# long division; stifles their creativity



## catskills (Nov 14, 2006)

After reading this article I want to stop paying my school taxes. What the hell are we paying the teachers for if they don't teach long division anymore.  :angry: 

Quote from Six Grade teacher, 

"We don’t teach long division; it stifles their creativity.’ ”

Any teachers on this forum please feel free to explain this one.

I figured it out.  The CIOs from Enron and Worldcom were trained in Fuzzy Math to encourage creativity.


----------



## FridayHiker (Nov 14, 2006)

Ahem.  PLEASE don't get me started on this.  I have two elementary school students who are at the top of their class in math.  Why?  Because I spend a lot of time with them "unconfusing" them after they have been taught six different ways to subtract, all of which get melded in their minds into one very wrong algorithm.  Subtraction was the absolute WORST in this regard, though none of the operations are exempt from the problem (they're not to division yet, so maybe that will be worse than subtraction).

There ARE elements of the program that I like, but the computation elements are very, very weak.

Personally, I don't see any need to reinvent the wheel.  I think the US should look to countries that are producing the best math students and adapt their program for use here.


----------



## roark (Nov 14, 2006)

FridayHiker said:


> Personally, I don't see any need to reinvent the wheel. I think the US should look to countries that are producing the best math students and adapt their program for use here.


 
BINGO!


----------



## catskills (Nov 14, 2006)

FridayHiker said:


> Ahem.  PLEASE don't get me started on this.  I have two elementary school students who are at the top of their class in math.  Why?  Because I spend a lot of time with them "unconfusing" them after they have been taught six different ways to subtract, all of which get melded in their minds into one very wrong algorithm.  Subtraction was the absolute WORST in this regard, though none of the operations are exempt from the problem (they're not to division yet, so maybe that will be worse than subtraction).


H'mm maybe this does work.  Parents recognize how bad the teachers are doing, parents get involved,  parents teach children, many children do better on tests, and test scores improve in the state.  Minor little problem.  There are a lot of single parent children that will not get the extra help from mom or dad.


----------



## ctenidae (Nov 14, 2006)

What, the Whole Language crackpots have gotten to the Math teachers now, too?

I weep for the future.


----------



## FridayHiker (Nov 14, 2006)

catskills said:


> H'mm maybe this does work.  Parents recognize how bad the teachers are doing, parents get involved,  parents teach children, many children do better on tests, and test scores improve in the state.  Minor little problem.  There are a lot of single parent children that will not get the extra help from mom or dad.



I've just got to clarify that I LOVE our school's teachers -- they're really terrific and I would never diss them -- and I don't fault them at all for this.  In fact, they seem to recognize the "basic fact" issues, and have added fact drills.  Unfortunately, curriculum decisions aren't made by the teachers.


----------



## JimG. (Nov 14, 2006)

I truly understand your pain...we moved to a new school district 3 years ago and math teaching was part of the reason. My kids are now taught math the same way I was many years ago. 

Of course, my wife and I spend alot of time with them, but it's more just checking work; we don't have to re-teach them or explain how to do the problems.

Maybe math is creative for mathematicians, but it isn't supposed to be for school kids. There is a math problem and usually one right way to solve it. Saying you don't teach the correct way to solve the problem because it stifles creativity is frightening and borderline criminal in my book.


----------



## jack97 (Nov 14, 2006)

FridayHiker said:


> Personally, I don't see any need to reinvent the wheel.  I think the US should look to countries that are producing the best math students and adapt their program for use here.



First, I think teachers are the most unvalued profession we have in our society. Often placed in the most difficult positions and yet they remain devoted to their craft. This level of devotion means a lot to me.


Here’s the negative 

Other countries are willing to fail a certain percentage of students who do not perform; they are not promoted to the next grade level. In our school system, we have “social promotion”; every one gets promoted, so we compromise academic performance for self confidence. Other countries don’t give many chances, if a student does not show aptitude in math and science they are put in a remedial program or school. So top students are given more resources to hone their skills instead of waiting for the rest of the class to catch up. 

The crux of the issue; our school system is trying to get everyone educated in a mainstream way. Initiatives such as; “No child left behind” or “Disparity in Achievement” tends to dumb down the lessons and lowers the achievement level. In Mass. more school systems are eliminating “tracking”, basically grouping the smart kids in separate subject classes and challenging them with harder problems. Such program are deem discriminatory because the lower half of the class do not get access to equal education. They would rather promote mainstreaming and to dumb down the lessons so that everyone can make the lowest level of achievements. The smart kids are not motivated to do more. And are being taught simple and non rigorous lessons that are targeted for the lower half of the class. 

I can go on about certain school districts battling against charter schools for public funds. In addition, my strong concerns about Mass legislation and the Governor elect but this would get into politics.


----------



## JimG. (Nov 14, 2006)

jack97 said:


> The crux of the issue; our school system is trying to get everyone educated in a mainstream way. Initiatives such as; “No child left behind” or “Disparity in Achievement” tends to dumb down the lessons and lowers the achievement level. In Mass. more school systems are eliminating “tracking”, basically grouping the smart kids in separate subject classes and challenging them with harder problems. Such program are deem discriminatory because the lower half of the class do not get access to equal education. They would rather promote mainstreaming and to dumb down the lessons so that everyone can make the lowest level of achievements. The smart kids are not motivated to do more. And are being taught simple and non rigorous lessons that are targeted for the lower half of the class.



Tracking is a big reason we moved...it's a big thing in the Arlington school district and my 2 oldest boys are in honors classes in all of their subjects. In addition, they go to school an hour early 2 days a week for enrichment classes which are sort of like electives.

It is not viewed as discrimination because it is available to all students...they just have to be smart enough or work hard enough to be enrolled. Totally determined by the teachers too.

And if any group ever tries to eliminate this because it's "discrimination" (it should be more correctly called recognition of outstanding work), I'll enroll my boys in private schools or we will move again.


