" Time spent asking, "which division problem doesn't belong" is wasted and should be spent teaching how to divide."
I agree with most of what you said, with the exception of a) the idea that Common Core is to blame for a particular confusing question and b) this statement. Kids need to learn both how math works, i.e. what division is about and how to do it, and which questions to ask. There's actually more value in knowing which questions to ask, but you can't do that well without understanding the nuts and bolts.

The industrial revolution created great wealth. Knowing the "3Rs" was key to those jobs. We still have to know the basics, but now there is little value in just being able to work math, spell well, memorize facts. Computers can do those things better than we can. In the modern economy understanding the mechanics of division is critical and so is being able to work out which problems to work and which ones don't belong. I would be surprised if this particular question was generated by the Common Core initiative, but regardless I strongly support this type of question. It sounds like it was causing some struggle, and I wholeheartedly agree there's nothing wrong with struggling with math. It's just like learning a language-- you always struggle at first.

That's a bunch of horse hockey. Just last night I was helping my son with a math problem in his homework. It had four different multiplication problems and asked the student to explain which one "didn't belong". It was the strangest math question he's brought home so far. I finally told him to write on there, "My dad's an engineer and he doesn't know what you're asking." He said, "My teacher will get mad." I said, "That's ok. I want her to explain it to me."

I understand your use of "they don't seem that bad." However, America is rapidly falling behind in the subject of math. I am familiar with the theory behind Common Core math, and I can almost sympathize. It's widely admitted that it was formulated for kids who "struggle with math". Truth be told, math in elementary school isn't complicated. Yet, even in grades 3 or 4 we are having problems getting it taught. Time spent asking, "which division problem doesn't belong" is wasted and should be spent teaching how to divide.

There's nothing wrong with "struggling with math". It should be welcomed as part of the process. I struggled with water skiing...terribly...haha...

You know...come to think of it: I think that one major problem with math in schools is that we aren't spending enough time teaching it. Remember the 3Rs? I don't have the answers, I'll admit. But, I have seen some Common Core material that is really distracting/misleading. I find that upsetting.

I remember seeing Monticello when I was in high school. I'd probably appreciate it more now.

My public education up until age 13 portrayed America as the general good guys, and didn't focus that much on liberty, although it was certainly mentioned. My partially public education from age 14-17 was more critical of the US and Europe in general. In college my only history was two history of science classes. Oddly, they were the most ideological-- not pro- or anti-US but rather in favor of questioning everything, in a way that bordered on post-modernism, something I now strongly reject.

CircuitGuy, I have seen no evidence of indoctrination in my grandchildren's common core standards--ALL of which were developed at the state and local levels, since there is no such thing as Federal Common Core instructional strategies. Not only have they been encouraged to drill for rote memorization of their "ARITHMETIC facts" for purposes of speed and fluency, they are also receiving direct instruction in MATH Quantitative Reasoning. It is the various teaching strategies for the MATH Quantitative Reasoning that frustrate parents to whom these strategies are unfamiliar. They need to quit listening to propaganda and do serious research on how children learn to reason quantitatively and how MATH concepts and constructs are internalized and assimilated by children. There are infinite methods for illustrating the associative and commutative properties of numbers. There is a variety of ways to solve both Arithmetic and Math problems and still arrive at the correct answers. But what do I know? I mean as long a we are broadcasting credentials around here, I have two advanced degrees--one of which is in statistics. I believe I have a fairly rigorous math background. In graduate school, I was required to do things like take given problems & their data sets and work all the way through the problems including multi-variate analysis ( such as a three-way analysis of co-variance & honestly significant difference) using only a two-variable statistic capable calculator. Why? To teach me what I was doing so that I'd understand when I used computer applications for the same process in real life situations. It was difficult and frustrating, but I LEARNED. What I DO find disturbing is the sheer number of people on this earth who have NO ability to tolerate the unfamiliar, are terrified of uncertainty; and who (instead of making a serious and scrupulous study of something) dismiss the novel out of hand due to FEAR. They listen to a bunch of crap about something they have not bothered to properly educate themselves. It must be hell to live in that kind of fear. Congratulations on being an informed, consistent, and wise consumer of your children's education.

"Common Core is a full, frontal assault on math."
I have seen no evidence of this. I see occasional blog posts with people feigning outrage over worksheets they say are confusing and they say were made confusing to comply with Common Core. Of the ones I've seen, they don't seem that bad, and they're not more confusing than bad worksheets inspired by other standards. I'm always open to new evidence, but I think it's people getting fired up over absolutely nothing, turning a mundane educational standard into an assault on math.

"Math is an international language that binds us to reality. "
I agree. It's a framework for understanding everything else.

Yeah, I've seen it. It's offensive.

You're not serious. Come on.

For starters - Common Core is a full, frontal assault on math. Math is an international language that binds us to reality. Only an evil person would purposely muck it up as is done in Common Core.

