When I entered sixth grade, my school tried to label me a "genius" and forced me into the Gifted and Talented program. This isn't a brag on my part; I hated it and eventually got out of it. The reason I hated it was two fold: the first reason was that I was clearly not a "genius", the second reason was because the GnT program was mainly reserved for upper middle and upper class kids who hated me (the poor kid) for intruding.
The reasons for me hating the gifted group are unimportant. The important part is why I found my way into the group. Like I said, I'm not a genius. What I am, however, is quick and intuitive when it comes to some things. One of those things is problem solving. Once I see a solution to a type of problem, I tend to remember it and work out ways to get to that solution pretty easily. That sounds a lot cooler than it really is, but that trait skewed my test results back in elementary school. That's why I found myself in gifted classes for half a school year decades back. Once I got into high school all my 'skill' gave me was the ability to annoy my teachers.
Earlier, reshared a link that shared previously: http://goo.gl/m9H42J
That link goes into an explanation of the image being shared on social networks about the "new math" being proposed. I'm not sure why the author in the link says that conservatives are the ones criticizing this new math stuff, since I've seen people leaning left complaining as much as those leaning right. I've heard educators complain about this method as well. The rage I've seen in comments based on the left half of the image below seem to know no political ideology as far as I can tell. And I have to admit, seeing the image without an explanation of why it's doing what it's doing seems pretty weird to me as well.
However, once I saw the explanation I was surprised. I wasn't surprised because it finally made sense, though. I was surprised because that's how I figured out how to solve large subtraction problems back in fifth grade. I say "figured out" because I don't recall being taught to do it. I do recall getting complex problems in paragraph format where I had to solve the problems by doing math (subtract, add, multiply, divide). Doing enough of them just made me work out shortcuts. That those shortcuts already exist as a known system is pretty much irrelevant. The algebra shortcuts I used in middle and high school are probably also part of a known system as well. Regardless, those methods I used sure as heck were faster and just as sure used to get me in constant trouble for not "showing my work" because the methods I used involved fewer steps.
So what's the big honking deal? I used to (and still) call it "working backwards" for reaching a solution. Heck, we already teach this to people who handle money as a way to give people change. Why would providing this method of doing simple math be a bad thing if it actually has practical application? There's no practical application for the "borrowing" method of subtraction, that's for damn sure. Instead, this just seems like more of the same hate on the education system that comes from the left as well as the right (though admittedly using different arguments).
Here's Jeremy's original post (sorry for not using the share button, dude): https://plus.google.com/+JeremyReger/posts/2QaBoS8H37M
Give Jeremy a circle if you like this post.
Conclusion for TL;DR folks: None of what I'm saying here is meant to defend Common Core as a whole. I don't know enough about all of the details for it to form a solid opinion one way or the other. But this proposed math change seems like an incredibly good idea.
Gifted and talented is not supposed to be equivalent to smart. It is supposed to be for people who have exceptional talents in one or more areas. Those people often need extension in those areas and sometimes need more help in other areas to remain balanced. For example you might be very good at music but poor at writing or perhaps you are very creative but have a hard time retaining historical facts. That's why it is called gifted and talented and not geniuses. Gifted and talented programs were gutted under No Child Left Behind. Let's hope they see a resurgence.
The reason conservatives oppose common core is because it damages local control. This is a legitimate complaint. However it's hard to fight common core by saying you want to spend more time on the Bible so the opponents use other means of putting it down. Some misinterpret real examples like this, but many just make stuff up. Unfortunately the constituency lacks the critical thinking skills that common core values to be able to discern truth from fiction.
Teachers have been pointed out as being against common core. Most recently some teachers were arguing for a delay in the use of test results for measuring performance because common core is hard and it's going to take a few years to get it working.
Others don't like that it requires teachers to actually work. We need to keep track if these teachers and get them other jobs that don't impact our children's education.
There are some genuine concerns about common core. My favorite is the massive unregulated demographic data collection done by the quasi-private testing companies. There is a legitimate use for collecting and aggregating this data, but it's use should be tightly controlled and should never be seen as a revenue source
In this case, the top way works, but if asked why it works most people would have no clue. The bottom way very clearly demonstrates what subtraction is. It's a difference. This method is essentially just counting up from the smaller number to the larger number; it's just doing it in bigger steps.
The old way is a handy shortcut, but it doesn't teach you anything more about the fundamental meaning of subtraction than just plugging it into a calculator would.
Second place for Frozen cover songs: "Do You Wanna Get a Beer, Man?" (Parody of "Do You Want to Build a Snowman" from Disney's Frozen)
I feel like the stronger play is to have timed exclusives. New cards are available to paid players first (i.e. they're in packs that you buy with gold) but are eventually available to free-to-play players (you can buy the pack using mana).
This approach means the free players have a reason to look at the packs bought with gold since the cards will be available eventually, and they don't feel like the paid players are buying a permanent advantage. Combined with a slight power creep, the paid players will have a small advantage, but only as long as they continue to buy gold. This changes the game from a pay-to-win to a pay-to-skip/pay-for-early-access game.
- PandoraSoftware Engineer, 2013 - present
- PhunwareAndroid Developer, 2011 - 2013
- Best Buy
- Alpha Omega Construction
- U.S. NavyNuclear Electronics Technician, 2006 - 2010
- T-Mobile USARetail Sales Associate, 2010 - 2011
27 New Android Apps And Live Wallpapers From The Last 2 Weeks (2/12/14 -...
Welcome to the roundup of the best new Android applications, games, and live wallpapers that went live in the Play Store or were spotted by
[New App] Auto Finder Runs In The Background And Remembers Where You Lef...
The expansive parking lots of your local mall can be a nightmare as you scan the sea of metal and glass to find your car. There are plenty o
Android UI Patterns: Samsung Delivers a Pile of Failure in Their Olympic...
It is worth remembering that the your app's user experience starts from the Play Store. Be careful not to leave in permissions that not actu
20 Things Nobody Tells You About Moving Out Of Southern California
Thinking of leaving Southern California? There's a whole bunch of stuff nobody told you about.
Rethinking TV news, Part I: What's broken, what's possible — BuzzMachine
Most TV news sucks. But I don't want to dwell on that. I'd like to see TV news be reinvented, yet I'm astounded so little innovation is occu
Contextual Action bar (CAB) in Android - TechnoTalkative
A Contextual action bar (CAB) is a temporary action bar that overlays the app’s action bar for the duration of a particular sub-task.