----------



## jack97 (Nov 14, 2006)

JimG. said:


> And if any group ever tries to eliminate this because it's "discrimination" (it should be more correctly called recognition of outstanding work), I'll enroll my boys in private schools or we will move again.



You are fortunate; protect it by fighting for it and voting for it.  

We lost tracking a couple of years ago; we just enrolled our daughter in math program outside of the school system.


----------



## JimG. (Nov 14, 2006)

jack97 said:


> You are fortunate; protect it by fighting for it and voting for it.



You bet, each and every year!

We are fortunate indeed that we live in a district dominated by relatively young professional couples all of whom have 2 or more kids. Everyone is on the same page educationally speaking, and most of us moved there for that reason. I do not believe our school budget has ever been voted down in the past 2 decades.

That's in comparison to our last neighborhood where the school budget was defeated every year for the 11 years we lived there. The demographic there was skewed more towards DINKs and older couples who were empty nesters. 

These are issues that are invisible to you until you have kids.


----------



## FridayHiker (Nov 14, 2006)

I also miss tracking, which was the norm when I was in school.  That said, our school is small enough that it would be a bit impractical.  They do pull the kids out twice a week for G&T classes -- basically electives, as you describe, but during their normal school day -- and that helps to add interest to their week.  

Personally, it doesn't bother me a bit if child A uses a different algorithm than child B to arrive at the same (correct, obviously) answer;  I disagree with this statement:  


			
				JimG said:
			
		

> There is a math problem and usually one right way to solve it.


 in that there is often more than one way to solve a problem correctly.  But what I don't like is the attitude that "Kids don't need to do this because in the real world, they'll use calculators".  I completely disagree.  I think that conceptually and mechanically, the kids DO  benefit from learning long division, or multiplication of multi-digit numbers.  When we worked a bit on two-digit multiplication this summer, the kids didn't know the standard algorithm.  They knew two different algorithms, one of which involved drawing a complicated grid (not so complicated for two-digit numbers, but much more so for larger numbers), or involved multiplying each of the digits by every other one, e.g.:

38*64=30*60 + 8*60 + 30*4 + 8*4 = 1800+480+120+32=2432 My son came up with the right answer, but if he were to have to multiply a 4-digit times a 4-digit, there would be sixteen different opporunities for errors, which could be as basic as inadvertently dropping a zero.

And like I said, subtraction was even worse.


----------



## JimG. (Nov 14, 2006)

FridayHiker said:


> Personally, it doesn't bother me a bit if child A uses a different algorithm than child B to arrive at the same (correct, obviously) answer;  I disagree with this statement:
> in that there is often more than one way to solve a problem correctly.  But what I don't like is the attitude that "Kids don't need to do this because in the real world, they'll use calculators".  I completely disagree.



Point taken...poorly written on my part. My point was supposed to be that kids need to be taught a correct solution to a problem and a framework or system to solve similar problems. To say that long division (and I'll read between the lines and say any generally accepted method of division) isn't taught because it stifles creativity is insane. 

Teach the kids a method and then they can get creative if they want to. We're not looking for creative answers, just the right answer.

And I agree with you regarding the sentiment that kids won't use this stuff and will use calculators and computers instead. This "logic" is what condemns me to watching a cashier fumble trying to give change from a cash purchase even when the register does the math for them...they still have to pull the correct change.


----------



## ctenidae (Nov 14, 2006)

The value in math is not, strictly speaking, being able to add and subract (though both are extremely useful skills themselves). Math provides a way of thinking, a framework for logically describing, then solving, a problem. How you organize the math in your head, whether it's subtraction, long division, or matrix algebra, is an intensly creative process.


----------



## JimG. (Nov 14, 2006)

ctenidae said:


> The value in math is not, strictly speaking, being able to add and subract (though both are extremely useful skills themselves). Math provides a way of thinking, a framework for logically describing, then solving, a problem. How you organize the math in your head, whether it's subtraction, long division, or matrix algebra, is an intensly creative process.



I do not believe this is what the teacher in FridayHiker's scenario meant when she said that long division stifles creativity. 

Children need to be taught methods of solving math problems. This is the framework wherein the creativity you describe takes place. Without that framework, children will not be successful math students. Period.

Long division is an established method for teaching kids how to solve division problems. It also promotes, not hinders, creativity because in this method each step is broken down and the children can see how the division is done. Creativity grows from this type of teaching method.


----------



## FridayHiker (Nov 14, 2006)

ctenidae, I agree with that as well -- I was on the math team in high school :nerd: and know that it was interesting to compare notes to see how others had approached problems.

But when push comes to shove, it doesn't really matter how creative the thinking is; if someone knows that they have three minutes to administer meds to save someone's life, and multiplies 3*60 and comes up with 300 seconds, you'd better hope that someone isn't you!  

Extreme hypothetical examples aside, complete mastery of and comfort with computation in the early grades is pretty critical to being able to deal with more advanced math, not to mention science.  I think that the constructivist math programs have emphasized creativity over accuracy to an extent that the students aren't being well served.  While I do agree with some of the developments -- e.g. the use of manipulative blocks/bars to enhance understanding of carrying or borrowing -- I think that the programs need to focus on one algorithm through mastery, and THEN examine other algorithms as an illustration that there are other methods that work, and an extension of number sense.  The grid method of multiplication that I mentioned above works because it forces the proper numbers into the proper place values.  The reasons that it works would actually be a sort of cool thing for maybe fifth graders to explore once they're completely comfortable with multi-digit multiplication.  But the kids in the younger grades have no conceptual understanding of why it works, and it's a pretty labor-intensive method, due to all of the drawing involved.

Here's a link if you're not familiar:

http://mathforum.org/library/drmath/view/52468.html

As for the other algorithm I cited, yes, it works, and obviously it's central to algebra once the kids get there.  But for computation purposes, it's pretty inefficient.


----------



## ctenidae (Nov 14, 2006)

FridayHiker said:


> But for computation purposes, it's pretty inefficient.



