Gifted Issues Discussion homepage Forums Age or Ability Specific Forums Middle School Common Core Math

How are your middle schools handling implementation of Common Core Math. I am on a committee looking at the changes our district is planning. Currently, our gifted students are able to take Algebra 1 in the seventh grade and Geometry in the 8th grade. Our district is proposing that gifted students not be allowed to take Geometry in 8th grade, but should instead spend 2 years in Algebra 1 beginning in the 7th grade
. This is based on the supposition that the increase in the rigor of the common core standards will be great enough to justify this amount of time spent in Algebra 1. I am a parent not a teacher and not really a mathematician. My son's class is the first this will affect.

Hmmm.

Well, I'm skeptical. My DD's foundation in algebra I and geometry is more than enough for her to tutor high school students in both courses-- and in the revamped Common Core "course three" which I gather is the new "prealgebra" class. Or maybe it's some other course that doesn't translate at all into the conventional sequence, as it has elements of algebra and geometry both, but with less rigor than either course. At any rate, DD knows her stuff well enough to explain it efficiently and cleanly to other students for four hours a week-- and that includes students who are into the newly designed/aligned course.

On the other hand, if "inquiry based" methods of math instruction are implemented as they have been in many ways around here... well, then, sure. I can see why it would take students-- even bright ones-- a couple of years to "discover" algebra 1 fundamentals on their own.

(Yes, sarcasm very much intended)

The only thing I know about Common Core Algebra I is that my son's class is using the Larson book that is supposedly aligned with the Common Core. Frankly, it doesn't look any more challenging to me. In fact, in browsing the book, I didn't find a few topics that I would have expected, such as dealing with algebraic fractions and polynomial division. The book essentially ends with the quadratic formula (there are two throwaway chapters afterward). Other books I have used for Algebra I (when I homeschooled) usually had the quadratic equation somewhere in the beginning of the second semester with topics like algebraic fractions following.

The book seems to place extreme emphasis on graphing and inequalities. It is also very much focused on procedural knowledge without much conceptual development. Unfortunately, my son's teacher prefers the "just read the book and come to me with any questions" approach to teaching, so he isn't getting the conceptual stuff there either.

Can you tell I'm frustrated?

Anyway, if this book is any indication, there is *less* covered in Algebra I under the Common Core, not more, and the level of challenge doesn't appear to be any greater.

This is pretty much why I dropped my AP Calculus class in high school (which I gather from many previous conversations here is known as Calc II in most school systems). I don't need procedures, except to reinforce the concepts. Teach me the concepts, and I'll own the procedures. If I came to the teacher with a concept question, his response was to very tersely demonstrate the procedure. Wrong answer.

I decided to stick it out until the end of the semester, by which time my test scores had fallen into the teens. But because I wasn't the only one floundering, the teacher gave me a B.

This all coincides with the "trend" that we've been observing w/r/t mathematics instruction trends as we veer into the path of Common Core.

We aren't the only parents who have been horrified that math courses don't seem to be actually, you know, teaching mathematics these days.

We and five or six other families (all with GT kids) have all noted it-- and we have all taken to offering our own kids direct instruction in everything from pre-algebra through calculus since the instructor's answer is "that's what Khan academy is for" and maybe (if you're lucky) another worked example, just like the book. Procedural without concepts, just as Dude notes.

I suspect that this is less about Common Core itself and more about the (fundamentally misguided, IMO) notions about "inquiry-based learning" and "flipped classroom" environments.

It's way different than when I was either a student OR a professor, that's for sure.

Oh, thank you for saying that. <3 <3 Inquiry-based learning is practically a sacred cow these days. It's accepted as the Truth in certain circles, which, combined with a backlash against learning actual facts ("They're too boring!"), drives me barmy.

Seeing lots of varied opinions for the common core standard.

@Val I think these buzz words of 'flipped classroom' should be highlighted as not misguided but instead an option for us teachers.

One resource that could be helpful is using online learning to supplement this. Take for example opened.io (currently in private beta).

It contains the largest catalog of educational videos all aligned to Common Core standards. Let me know if you guys need an invite.

Thank you for your input. It is very frustrating. My older son is in Algebra 1 (seventh grade). They are using the Common Core Algebra 1 book, though the district math director claims they have not implemented common core math. The class seems to be covering the material fine in a one year time span.Our Algebra teacher is phenomenal The proposal spends two years in Algebra 1. The district says they have not made a final decision. We are going to the school board about this.

I think it's ridiculous. For one thing, I can see it as possibly an option (and still not thinking it's a requirement) for the very first year that Common Core is used in your Algebra curriculum, but not as a proposal to change it for several years at a time. The thinking should be that as common core is implemented in the prerequisite classes, students will end up more and more prepared and "Common Core" Algebra will just be..."Algebra" again. No need to take two years to teach it. Sure, there may be some gaps for that first year of implementation, but it shouldn't last much beyond that, especially with gifted kids.

When I was a youngster, there was Algebra 1 and Algebra 1A and Algebra 1B. 1A and 1B were year long classes of Algebra 1 split in half. Just about everyone started in Algebra 1 with a few sections of Algebra 1A. Then at the end of the first nine weeks and again at the end of the first semester those not doing well in Algebra 1 were grouped together to make more sections of Algebra 1A. The point is...the only people who had to take two years were those who needed to take two years because the pace was too fast.

What astounds me is that everyone assumes that everyone can learn everything at the same pace (even if they need it a bit slower OR a bit faster) because of course everyone is exactly the same.