting, he couldn't speak more than two words at a time. He couldn't even answer -- in words -- what he had for lunch most days.

He COULD however, do math that was presented to him in visual form, and math became a strength for him.

This is part of why 95 percent of special needs kids are failing the CC testing.

Jodi,

The reality is that language disabilities are a very very difficult thing, and receptive language disabilities even more so than expressive. I'm sorry you've had to deal with them.

What we find at my school, is that for many of our kids who are like yours, is that carefully created math curricula can help kids build a bridge between visual strengths and verbal weaknesses, as well as kids who need bridges built in the opposite question.

I'm a strong advocate for children with disabilities. I taught special ed for 15 years, and most of my work continues to be with students with disabilities today. I know their struggles, and the challenges of educating them in the context of a rigorous curriculum. But, removing things from the curriculum because certain kids will struggle isn't fair. It isn't fair to the kids without disabilities either. Although there's no doubt that the new standards are challenging, they're challenging because these are skills that are needed. Setting them as targets is the only way to get the support that students need to have a chance of meeting them.

 

[nugov2]

Jodi,

The reality is that language disabilities are a very very difficult thing, and receptive language disabilities even more so than expressive. I'm sorry you've had to deal with them.

What we find at my school, is that for many of our kids who are like yours, is that carefully created math curricula can help kids build a bridge between visual strengths and verbal weaknesses, as well as kids who need bridges built in the opposite question.

I'm a strong advocate for children with disabilities. I taught special ed for 15 years, and most of my work continues to be with students with disabilities today. I know their struggles, and the challenges of educating them in the context of a rigorous curriculum. But, removing things from the curriculum because certain kids will struggle isn't fair. It isn't fair to the kids without disabilities either. Although there's no doubt that the new standards are challenging, they're challenging because these are skills that are needed. Setting them as targets is the only way to get the support that students need to have a chance of meeting them.

Well said!

 

[SmallWorld71]

This is WAY WAY beyond most 1st graders I know. (Probably not on the DISboards, but in the rest of the general world.)


1st grade writing standards:


CCSS.ELA-Literacy.W.1.1 Write opinion pieces in which they introduce the topic or name the book they are writing about, state an opinion, supply a reason for the opinion, and provide some sense of closure.
CCSS.ELA-Literacy.W.1.2 Write informative/explanatory texts in which they name a topic, supply some facts about the topic, and provide some sense of closure.
CCSS.ELA-Literacy.W.1.3 Write narratives in which they recount two or more appropriately sequenced events, include some details regarding what happened, use temporal words to signal event order, and provide some sense of closure.

This is what those things might look like in our 1st grade classrooms.

Opinion Piece

I red Don't Let the Pigeon Drive the Bus. It is a fune dok. The pigeon said plez plez plez. He jumped up and down. You shud rede it to.

Informative Piece

All About Puppies

Puppies are babe dogs. (imagine a picture on each page for each line)

Puppies like to play wif bals.

Puppies nede leshs and colrs.

Puppies eat puppy fud.

Puppies are a gud pet for yur kid.

Narrative piece

Me and my Gradma wnt to the zoo. First, we saw zebras and giraffes. My Grandma sed he is so tal! Thn my Grndma bot me a toy panda bare. I was smiling. Last, we wnt home.

I am a Special Education teacher who works with 1st and 2nd graders with IEP's primarily on reading, writing and math. While I do pull students for reading, all my students are included in the regular classroom for writing and math and get their support in the classroom.

I have 7 students on IEP's in grade one. (Out of about 70 1st graders total at the school.) Currently, 5 out of my 7 students can meet those standards with their accommodations in place. It is still pretty early in the year and the 2 other students mentioned are the only two students in the entire grade that can not write multiple sentences independently. Now, most of the spelling is invented, the punctuation marks are hit or miss etc... but, the ideas and concepts are there.

It's actually pretty easy to get young students to write. As long as they know their consonants/ sounds they can get a lot down. They just have to be taught how and for typical children that only takes a short time. Most first graders are very eager to share their ideas!

FWIW - before someone asks, I do not teach in a wealthy district. It is very mixed income with enough students living below poverty to qualify us for a good amount of Title 1 $.

 

[SmallWorld71]

My child had very little receptive language in 1st grade, as is the case with many special needs children. In a classroom setting, he couldn't speak more than two words at a time. He couldn't even answer -- in words -- what he had for lunch most days.

He COULD however, do math that was presented to him in visual form, and math became a strength for him.

This is part of why 95 percent of special needs kids are failing the CC testing.

One problem I have always had with the MCAS, which is soon to be replaced by the similar CC testing, is that is measures Special Education students (and all students) against grade level standards and therefore doesn't show growth. IME, most (not all) children with special needs can meet these rigorous standards, but they just do it at a slower pace.

