Common Standards Maths: What You Should Pencil in?

Common Standards Maths: What You Should Pencil in?

Here’s a quick ‘why’ and ‘what’ for Maths education professionals in the US as they prepare for a changed scenario of guidelines

Mathematics is a unique subject, enveloping teachers and students alike in a distinct set of fears and obsessions.

Quintessentially true to its DNA, the subject is quite binary in nature – you either hate it or love it. There are seldom any ‘in-betweens’ here.

The situation in the United States is oddly interesting then when you take a quick look at what some PISA findings insinuated in 2012. PISA or Programme for International Student Assessment, which is a worldwide study by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), showed in its 5th survey after assessing the competencies of 15-year-olds in reading, mathematics and science (with a focus on mathematics) in 65 countries and economies; that among the 34 OECD countries, the United States came below average for performance in mathematics and the top-performer rank went to, Shanghai-China. What was more surprising was that over one in four U.S. students did not hit the PISA baseline Level 2 of mathematics proficiency. Specific weaknesses were related to performing mathematics tasks where higher cognitive demands, or taking real-world situations, as well as morphing them in a mathematical context was desired for.

Now, there was also an alignment study between the Common Core State Standards for Mathematics and PISA which recommended that if Common Core Standards can be deployed well than significant performance gains in PISA could ensue successfully.

That brings us to an important concern – can we bridge the gaps that different approaches and tools create in the mathematics knowledge tank of our future generations?

How?

By setting a common grammar for a language like Maths, that has become as universal as English in the global dynamics of this 21^st century. This is of paramount importance as countries from the developed world are increasingly missing something vital in Maths education while Asian countries seemed to have cracked something right. It’s not just a ‘US’ problem but also something felt in the UK, as media reports have occasionally reminded in the recent past.

The solution of injecting standards attacks the main issue of learning by rote and works at unbolting the doors of creative problem-solving.

Common Core Standards strive to do just that.

Introducing Standards

In the views purported by well-known mathematician Conrad Wolfram, there is a yawning gap of sorts between Maths in education and Maths in the real world. He often asks – are we largely teaching them wrong Maths?

His argument can’t be dismissed easily – specially the one where he exposes the widespread and almost-reflexive use of computers for calculating, and quite universally. He cautions against the confusion of rigor at hand-calculations with the bigger issues of wider problem-solving. Time has changed and so have problems. Do we still need to teach students to use fingers to add numbers when they learn to click at phone/computer key pads the moment they are out of that stroller?

Studies have shown that mathematics education in the United States has scope for turning substantially more focused and coherent. That is essential to raise mathematics achievement and that’s where newly-designed mathematics standards can tackle the classic scar of a curriculum which is frequently-tagged as “a mile wide and an inch deep.”

So corralling the best quality math standards from states across the country and also building upon some crucial international models for mathematical practice, and flanking it aptly with research and input from a variety of sources (read state departments of education, educators, parents and students, and members of the public); the main anatomy of new standards has been laid down.

Courtesy: notable-quotes

While they pick the best of existing standards, these standards forge strongly all the skills and knowledge that students will need to succeed in college, career, and life and apply their acumen for real-world problems instead of towing a path trodden for years now.

They essentially encourage math teachers to get a better grip on the ‘why’ and hence equip them better for a new, digitally-savvy, computer-dappled world with its own new set of problems.

Here’s a quick walk-through to help you in and before the class-room next time as delineated by Common Standards organization:

o      In grades K–2: Concepts, skills, and problem solving related to addition and subtraction

o      In grades 3–5: Concepts, skills, and problem solving related to multiplication and division of whole numbers and fractions

o      In grade 6: Ratios and proportional relationships, and early algebraic expressions and equations

o      In grade 7: Ratios and proportional relationships, and arithmetic of rational numbers

o      In grade 8: Linear algebra and linear functions

What mindset change it calls for?

Teachers may want to have a consideration of what these standards are chasing eventually and that will help them acclimatize their approaches well. The idea is to help a student build strong foundations, and focus more on a compact understanding of concept, rather than walking along the rote. It should move students towards better degrees of procedural skill and fluency, and prepare them well to apply the math not only just inside but outside the classrooms and in the real world as well.

These standards have the potential to bring in more coherence and take out tactical approaches or mnemonics. That should explain why coherent progression from grade to grade is a remarkable pattern here along with a well-rounded tendency in these standards so that topics are integrated well for a 360 degree view.

Courtesy: Bhaugolikgyan.wordpress

There is adequate room for conceptual understanding of key concepts, in order to stress strongly the ultimate goal of application.

Courtesy: sites.psu.edu

 The standards still give a reasonable emphasis on speed and accuracy in calculation or practice of core functions as well as general fluency.

Conclusion

If students can have a comprehensive and an application-oriented learning of this subject then teachers will be successful in making a better, well-armed generation of Maths- brains for future.

Video link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=60OVlfAUPJg

Like in this video, Conrad Wolfram, physicist, mathematician and technologist, and founder of computerbasedmath.org shows the irony of why Maths is uninteresting and why some teachers are frustrated while the world has become more mathematical. He pokes a good question – has Biology reduced conceptually because of use of more computers? He urges education stakeholders to make the subject more practical and more conceptual.

Maths should have more relevance out there in real-life and that’s precisely where these standards spur students towards/

That’s where and why teachers would need to move from toy problems of yester-year curricula and tackle the real world readiness instead.

Courtesy: Cartoonstock

Make students amenable to use of creativity and conceptual understanding which leads to practical results, shape appropriate mathematical maturity, and thus make the subject so much more exciting and refreshing than it has been all these years.

They may finally be able to hit back at and solve old Maths jokes like – “I have never understood this in my Maths class – why would anyone buy 64 watermelons in the first place?”