Rote memorization, I think, lays the most efficient computational groundwork possible. Everyone should memorize their sums and gazzintas. From there, you can figure out your personal algorithms.


----------



## jack97 (Nov 14, 2006)

FridayHiker said:


> Extreme hypothetical examples aside, complete mastery of and comfort with computation in the early grades is pretty critical to being able to deal with more advanced math, not to mention science.  I think that the constructivist math programs have emphasized creativity over accuracy to an extent that the students aren't being well served.



I agree, it's been my conjecture that educators promoting our present method has completely missed on this point. At times, I question their general understanding of math. Exp with my daughter in the lack of adhering to accuracy has been causing behavoiral problems. She thinks that we are highly critical of her work (nit picking). Hopefully by enrolling her in an outside program where accuracy matters she might get the idea how important this is. 

BTW, The lattice math approach is a wonderful method in showing structure to the associative and distributive properties of the multiplication operator however spending alot time on it as a computational skill is a complete waste.


----------



## ctenidae (Nov 14, 2006)

_Dr. Warfield said. “That’s why we have so many parents who see their children having trouble with math and say ‘Honey, don’t worry. I never could do math either.’ ”
_

I think we may have evidence of at least part of the problem, here. Not dinging on the parents here, but parents, in general, have got to take some responsibility for their children's education. It's good to see a significant group doing so.


----------



## JimG. (Nov 14, 2006)

ctenidae said:


> _Dr. Warfield said. “That’s why we have so many parents who see their children having trouble with math and say ‘Honey, don’t worry. I never could do math either.’ ”
> _
> 
> I think we may have evidence of at least part of the problem, here. Not dinging on the parents here, but parents, in general, have got to take some responsibility for their children's education. It's good to see a significant group doing so.



No doubt true...parents have to be an active participant. And that does not mean doing the homework for the kids because I know more than a few families that play this game. 

But realistically the groundwork, challenge, and grading standards are totally the realm of the school and the teachers. Because none of my exhortations to strive for success and embrace challenge matters a bit if my kids are being taught nonsense and they get an A for doing work well below their capabilities.


----------



## hammer (Nov 14, 2006)

jack97 said:


> BTW, The lattice math approach is a wonderful method in showing structure to the associative and distributive properties of the multiplication operator however spending alot time on it as a computational skill is a complete waste.


Say again? :blink:


----------



## ctenidae (Nov 14, 2006)

JimG. said:


> But realistically the groundwork, challenge, and grading standards are totally the realm of the school and the teachers. Because none of my exhortations to strive for success and embrace challenge matters a bit if my kids are being taught nonsense and they get an A for doing work well below their capabilities.



Absolutely. And the impetus for those standards and challenge has to come from parents, being involved in the schools, paying attention to who is on the school board and what they're doing, knowing who the teachers are and what they're doing.


----------



## JimG. (Nov 14, 2006)

ctenidae said:


> Absolutely. And the impetus for those standards and challenge has to come from parents, being involved in the schools, paying attention to who is on the school board and what they're doing, knowing who the teachers are and what they're doing.



And paying our taxes; which brings this topic full circle from my point of view...we moved 3 years ago to be in a school district with other families who think this way.


----------



## Paul (Nov 14, 2006)

I have a conference call in a few minutes, so I don't have time right now to get into this, but I just wanted to add that I agree on virtually all points that have been presented. I have a 6 year-old (first grade) and seeing how things are presented to her are pretty disturbing. It really seems that many schools are starting to turn their efforts away from academia, and more towards social skills and self esteem building, among other things that, as a parent, I would rather teach her myself.

I'm beginning to wage war on the schools, but if this proves to be quixotic (which it likely will) it may be time to move.

*sigh....


----------



## John84 (Nov 14, 2006)

It really shocks me when we get a test back and you hear kids asking "What'd you get?" "I got a 25/30." "Oh, is that a B?" "I'm not sure, can I borrow your calculator?" It boggles my mind that these kids have made it this far in math (Honors PreCalculus), yet they can't do simple math.


----------



## ctenidae (Nov 14, 2006)

John84 said:


> It really shocks me when we get a test back and you hear kids asking "What'd you get?" "I got a 25/30." "Oh, is that a B?" "I'm not sure, can I borrow your calculator?" It boggles my mind that these kids have made it this far in math (Honors PreCalculus), yet they can't do simple math.



Try giving a store clerk $5.25 on a $4.15 bill. Amazes me every single time.
This all brings up a deeper pet-peeve issue of mine- Learned Helplessness. People actually learn how to not be able to do things on their own. Once you start noticing it, it gets quite depressing.

Fortunately, I don't need any help getting a bottle of bourbon open.


----------



## JimG. (Nov 14, 2006)

ctenidae said:


> Try giving a store clerk $5.25 on a $4.15 bill. Amazes me every single time.
> This all brings up a deeper pet-peeve issue of mine- Learned Helplessness. People actually learn how to not be able to do things on their own. Once you start noticing it, it gets quite depressing.
> 
> Fortunately, I don't need any help getting a bottle of bourbon open.



No no, please don't start me on the learned helplessness issue.


----------



## jack97 (Nov 14, 2006)

jack97 said:


> BTW, The lattice math approach is a wonderful method in showing structure to the associative and distributive properties of the multiplication operator however spending alot time on it as a computational skill is a complete waste.





hammer said:


> Say again? :blink:



Sorry for the poor wording. 

My point, the various multi digit multiplication algorithms that are being taught all share the fact they must produce the same answers. This is based on fundamental algebraic properties (associative, commutative and distributive). The lattice approach and other algorthims can be broken down to show these properties. As you go further in advance math; Analytical Geometry, Calculus, Matrix Algebra and so on, you have to look for organization (structure) in these properties as well as other concepts to effectively use them. 

I remember a third party conversation; someone overheard his MIT math professor asking a computer salesperson, “yeah, but do I really need a computer to do math”. My other point, there’s another level of math that our education policy makers have not been exposed to. Probably the reason they are policy makers. ….. the blind leading the blind.