For example, a lot of our special ed. students failed the MCAS in 3rd grade. These same students are now in 5th grade. They've grown a lot academically. If given the 3rd grade test now, they could pass. But, they'll be given the 5th grade test and fail. It's a viscous circle that doesn't show their growth. It also contributes to low self-esteem etc... Many special ed. parents at the elementary level lie to their students and tell them that they didn't get the results. I don't blame them.

 

[jodifla]

But the jury ISN'T out. How many links have you posted from parents who have already convicted CC? How many people have posted on Dis in the many threads that CC is the worst thing to happen to schools? That doesn't sound like "the jury is still out", it sounds like they've voted unanimously to convict based on opening arguments from the prosecution.

Once a kid shuts down, it's very hard to undo that damage. Sitting at a table with an hour or 4 or 8 hours of the wrong material isn't going to get children with severe language disabilities to learn any better.

Maybe I used this example before, I can't recall: But if I told you you MUST go to school and you MUST take college level classes in Chinese, how do you think you'd do? How long would you sit in the class before you simply checked out, doodled, did your grocery list, etc.

My son has an IEP and is making great strides. But I have to constantly push and push teachers, administrators and schools to do the right thing.

CC makes the battle all that more uphill, because so many of the standards use "discuss" "tell" "describe" etc.....even math problems that you should just be able to give the darn answer to.

The other dirty truth of CC is that when you look around for any data on special needs kids and the Common Core, the truth is, there isn't any. All the (rather sketchy) research is for more typical kids.

These parents are "convicting" the CC because although it endlessly talks a good game about being broad, in reality, it's geared for a very particular type of student.

And how many nights of "I'm stupid"-- "Please dont' send me to school" would you want to go through with your kid?

 

[jodifla]

This is an extremely long article about CC in Kentucky (the first state to implement CC). IMO, it shows both pros and cons. http://hechingerreport.org/content/kentucky-pioneers-common-core-reforms-with-mixed-results_13297/

It talks about introducing concepts early. It talks about "not having the foundation" of facts and needing to learn new concepts. It has examples from a number of schools. I'm only extracting a couple lines, but it's so much more.


Yes, the majority of kids "failed" the test. But I key in on "test scores went up".

Thanks for this report. Here's what stood out to me:

But after more than two years of effort at Liberty, they have yet to see a substantial increase in test scores—the yardstick that the success of the new standards will ultimately be measured on.

Across the state, test scores are still dismal and state officials have expressed concern that the pace of improvement is not fast enough. Districts have also seen varying success in changing how teachers teach, something that was supposed to dramatically change under the new standards. In 2010 Kentucky was the first of 45 states to adopt the new standards, making the state a test case that others are watching closely as they roll out Common Core and try to manage a growing backlash against the standards. So far, the state’s experience suggests it will be a slow and potentially frustrating road ahead.

And the gap has increased between the percentage of white students who are proficient and the percentage of African Americans. “Overall, the math and reading scores in grade 3-8 and high school did go up, but the concerns we have is that they did not go up fast enough,” Holliday said at a September press conference announcing the new results.

Although many Kentucky educators praise the Common Core for its back-to-basics approach in the elementary years and increased rigor, the poor results have raised concerns about whether it was fair suddenly to ask students to do harder work without properly teaching them foundational skills and whether schools have enough resources to implement the new standards faithfully.

At nearly every grade level in Kentucky, Common Core pushes down content to younger students. For example, in math, the order of operations (Parentheses, Exponents, Multiplication, Division, Addition, Subtraction) used to be covered late in the year in sixth grade; under the Common Core State Standards, fifth graders start with it on day one.



On day five, Jason Cornett’s fifth-grade math class at Flat Lick Elementary School in Knox County was working on problems in pairs. While his first class of the day had generally gotten the right answers, his second class was struggling. At times, they failed to grasp the new concept and so they added before dividing, for instance. Other times, they were stumped by multiplication and division. Many used their fingers for addition and subtraction.

“They’re still having trouble mastering the basics and you’re trying to add stuff on top,” said Cornett. “Over all [Common Core] is a positive change, but it’s been hard on some of the kids in the middle of the transition.”

 

[nugov2]

Once a kid shuts down, it's very hard to undo that damage. Sitting at a table with an hour or 4 or 8 hours of the wrong material isn't going to get children with severe language disabilities to learn any better.

Maybe I used this example before, I can't recall: But if I told you you MUST go to school and you MUST take college level classes in Chinese, how do you think you'd do? How long would you sit in the class before you simply checked out, doodled, did your grocery list, etc.

My son has an IEP and is making great strides. But I have to constantly push and push teachers, administrators and schools to do the right thing.

CC makes the battle all that more uphill, because so many of the standards use "discuss" "tell" "describe" etc.....even math problems that you should just be able to give the darn answer to.

