Looking for a Silver Bullet

2+2=What? Parents rail against Common Core math

http://news.yahoo.com/2-2-parents-rail-against-common-core-math-060635222.html

An Iowa woman jokingly calls it "Satan's handiwork." A California mom says she's broken down in tears. A Pennsylvania parent says it "makes my blood boil."

I don't know what to expect.

I often see some parent railing against Common Core Math (more so than any other subject) on Yahoo! every now and then, and the specific moronic examples make me wonder what is going on, but I know this is not fair. Not one thing, such as different teaching method, can change or improve something so drastically. I know this, but still hope to be wrong.

Call it what you like. Math by any other name is Math, and that alone intimidates a lot of kids and adults. Therefore, I go by the rule of simpler is better (actually, this is my rule for a lot of things). There is a time for multistep, drawn out explanations (Geometry with theorems and proofs) and maybe that needs to come in the middle school time-frame, I don't know. But I don't think making math more complicated or convoluted is the solution (I'm mostly going by the internet examples).

One more personal gripe about Common Core Standards (as I know it practiced at our school) - too much testing! I thought standardized testing went away with STAR testing being gone, but boy, was I wrong.  Now, instead of testing students once a year, I think our schools students are tested three times a year! What is going on? What happened to the reduction of standardized testing? Hey, testing by any other name is still testing. 

American children do not go to school as long as some of their better test-taking counterparts. Therefore, I'm not sure if they should lose any more time in testing (three times a year!) when we don't really know what the test results are used for. I ask you - what are they used for? Do they effect next year's curriculum? If anyone has an answer, please let me know.

 I've also heard the imperative of transforming our schools to meet "21st Century Education" challenges, meaning bringing more computers and technology into our schools. Again, I know this alone isn't going to improve our education system, but again, I live in hope.

But the reality is this. A computer is a tool, just like a piece of paper and a pencil. It can only be as effective as a student who is using it. And in order to be effective, this student must be under an effective teacher's guidance. But lately, people are expecting technology alone to be the silver bullet that fixes the broken educational system. 

More and more chrome books are going into our schools, and I'm not convinced that that's a good thing. So far, I think they are effectively used in ~1/3 of the classrooms, max. Otherwise, I think they are little better than baby-sitters. And I've seen my child guess at and trick programs to get the correct answers. Can this be called learning? What is my child learning to do? Trick a software program. I guess you can call that problem-solving, but I'd rather have my child problem-solve with other children and teachers.  Maybe I'm too old-fashioned or too-anti technology, but I think we need to minimize the computer time in schools rather than maximize it.

Another question I'd like to ask is...how much is this costing the school district? A software program can't be cheap for a 700 students let alone 7,000 or more. A software program is useless without a computer or chrome book to run it on. So, how much more does that cost a school of 700 students or 7,000 students? How much money are we talking about here? Is it $100,000? Is it$500,000? Or is it $1,000,000? More?? Is this the best way to spend that money? How about hiring more teachers? Or reducing classroom sizes so that there will be more interaction between students and teachers? So, introducing technology into the classrooms alone is not a solution.

Well, for starters, I think parental involvement is crucial. Parental involvement doesn't mean blaming the teachers and administrators of your child's school. What I mean by it is an active parental engagement - checking homework, talking with children about the day, listening, etc. Several times, I've been shocked to hear a parent blame a teacher for his/her child's problems. A school/teacher gets that child for usually six hours a day in elementary school (if we take away recess and lunch, probably about five hours). No matter how long the child is in school, we, the parents, are responsible for that child. Period. No ifs or buts. We, the parents, need to own the fact that whatever the problem the child has, existed long before he/she entered school, and will exist long after he/she leaves this teacher, this school if the parents choose not to correct the behavior/situation. I think parental disengagement is one of the biggest contributing factors in children who struggle in school.

 So, what is the solution? I think there's a place for innovative teaching methods, stronger curricula, and technology. But no matter how many fancy computers populate our classrooms and nifty teaching methods are introduced to our children, nothing is assured of success unless the parents engage with their children actively.

P.S. - Just in case anyone is curious, I am not a teacher, but I've been teaching science as a volunteer (hands-on science projects) at my children's school for seven years now, covering K to 6th grade.