----------



## hammer (Nov 14, 2006)

JimG. said:


> No no, please don't start me on the learned helplessness issue.


That's not unique to this generation...I know of at least a few men that have or have had their spouses do everything around the house, and if they are left to their own would have a very hard time cooking a meal for themselves, doing laundry, etc.


----------



## hammer (Nov 14, 2006)

jack97 said:


> Sorry for the poor wording.
> 
> My point, the various multi digit multiplication algorithms that are being taught all share the fact they must produce the same answers. This is based on fundamental algebraic properties (associative, commutative and distributive). The lattice approach and other algorthims can be broken down to show these properties. As you go further in advance math; Analytical Geometry, Calculus, Matrix Algebra and so on, you have to look for organization (structure) in these properties as well as other concepts to effectively use them.
> 
> I remember a third party conversation; someone overheard his MIT math professor asking a computer salesperson, “yeah, but do I really need a computer to do math”. My other point, there’s another level of math that our education policy makers have not been exposed to. Probably the reason they are policy makers. ….. the blind leading the blind.


Sorry about my igonorance...as an engineer, I guess I've been doing various levels of math for so long that I haven't thought of the concepts behind what I'm doing.

One other thing:  I'd actually like to know what kind of math background our math teachers (in general) and math education policy makers really have...


----------



## JimG. (Nov 14, 2006)

hammer said:


> That's not unique to this generation...I know of at least a few men that have or have had their spouses do everything around the house, and if they are left to their own would have a very hard time cooking a meal for themselves, doing laundry, etc.



I hate to admit it about the man I admire most, but this is my Dad. 

He could flood the basement doing laundry, then burn the wet clothes drying them.

He once put a pot of water to boil for a cup of tea...when he finally came back to it, the water had evaporated and the bottom of the pot had burned clean through.

And when I was very little, I had a taste for sardines...so I asked my Dad to give me some sardines. Somehow, he confused the sardines with liverwurst. It took me another 20 years to regain my taste for sardines AND liverwurst.


----------



## ctenidae (Nov 14, 2006)

JimG. said:


> I hate to admit it about the man I admire most, but this is my Dad.
> 
> He could flood the basement doing laundry, then burn the wet clothes drying them.
> 
> ...



I don't think that's learned helplessness- that's brilliance. How often did he get asked to do laundry, feed the kids, or cook? Not often, I bet.


----------



## jack97 (Nov 14, 2006)

ctenidae said:


> I don't think that's learned helplessness- that's brilliance. How often did he get asked to do laundry, feed the kids, or cook? Not often, I bet.



I think we have generation of men that got their brains knocked silly. I can't figure out how they got away with this.


----------



## ctenidae (Nov 14, 2006)

jack97 said:


> I think we have generation of men that got their brains knocked silly. I can't figure out how they got away with this.



I blame Bill Cosby.


----------



## JimG. (Nov 14, 2006)

ctenidae said:


> I don't think that's learned helplessness- that's brilliance. How often did he get asked to do laundry, feed the kids, or cook? Not often, I bet.



Hmmm...life works in strange ways. My Mom got sick of it and divorced him. He remarried and his wife is an accomplished ballerina who is now a dance professor. She spends alot of time choreographing shows...in fact she is in charge of the Nutcracker every year.

Guess what? She doesn't cook or clean or do laundry either. When we visit it's just pitiful. The refrigerator is empty because neither of them know what to do with food other than eat it. He complains that every meal is eat out or take out. Clothes are usually in a pile somewhere...the clean stuff upstairs and the dirty in the laundry room. They don't know to separate the whites from the colors...my dad has alot of "tie dyed" underwear. Dust bunnies live under all the furniture.

Yes, life is funny.


----------



## ctenidae (Nov 14, 2006)

JimG. said:


> Yes, life is funny.



But can he do long division?


----------



## JimG. (Nov 14, 2006)

ctenidae said:


> But can he do long division?



Yes, but his penmanship is atrocious.


----------



## NYDrew (Nov 14, 2006)

are you freaking kidding me!!!!!!!  I mentor in a middle school and hear this kinda crap all day...but this one is new.


----------



## Hawkshot99 (Nov 14, 2006)

I can cook and do my laundry.  


Oh yea, and I think I can still do long division( just wrote a problem in my head), subtraction, make change......

All this even with our school systems.  Must be that Arlington distric Jim speaks of.:razz:


----------



## JimG. (Nov 15, 2006)

Hawkshot99 said:


> All this even with our school systems.  Must be that Arlington distric Jim speaks of.:razz:



Oh, it's far from perfect, but Arlington is a top rated school district in NY.

Admittedly that's judged based on today's learning standards.


----------



## hammer (Nov 15, 2006)

Hawkshot99 said:


> Must be that Arlington distric Jim speaks of.:razz:


"distric"...I guess that Arlington needs work on teaching spelling? :wink:






Sorry, couldn't resist...


----------



## jack97 (Nov 15, 2006)

Here's a web site of BU's education program. Teachers specialize in teaching math. Lots of courses on how to teach math. Limited math studies, requirements start during the master program. On paper, this sounds good, the approach breaks downs if the teaching methods are flawed. 

http://www.bu.edu/sed/students/prospective/undergraduate/programs/math/index.html
http://www.bu.edu/sed/students/prospective/graduate/programs/math/index.html


----------



## hammer (Nov 15, 2006)

jack97 said:


> Here's a web site of BU's education program. Teachers specialize in teaching math. Lots of courses on how to teach math. Limited math studies, requirements start during the master program. On paper, this sounds good, the approach breaks downs if the teaching methods are flawed.
> 
> http://www.bu.edu/sed/students/prospective/undergraduate/programs/math/index.html
> http://www.bu.edu/sed/students/prospective/graduate/programs/math/index.html


I guess this gets into the philosophy of "depth of knowledge in the subject matter" vs "knowledge of teaching methods"...

