I don't think there is anything wrong with it because it is teaching kids how to break big problems up into smaller problems, which is how you actually solve problems in the real world. Granted, I don't know a whole lot about it, so there might be some inane bull **** I'd disagree with, but this seems fine to me.

I personally was so far beyond needing to break down such a simple problem that it would have shortcircuited my brain to even try as a youngster.

I could add columns of 3 and 4 digit numbers in my head at about 5-6 yo (thanks yatzee), and it was a skill that took me years to get back after I had to learn the way to show my work in elementary.

I personally think showing work is vastly overrated anyway. If this is supposed to be the age of learning how everyone best does it, then I don't see why because I'm so such much smarter than the teachers that I have to show them how I arrived at a correct answer.

But I would have bugged teachers to death if I'd had shit like this in school.

But I would have bugged teachers to death if I'd had shit like this in school.

I've stared at this for five minutes, and I still don't understand what it's asking.

But I would have bugged teachers to death if I'd had shit like this in school.

I've stared at this for five minutes, and I still don't understand what it's asking.

It's actually really simple once someone explains it -- but, again, you have to already know the answer to GET the answer.

Basically, you subtract whatever you need to get to the nearest round number. In this case, you subtract 5 to get 10. Then you subtract the remaining number (2 because 5+2=7) and you get the answer, 8.

With a larger number, you keep subtracting to round numbers until you can't anymore, then add all the numbers you subtracted in order to get the number.

So for 1,053-500, you subtract 3, then 50, then 500. Then you add 500+50+3 and get 53, which is the answer.

Know what I think of that?

fu[/b]ck no

But I would have bugged teachers to death if I'd had shit like this in school.

I've stared at this for five minutes, and I still don't understand what it's asking.

It's actually really simple once someone explains it -- but, again, you have to already know the answer to GET the answer.

Basically, you subtract whatever you need to get to the nearest round number. In this case, you subtract 5 to get 10. Then you subtract the remaining number (2 because 5+2=7) and you get the answer, 8.

With a larger number, you keep subtracting to round numbers until you can't anymore, then add all the numbers you subtracted in order to get the number.

So for 1,053-500, you subtract 3, then 50, then 500. Then you add 500+50+3 and get 53, which is the answer.

Know what I think of that?

fu[/b]ck no

I'm not defending it. Not even a little bit. It's ridiculous. But it makes some sense once someone explains it. However, it makes sense to me because I already know basic math. If I didn't, I'd be paralyzed with fear.

But I would have bugged teachers to death if I'd had shit like this in school.

I've stared at this for five minutes, and I still don't understand what it's asking.

It's actually really simple once someone explains it -- but, again, you have to already know the answer to GET the answer.

Basically, you subtract whatever you need to get to the nearest round number. In this case, you subtract 5 to get 10. Then you subtract the remaining number (2 because 5+2=7) and you get the answer, 8.

With a larger number, you keep subtracting to round numbers until you can't anymore, then add all the numbers you subtracted in order to get the number.

So for 1,053-500, you subtract 3, then 50, then 500. Then you add 500+50+3 and get 53, which is the answer.

Know what I think of that?

fu[/b]ck no

I'm not defending it. Not even a little bit. It's ridiculous. But it makes some sense once someone explains it. However, it makes sense to me because I already know basic math. If I didn't, I'd be paralyzed with fear.

I mean this with my whole heart because I like you very much.

No, it doesn't make sense. It's fucking *kitten* backwards.

As a Mechanical Engineer this makes me cry and worry for our children's future.. I'd love to see a Calculus (or even Trigonometry) equation solved using the common core methodology.

I can't. I can't stay out.


Bottom line is.... some kid's struggle with Math and don't understand it the way it's been "traditionally" taught. OK, great... here's a new option that might make more sense to THOSE kids.

But for all of the others that grasp and excel at math in a traditional sense, they should NOT even be doing this. The ****ing dots, blocks, circles.... COMPLETELY unnecessary and has made it MORE difficult to for my child to excel in math.

The fact it's become about funding and forced on all children is f*cked up beyond all belief and I'm so incredibly pissed I could punch a baby dolphin.



The. End.