The other dirty truth of CC is that when you look around for any data on special needs kids and the Common Core, the truth is, there isn't any. All the (rather sketchy) research is for more typical kids.

These parents are "convicting" the CC because although it endlessly talks a good game about being broad, in reality, it's geared for a very particular type of student.

And how many nights of "I'm stupid"-- "Please dont' send me to school" would you want to go through with your kid?

But I ask yet again, is this CC's fault or your districts fault for implementing it in such a way that is so narrow-minded that they are not even doing it right for the student's that are not on IEPs. I am just so astounded b/c honestly anyone I talk to has yet to have an issue in this area(not even just my school district). I truly believe this has brought to light how many sub par administrators and teacher we have in this country and the serious issues with education in America. I do agree this new implementation should be rolled out in a way that older students don't have such a gap from where they were to where they should be, but for the younger grades I think if implemented properly the students will do well.

If my child was saying they were stupid and don't send me to school, I would find what the real problem was. If it was the district was using some bogus scripted program or whatever it was I would be bringing to them districts that are implementing it right. I would be pulling lessons from online that work and would be speaking out at every board meeting. I'd be getting other parents who felt the same to speak out with me. I would give them real options and not just criticism. I would be at every monthly meeting for the open comments section until I was heard or the year ended. It is our job as parents(and it sounds like you are fighting) to fight for our children. And just for the record there were children who felt that way before CC, but the outspoken people are getting a lot of people to "jump on the bandwagon". I am sure there are some speaking out against CC who had students struggling before it was even rolled out. I see people posting that teachers will lose their jobs if they don't teach certain ways...I call BS. Do we not know how powerful Teacher's unions are...we can't even fire the worst of the worst, but they will be fired if they don't teach in a very specific way? I don't buy it. A good teacher will look at what she/he has, the needs of her students and do their best to get them learning. They are not mindless robots standing in front of a class spouting off words from a script or so brainwashed they will only present a lesson a certain way.

I have searched pinterest even for CC lessons and there are great ones there. I also see many are not all that different from what I was teaching before CC. I can see people being outraged about the testing who have done it, but I really just keep scratching my head with the outrage at standards when it should be outrage at the subpar people implementing them.

 

[Mickey'snewestfan]

Once a kid shuts down, it's very hard to undo that damage. Sitting at a table with an hour or 4 or 8 hours of the wrong material isn't going to get children with severe language disabilities to learn any better.

Maybe I used this example before, I can't recall: But if I told you you MUST go to school and you MUST take college level classes in Chinese, how do you think you'd do? How long would you sit in the class before you simply checked out, doodled, did your grocery list, etc.

My son has an IEP and is making great strides. But I have to constantly push and push teachers, administrators and schools to do the right thing.

CC makes the battle all that more uphill, because so many of the standards use "discuss" "tell" "describe" etc.....even math problems that you should just be able to give the darn answer to.

The other dirty truth of CC is that when you look around for any data on special needs kids and the Common Core, the truth is, there isn't any. All the (rather sketchy) research is for more typical kids.

These parents are "convicting" the CC because although it endlessly talks a good game about being broad, in reality, it's geared for a very particular type of student.

And how many nights of "I'm stupid"-- "Please dont' send me to school" would you want to go through with your kid?

I think the question of how students handle kids with disabilities, is an incredibly important one. When I started teaching, in the city I live in, kids with disabilities were exempted from everything. I can tell you so many stories of students of mine who spent their days before they got to me coloring, or cutting and pasting, or generally being ignored. Kids shut down from that too, because kids need stimulation and challenge. On the other hand, in those days as a special educator, I had enormous freedom in what and how I taught. Very little was dictated to me, and so I could tailor my instruction to exactly what kids need.

Then NCLB came along and the pendulum swung the other way. Suddenly, the only thing that mattered was "grade level standards". If third grade was multiplication, and you had a child who couldn't count, well they worked on multiplication anyway. The other day, I was asked to consult on an IEP from a student not at our school. This was a high schooler who was working on very basic level math. During testing, he needed to count out manipulatives to add two numbers under 10. But his IEP was full of crazy stuff like "given a page of algebraic problems, will circle the ones that show the distributive property". This was a kid who needed to learn how to count money, not to identify properties of algebra problems he couldn't solve.

Figuring out the middle ground is going to be crucial, whatever the standards. While, for some kids, the old standards might have been accessible while the CC one aren't, that's a very small slice of kids. There are also plenty of kids for whom neither are accessible, and other kids with disabilities who will be able to reach the new standards too with the right structure and support. With or without the CC standards, states need to figure out how to handle students who need substantially modified curriculum and expectations, because right now there are too many heartbreaking stories.

However, the solution isn't to lower the standards to the level of students with disabilities. It's to figure out ways to bring as many students with disabilities up to the level of the standards as possible, and to develop systems for modifying standards when appropriate.