In any case, when trying to sort out math homework with my kids, I tend to run into a lot of problems associated with methods...it seems that more emphasis is put on the "latest and greatest" method for doing the basics and not enough emphasis is put on the final product (i.e., the answer).


----------



## JimG. (Nov 15, 2006)

hammer said:


> "distric"...I guess that Arlington needs work on teaching spelling? :wink:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Hawkshot is killing me here...change his name to Monkey Wrench.


----------



## ctenidae (Nov 15, 2006)

jack97 said:


> Here's a web site of BU's education program. Teachers specialize in teaching math. Lots of courses on how to teach math. Limited math studies, requirements start during the master program. On paper, this sounds good, the approach breaks downs if the teaching methods are flawed.
> 
> http://www.bu.edu/sed/students/prospective/undergraduate/programs/math/index.html
> http://www.bu.edu/sed/students/prospective/graduate/programs/math/index.html




Interesting. At Northeastern you have to get a BS in Math, _then_ you can take the education courses.


----------



## jack97 (Nov 15, 2006)

hammer said:


> In any case, when trying to sort out math homework with my kids, I tend to run into a lot of problems associated with methods...it seems that more emphasis is put on the "latest and greatest" method for doing the basics and not enough emphasis is put on the final product (i.e., the answer).




That’s crux of the issue.

I’m an engineer also. I remember my undergrad freshman and especially sophomore courses, we were taught lots of methods for basically solving the same problems. Things started to click as a junior but after constant repetition of problem solving with one or two methods. Once this happens I could see how the other methods relate, its pros and cons. 

That’s why I’m a believer in drilling, similar to the Kumon approach.


----------



## Hawkshot99 (Nov 15, 2006)

JimG. said:


> Hawkshot is killing me here...change his name to Monkey Wrench.



Hey I thought we were talking math here:razz:


----------



## smitty77 (Nov 15, 2006)

ctenidae said:


> _Dr. Warfield said. “That’s why we have so many parents who see their children having trouble with math and say ‘Honey, don’t worry. I never could do math either.’ ”
> _
> 
> I think we may have evidence of at least part of the problem, here. Not dinging on the parents here, but parents, in general, have got to take some responsibility for their children's education. It's good to see a significant group doing so.


Bingo!  I know a few people that can't read, write, or do math beyond a 3rd grade level, and they all have diplomas.  Kids go with what they know.  If they continually see mom and dad go "Well... 6 and 2, carry the 4, plus the tax.... Aww, screw it, the {bill / legal agreement / H&R Block tax form} looks right to me." then they'll have no incentive to learn the basics either.

Unless the wife opts-out at the last minute, it looks like we're home schooling the kids.  She has a degree in elementary education, I have one in engineering with enough coursework in math to qualify for a minor.  I love math (algebra, calculus, trig) and physics.  I know enough chemisty to be dangerous.  With our collective knowledge I think we have a legitimate shot at putting a good education into our children.  It's becoming more apparent every year that if we don't do it, no one will.  From what I gather, a lot of other families in our town are going the same route as the school system fights to keep itself alive.

Good thread.  Lots of smart folks around here.
Smitty


----------



## ctenidae (Nov 15, 2006)

smitty77 said:


> From what I gather, a lot of other families in our town are going the same route as the school system fights to keep itself alive.



Might be worth looking onto doing sort of group homeschooling. I know some communities have groups where parents with specific knowledge act as "tutors" to everyone else's kids.


----------



## bvibert (Nov 15, 2006)

smitty77 said:


> Bingo!  I know a few people that can't read, write, or do math beyond a 3rd grade level, and they all have diplomas.  Kids go with what they know.  If they continually see mom and dad go "Well... 6 and 2, carry the 4, plus the tax.... Aww, screw it, the {bill / legal agreement / H&R Block tax form} looks right to me." then they'll have no incentive to learn the basics either.
> 
> Unless the wife opts-out at the last minute, it looks like we're home schooling the kids.  She has a degree in elementary education, I have one in engineering with enough coursework in math to qualify for a minor.  I love math (algebra, calculus, trig) and physics.  I know enough chemisty to be dangerous.  With our collective knowledge I think we have a legitimate shot at putting a good education into our children.  It's becoming more apparent every year that if we don't do it, no one will.  From what I gather, a lot of other families in our town are going the same route as the school system fights to keep itself alive.
> 
> ...



We're seriously considering the home schooling route too, though we have a few years to decide...


----------



## Marc (Nov 15, 2006)

ctenidae said:


> Might be worth looking onto doing sort of group homeschooling. I know some communities have groups where parents with specific knowledge act as "tutors" to everyone else's kids.



I was homeschooled.  The curriculum included things like:

Woodchopping
Sealing the driveway and the human response
Cutting the grass and benefits to character


----------



## catskills (Nov 15, 2006)

bvibert said:


> We're seriously considering the home schooling route too, though we have a few years to decide...


Good plan.  When our youngest child started second grade she would write a 30 word story with only three words spelled correctly.  Our daughter was actually above the bell shaped curve for her class reading/writing ability.   This was all thanks to the brand new first grade teacher trained in whole language.  Not one of the other teachers in the school had ever been trained in whole language.  The second grade teacher had a real problem on her hands.  Solution my wife worked with our daughter and got her back on track.  Once our daughter learned to read it was hard to stop her.  She would read books under the covers with a flashlight to all hours of the night.  Most of the other parents had to do the same.  It wasn't long before the principal was replaced.


----------



## ctenidae (Nov 15, 2006)

catskills said:


> Not one of the other teachers in the school had ever been trained in whole language.



I think you may have your terms switched. Whole Language has been repeatedly proven to benefit about 20% of students. The rest get left terminally behind. Phonics, on the other hand, works for 80% of students, and stays with them forever. Guess which way reading has been taught in the US for the past 30 years.