"Where there is no mathematics, there is no freedom." - Edward Frenkel

I visited Jefferson's house earlier in the year while I was in Charlottesville VA, and toured the exhibits there. I was amazed at the difference in the relating of historical events between what I saw there, and what I remember from American History classes in public school. It was like night and day. In the government indoctrination classes, America was portrayed as some great defender of liberty. The truth is not nearly so innocent. Running off the mormons all the way out of the country to the west, forced march of the Indians from their homes to relocated territories, the who civil war with the Union intent on destroying the south (while the south just wanted to be left alone), the incessant acquiring of more and more territory using military force. These things paint a picture of a country saying one thing in the constitition, but doing far different things in practice. (As many presidents including Obama does ). This is what I mean by government indoctrination schools- they just fit the agenda of our not-so-clean government. This is apart from the whole idea of "teaching students what WE think", not what the students want and need to learn.

I think it's a hasty conclusion. Maybe some of them have agendas. I simply don't see it in the two public schools I interviewed or the one my kids attend. There may be some bureacratic mentality, but it's not nefarious. I see why that could happen. I just don't see it happening so far. In general (not in the schools we interviewed) I see gov't as much more often inept than nefarious. Often it's a bunch of people on gravy-train jobs where they get low pay and have no chance of getting fired or making a lot of money. They just count off years until retirement, which is sad.

If I wasnt forced to pay for and attend public schools, I wouldnt care if government has schools. I would conclude that they set them up to further their agendas. Personally, I found the time I was forced to spend in them was inhibiting my learning, not furthering it.

"CG, are you unaware of the outrageous lies CC teaches and calls it history?"
No. I've only seen a few blog posts written by people feigning outrage over absolutely nothing. If there's something outrageous in the standard, I haven't discovered it yet. My wife and I monitor things closely. If we see this problem, we'll move them. We already have the backup choices planned.

I will be finding out if this is true in three years. My kids will have to learn their multiplication tables in some form or another.

I detect no ideological indoctrination whatsoever, but that doesn't make gov't-run schools a good thing. This wouldn't be a topic for public discussion if schools were private. I would want schools that subscribe to some standard like Common Core, but not everyone would. The more things the gov't runs, the more we debate what should be private purchasing decisions. I'm sure we'll soon see debate about how often people should have tests for cancer or heart disease.

But the common core creatures are not a state, never mind qualified for anything regarding education.
My understanding is they are a crony connected Testing business for the idiot leftest creatures that want to track Your child for life.
Seems to me to be a state's right to be stupid and corrupt; never mind creating something beyond useless idiots...
Here is a good question; was the Dept of DeEducation voted into existence by congress?; or was it another executive disorder.

An appropriate abbreviation since they have gone limp on this one.... ;-b

CG, are you unaware of the outrageous lies CC teaches and calls it history?

It wouldn't surprise me if Gates is shadow-funding it, the way he did the outrageous patent-troll case SCO v. Linux.

The federal DOE has made CC a condition of its payments to state schools. Of course, constitutionally the federal government has no business making any payments to state schools, so setting conditions on them shouldn't make any difference to that question.

I'm no Constitutional scholar, but this I do know; The Constitution was written to restrict government not to enance it. You might call the constitution an anti-government expansion document. Not only Common Core, but hundreds of laws on the books are unconstitutional. The lefties love the laws and rules, the right is too chicken-shit to challenge them. Just for "fun" I looked up what I would have to do to CMA if I wanted to open a business like the one I did 1969. In '69 I had to pay for an occupancy permit, which I thought was a scam back then but I did it. Then I had all the utilities put in my name. That was it folks. Today? I lost track of all I needed to do after going through the list of rules. I doubt if I ever could, or ever would have gone into business then, and I sure as hell wouldn't do it today. Under Obama and to a much lesse extent under previous regimes, the anti business mentality is so severe that it is a wonder that anyone is employed. Oh, wait...the government is taking up the slack. Very shortly there will be more people employed by the government than by private industry. If it hasn't already happened.

Congress will, therefore, vote on it and pass it.

The Gates Foundation hasn't had a lot of Idaho-specific presence, though I agree that they're behind a lot of the Common Core push nationwide.

I was wondering about the inter- vs intra. Thanks for the correction.

You are also correct in that the Constitution doesn't authorize a federal program for education. In fact, in the authorization for the Federal Department of Education it specifically forbids the national program from any kind of dabbling at the State or local level.

Common Core is different, however, because it isn't being pushed by the Federal Government (at least explicitly), but by a coalition that has persuaded the States to sign on as participants - thus they have been able to avoid the challenges of the Federal Courts up to this point.

The Albertson Foundation was a primary one behind Gov Otter's support for Common Core, but Troupis specifically mentioned the Gates Foundation when discussing his lawsuit on talk radio the other morning.

Nevertheless...............;-)