Read "Why Johnny Can't Read" by Rudolph Flesch. I don't want to get into an argument as to why whole language is of the devil, but I will if I have to.


----------



## NYDrew (Nov 15, 2006)

JimG. said:


> Tracking is a big reason we moved...it's a big thing in the Arlington school district and my 2 oldest boys are in honors classes in all of their subjects. In addition, they go to school an hour early 2 days a week for enrichment classes which are sort of like electives.
> 
> It is not viewed as discrimination because it is available to all students...they just have to be smart enough or work hard enough to be enrolled. Totally determined by the teachers too.
> 
> And if any group ever tries to eliminate this because it's "discrimination" (it should be more correctly called recognition of outstanding work), I'll enroll my boys in private schools or we will move again.



When I was in a gifted program being shut down, our (the gifted kids) parents took a very intellegent tactic.  Instead of trying to save the gifted program...they threatened to sue that the special ed program needed to be eliminated too for the same reasons.  The tactic worked, the district realized they could not legally eliminate the special ed program, but also realized that eliminating the gifted program and keeping special ed was discriminatory and hence illegal(especially since there was more gifted students then special ed).

You should have seen the look of the parent who started the whole mess....I should mention that her kid was learning disabled.  She had a lot of apologies to dish out afterwards, and no one accepted them because she was nothing more then a selfish female dog who was trying to secure more funds for her kids programs.

Now I mentor in a school which fully intergrates all levels of learning.  Now, if any of you have a disabled child...you might be offended, honestly I don't care because if this is going on in your district, then you should not allow what I'm about to say to go on.  I don't think it is fair that a student trying to work hard should be distracted by a braille machine going off, or have to hear a text reader read, or listen to an aid and special student talk, or even be forced to partner up with that kid who is so special that everyone around them can't stand them in a group.  Its called survival of the fittest for a reason, now I got no problem helping those who wouldn't normally thrive, but it should not be at the cost of others.  This new treatment of students is causing a dumbing of america.

WE DID NOT PUT A MAN ON THE MOON BY TEACHING SMART KIDS TO SIT NEXT TO DUMB KIDS AND LIKE IT.  because that is all we are teaching now.


There I said it.


----------



## John84 (Nov 15, 2006)

NYDrew said:


> When I was in a gifted program being shut down, our (the gifted kids) parents took a very intellegent tactic.  Instead of trying to save the gifted program...they threatened to sue that the special ed program needed to be eliminated too for the same reasons.  The tactic worked, the district realized they could not legally eliminate the special ed program, but also realized that eliminating the gifted program and keeping special ed was discriminatory and hence illegal(especially since there was more gifted students then special ed).
> 
> You should have seen the look of the parent who started the whole mess....I should mention that her kid was learning disabled.  She had a lot of apologies to dish out afterwards, and no one accepted them because she was nothing more then a selfish female dog who was trying to secure more funds for her kids programs.
> 
> ...




If my smiley faces worked, I'd put the clapping one right here ____


----------



## ctenidae (Nov 15, 2006)

Here, here, *NYDrew*!
My mom's a gifted-ed teacher, adn she basically pulled teh same thing- got the gifted program listed as "special ed", so now she has nine kinds of leeway to teach what needs to be taught to AP and advanced kids. Good stuff.


----------



## jack97 (Nov 16, 2006)

NYDrew said:


> WE DID NOT PUT A MAN ON THE MOON BY TEACHING SMART KIDS TO SIT NEXT TO DUMB KIDS AND LIKE IT.  because that is all we are teaching now.
> 
> 
> There I said it.



Now that you said, good for you. 

If people want to dig in more, they should look into how much money their school district is spending on the special needs students. Generally, the transportation and teaching cost is higher per students than non special needs. Past towns meetings I have attended, the reason for an increase in the school budget is to get more special needs teacher to shadow the students. With limited budgets, schools are force to throw out or absorb a gifted program into the special need program (as others have mentioned). IMO, the special needs progam has done more damage than any thing else. 

The next thing to watch for is mandatory extended day and a longer school calendar year. Some Mass state legs and our governor elect has been proposing this. Its not school reform but doing what they have doing (dumbing the kids) with with more hours and extra days. My concern is that this will take away the extra time we already have to either tutor or put my daughter in an outside program. I think lots of affluent districts already do this, augment their children education with outside programs, it gives the school district a false conclusion that they are doing well but in fact they have parents who have found ways to overcome the school district. Once the extra hours and days become mandatory, this option is taken away from the parents.  

OK... end of rant.


----------



## jack97 (Nov 16, 2006)

*Rant addendum*



jack97 said:


> IMO, the special needs progam has done more damage than any thing else.



Our school budgets for 06 had several proposals, one increase and two status quo budgets. The former maintains all staff levels and later assumes letting go 10 to 15 teachers and admin to make budget. In all cases, the special needs expenditure remained the same with slight increases from the previous year. This means education for middle to brightest kids is sacrifice to mainstream the special need. Usually, the bottom half of the kids can claim attention deficit disorder (ADD) and get some special needs help.

Talk about a messed up system, this is the generation that should keep our country economically strong when we get old.


----------



## smitty77 (Nov 16, 2006)

ctenidae said:


> I think you may have your terms switched. Whole Language has been repeatedly proven to benefit about 20% of students. The rest get left terminally behind. Phonics, on the other hand, works for 80% of students, and stays with them forever. Guess which way reading has been taught in the US for the past 30 years.
> 
> Read "Why Johnny Can't Read" by Rudolph Flesch. I don't want to get into an argument as to why whole language is of the devil, but I will if I have to.


I think what he was referring to was the fact that his daughter's reading and writing ability were severely hindered by this Whole Language approach introduced my the new first grade teacher.  When my wife got her degree back in the mid 90's, the current method of teaching reading was Whole Language and Creative Spelling ("Johnny, how do _you_ think that word is spelled?)  The result has been a buttload of kids that can't read or write.  Why do you think "Hooked on Phonics" is so successful these days?  That business venture would have flopped 20 years ago when schools actually taught phonics themselves.  Now that they don't, some corporation can make big bucks on your child's learning difficulties.

What's with all of the special needs programs these days?  Are there _that_ many kids with "special needs", or just a bunch of kids that would benefit from some creative motivation and small amounts of specialized tutoring.  Is the fact that we're fumbling the ball with teaching methods like "Whole Language" the reason we have some many kids with "Learning disabilities"?  I'm not making light of kids with real problems, as some genuinely need all of the help they can get.  But it seems the more money we pump into special needs programs, the more special needs students we're treating/creating.

I shudder to think what would have become of me if I were going to school now.  I probably would have been assigned my own special needs staff:
- 25 years ago my kindergarden teacher wanted to hold me back because I couldn't use scissors.  She neglected to notice I was a lefty using righty scissors.
- My first grade reading teacher thought I was a slow learner until she realized I knew all the answers but was too shy to raise my hand.  My parents worked with me after school for a few months to get me back up to speed with the higher level kids.
- My fourth grade teacher noticed me really disinterested in math early in the school year.  I told her I knew most of what she was teaching and was just bored.  I was moved up to a higher level.

How many students have the ablitly but are wrongly labeled "special needs"?  I see students these days being classified as "haves" and "haves nots".  You're either a genius, or you have a learning disability.  Things need to change from top to bottom in our schools before anything gets better.


----------



## jack97 (Nov 16, 2006)

smitty77 said:


> I'm not making light of kids with real problems, as some genuinely need all of the help they can get.  But it seems the more money we pump into special needs programs, the more special needs students we're treating/creating.



As a society, we have to decide where best to put our resources. Below is a graph of the amount of money spent on student and special needs student in Mass. I've seen charts of nearby towns where the cost per special needs student is triple or quadruple compare to non special needs.


----------



## JimG. (Nov 16, 2006)

smitty77 said:


> I think what he was referring to was the fact that his daughter's reading and writing ability were severely hindered by this Whole Language approach introduced my the new first grade teacher.  When my wife got her degree back in the mid 90's, the current method of teaching reading was Whole Language and Creative Spelling ("Johnny, how do _you_ think that word is spelled?)  The result has been a buttload of kids that can't read or write.  Why do you think "Hooked on Phonics" is so successful these days?  That business venture would have flopped 20 years ago when schools actually taught phonics themselves.  Now that they don't, some corporation can make big bucks on your child's learning difficulties.
> 
> What's with all of the special needs programs these days?  Are there _that_ many kids with "special needs", or just a bunch of kids that would benefit from some creative motivation and small amounts of specialized tutoring.  Is the fact that we're fumbling the ball with teaching methods like "Whole Language" the reason we have some many kids with "Learning disabilities"?  I'm not making light of kids with real problems, as some genuinely need all of the help they can get.  But it seems the more money we pump into special needs programs, the more special needs students we're treating/creating.
> 
> ...



I'm proud to be associated in a small way with a group of folks who are intelligent and caring.

Smitty, I went through the same issues in elementary school. My 1st grade teacher told my parents she thought I was "retarded" because I wouldn't sit still and would go off on my own in the middle of her class and do what I wanted. I was simply bored to death.

After they figured out I was actually pretty bright, they started to sit me next to the less smart kids in the hopes my smarts "would rub off on the others". That was 4th grade and my last in public schools.

My son David is the splitting image of his Dad...has the same issues at school. Except in today's schools they wanted to give him drugs to "help" him. No way. Not happening. I had several very contentious meetings with school officials and finally convinced them that David was just bored to death. 

So to "humor" me they tracked him into honors classes. Guess what? David has been a perfect student since. And he's still bored.

Bottom line is if your kid isn't meeting some standardized image of what the educational system thinks is a good student, there's going to be trouble. And parents have to be vigilant so their kids don't get lost in the system.


----------



## ctenidae (Nov 16, 2006)

I was fortunate enough to go to Catholic school for grades 1-4. My 1st and 2nd grade teacher had a master's in learning disabilities, and decided I probably had ADD. I'm fortunate it was Catholic school, because the nun was completely against drugs as treatment. She taught me how to sit still and concentrate, and perhaps more importantly how to realize when I was wandering off. She then proceeded to teach me to read, and I haven't stopped since. of course, after that I got in trouble for reading 6th grade books in 2nd grade, and for trying to do book reports on John D McDonald novels in 4th grade. Life's tough in a Catholic school.

Probably didn't hurt that my Mom was interested, and went on to get her Master's in learning styles, National Teacher Certification, and such. When she's not teahing kids, she's teaching teachers how to teach. Works out pretty well.


----------



## FridayHiker (Nov 16, 2006)

JimG. said:


> Bottom line is if your kid isn't meeting some standardized image of what the educational system thinks is a good student, there's going to be trouble. And parents have to be vigilant so their kids don't get lost in the system.



I think there's a flip side to it as well, though, as I see a lot of parents who WANT to get their kids "coded" (i.e. identified as Special Ed students), as once they ARE coded, they have a lot more leeway to demand that the school district do X, Y, and Z, because now their child is protected under the federal IDEA (Individual with Disabilites Education Act).  

I've even heard this quite a bit lately (not in our school, but from friends elsewhere in the country) from parents of gifted children, who feel that with the lack of a gifted program in their schools, getting their kid coded as what amounts to basically "chronically bored" will allow them to demand stimulation for their kids.  It doesn't often work, but parents still try.  Pretty sad that that's what it has come down to, but in some places it has.

I guess I'm not with the majority on this thread, because as a parent, I generally don't object to mainstreaming as long as it isn't more than marginally disruptive to others in the class.   I do think that it engenders a bit more of a sense of compassion and understanding toward children with differences and disabilities.  I have far more issues with e.g. a child who is very bright but troubled, and causes MAJOR disruptions (e.g. throwing books and furniture and causing classroom evacuations  ).  If a child is e.g. autistic and has the assistance of an aide but perhaps only limited social or even academic interaction with others in the class, but it is deemed by his/her parents and counselor to be the best placement for him/her, then I won't argue with that.

That said, I do believe that math and reading should be tracked subjects in the early grades, with kids having mobility if appropriate.

But I do completely agree that the expenditures have gotten completely out of hand.  We are very lucky that in our district, we have an older gentleman who did not raise his (now adult) children in our town, who EVERY SINGLE YEAR stands up at the annual school budget vote and says "How much are we spending per gifted student, and how much are we spending per Special Ed student?"  We have NEVER had the gifted budget cut.  I always appreciate that the question comes from someone with no children in the school, as everyone in the room knows that for him, the question is not self-serving.


----------



## jack97 (Nov 16, 2006)

FridayHiker said:


> We are very lucky that in our district, we have an older gentleman who did not raise his (now adult) children in our town, who EVERY SINGLE YEAR stands up at the annual school budget vote and says "How much are we spending per gifted student, and how much are we spending per Special Ed student?"  We have NEVER had the gifted budget cut.  I always appreciate that the question comes from someone with no children in the school, as everyone in the room knows that for him, the question is not self-serving.



I would say that it is self serving in a non direct way. The kids in the school system now is the country's future. Our (future) economy and standard of living is going to based on how they perform,  especially against foreign competition (countries). Our tech edge has been slowly eroding for that past decade and other countries are producing kids who can outperform our kids in math and science. 

Imagine being on a fix income or at lower income in a second rate economy because China and India has the best math and science people...IMO a scary thought.


----------



## FridayHiker (Nov 16, 2006)

jack97 said:


> I would say that it is self serving in a non direct way. The kids in the school system is the countries future.



That is, in fact, _exactly_ what he says every year.  

Um, you don't have white hair and live in my town, do you?


----------



## JimG. (Nov 17, 2006)

FridayHiker said:


> I guess I'm not with the majority on this thread, because as a parent, I generally don't object to mainstreaming as long as it isn't more than marginally disruptive to others in the class.   I do think that it engenders a bit more of a sense of compassion and understanding toward children with differences and disabilities.  I have far more issues with e.g. a child who is very bright but troubled, and causes MAJOR disruptions (e.g. throwing books and furniture and causing classroom evacuations  ).  If a child is e.g. autistic and has the assistance of an aide but perhaps only limited social or even academic interaction with others in the class, but it is deemed by his/her parents and counselor to be the best placement for him/her, then I won't argue with that.



My post did make it sound like I'm against it. To clarify, I'm not necessarily against it either, as long as it is only marginally disruptive as you have mentioned. My 2 oldest sons have both told us that they have been asked by their teachers to help these kids out, and I told them both it is part of their role as good fellow humans to help others less fortunate than them. 

It is no coincidence that both boys have become better teammates in other areas of their lives; both have embraced that role as coach. I think it's good for them and it helps their self esteem and self image a great deal. A big part of life is allowing others to depend on you.


----------



## jack97 (Nov 17, 2006)

JimG. said:


> My post did make it sound like I'm against it. To clarify, I'm not necessarily against it either, as long as it is only marginally disruptive as you have mentioned. My 2 oldest sons have both told us that they have been asked by their teachers to help these kids out, and I told them both it is part of their role as good fellow humans to help others less fortunate than them.
> 
> It is no coincidence that both boys have become better teammates in other areas of their lives; both have embraced that role as coach. I think it's good for them and it helps their self esteem and self image a great deal. A big part of life is allowing others to depend on you.



Conceptually, I have nothing against mainstreaming and developing the social skills to interact with everyone in the classroom. 

Here’s the but…... We are doing it at a sacrifice of academic excellence and achievement for the middle and top students. Other countries eight graders have consistently outperformed US in math and science. We just looked at the results of high school Olympiad, the best of the best in academics (mainly math and physics), US was not in the top group, the scores between the top teams to US was night and day, pathetic when see a lot  foreign names in the US team. This means the school system doesn’t promote excellence in these disciplines for the middle and top students.  

IMO, this a big social issue in the years to come. Think about how our life style right now. We are a strong country due to past innovations in medicine, industry, and technology. This was built on a strong of knowledge of math and science. Who is going to keep up this up when we get old…. looks like other countries; the Chinese and Koreans.


----------



## ctenidae (Nov 17, 2006)

Mainstreaming should focus on bringing students up to the mainstream level, rather than bringing the mainstream down to the lower students. Unfortunately, it's easier, cheaper, and more "self esteem building" to make everyone dumber.


----------



## JimG. (Nov 17, 2006)

jack97 said:


> Conceptually, I have nothing against mainstreaming and developing the social skills to interact with everyone in the classroom.
> 
> Here’s the but…... We are doing it at a sacrifice of academic excellence and achievement for the middle and top students. Other countries eight graders have consistently outperformed US in math and science. We just looked at the results of high school Olympiad, the best of the best in academics (mainly math and physics), US was not in the top group, the scores between the top teams to US was night and day, pathetic when see a lot  foreign names in the US team. This means the school system doesn’t promote excellence in these disciplines for the middle and top students.
> 
> IMO, this a big social issue in the years to come. Think about how our life style right now. We are a strong country due to past innovations in medicine, industry, and technology. This was built on a strong of knowledge of math and science. Who is going to keep up this up when we get old…. looks like other countries; the Chinese and Koreans.



I can't argue with this...such a quandry. We've got some real problems in this country.


----------



## skiNEwhere (Nov 17, 2006)

This is about as much BS as tag getting banned in one town. I think it depends on the teachers, some are better than others. 

I hate to compare to other countries, but look at Japan. While there schools are very hard, as a result they have much more technology, and they have evolved very fast as a country


----------



## ctenidae (Nov 17, 2006)

jack97 said:


> Who is going to keep up this up when we get old…. looks like other countries; the Chinese and Koreans.



And the Indians.


----------

