What even is American Grade 1 Maths?

BallistixOnZ490 said:
Careful there, all the teachers and people who know teachers are saying that the question and link explaining it are perfectly normal English that everyone should know.
Click to expand...

Did the person completing the exam paper get internet access to the link with further explanation though?
 
thenewoc said:
Did the person completing the exam paper get internet access to the link with further explanation though?
Click to expand...

The further explanation doesn't even make sense which is the point, and that is what 5 year old kids are being taught.

Then we wonder why kids are getting dumber. Gee I wonder how and why that could be?

Simply teaching algebra would be easier to all 5 year olds than this crap is.

People defending it by saying 'kids are too dumb to understand algebra' ... You mean dumb kids are too dumb to learn algebra. Doing the methods in the OP simply brings the normal and clever kids down to the same level as the dumb ones. Now everyone can be equally dumb and not understand anything when they leave school. Ultra mega 'EVERYONE CAN BECOME ANYTHING THEY WANT TO BE' wokey dopes leaving school to study their Artisanal Sandwich Making course at Subways is all we are ending up with as a result.
 
Last edited:
thenewoc said:
At that age we did coins and how to make certain amounts with different combos.
Click to expand...

So I was the only person sat through primary school being given tests of sums with a neat trick question for number 20 that made every test incredibly interesting?

In year 3, myself and a few other kids actually asked our teachers for maths homework because we wanted more that we could do at home before we were meant to be given homework.

We had these books I can't remember the name of that we were given that got progressively harder, SPSG or some such? It became a challenge to see who could get through most of them. They were not just maths either, loads of general knowledge, trivia and things that kids should be learning in them. It was actually fun going through those books and learning the stuff in them.

I was one of the few kids constantly asking to take more of those books home to do.

Maybe they are too expensive to print for every kid nowadays or something.
 
thenewoc said:
Well at 5 years old I doubt we did a lot other than start times tables, reading, singing, painting, playing etc
Click to expand...

Found it, they were 'SPMG' books, actually Scottish education ones it seems back in the 80s:

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Infant-Mathematics-Workbk-1-Development-Activity/dp/0435026011

We were still given these in England in years 3 & 4, they were actually super decent and thorough, and if you found them easy you simply kept going through them to the next ones.

We used to be given printed books per kid, and you did the exercises in the actual books using pencil (maybe they then erased them to give to the next kids, I don't remember the books being pre used or not).
 
Surveyor said:
Such fun.

Click to expand...

I always wanted things like these as a kid but never got any. Never had any lego either, only Scrabble, boggle, a geosaffari, oh god and a bunch of Readers Digest atlases and books on animals and planets that my dad thought would be useful. They actually were though, though Readers Digest are crap.

Yes I used to read massive hardback books about mushrooms when I was 6.
 
Most teaching systems are a joke because they're infiltrated by the wasteful left. They should create teaching plans centrally since there's only one GCSE syllabus per subject or should be. No need for separate exam boards unless they're following the same content. No reason why this wasn't online either so pupils can learn at their own pace, catch up on missed classes due to illness etc. Would also support those wanting to home school. Would be far more efficient.
 
thenewoc said:
Most teaching systems are a joke because they're infiltrated by the wasteful left. They should create teaching plans centrally since there's only one GCSE syllabus per subject or should be. No need for separate exam boards unless they're following the same content. No reason why this wasn't online either so pupils can learn at their own pace, catch up on missed classes due to illness etc. Would also support those wanting to home school. Would be far more efficient.
Click to expand...

.so no inherent self checking mechanism in your world?

We don't have just 1 court for a reason
 
thenewoc said:
The poor sod is being penalised by a brain dead leftist education system.
Click to expand...
thenewoc said:
Most teaching systems are a joke because they're infiltrated by the wasteful left. They should create teaching plans centrally since there's only one GCSE syllabus per subject or should be. No need for separate exam boards unless they're following the same content. No reason why this wasn't online either so pupils can learn at their own pace, catch up on missed classes due to illness etc. Would also support those wanting to home school. Would be far more efficient.
Click to expand...
Mods, can we ban these moronic dog whistle posts?
 
thenewoc said:
We used to have encyclopedias back then since it was prior to the internet.
Click to expand...

Oh yes that's what they were. My dad simply had a bookcase full of such encyclopedias and atlases that I would sit and read through. They had loads of images of planets, dinosaurs, mushrooms etc.

But apparently 5 year olds today are too dumb to learn 8+9.
 
Tefal said:
.so no inherent self checking mechanism in your world?

We don't have just 1 court for a reason
Click to expand...

But those courts refer to one set of laws.

I also never suggested the syllabus wasn't or shouldn't be the work of multiple people with the right skills.

What you don't need is several thousand teachers creating different lesson plans for each syllabus.
 
Some learners aren't visual thinkers, so could be stumped at that age, I suppose. Likewise if they're super concrete, so can only count with physical counters, fingers or toys one at a time. This is where the teacher is meant to step in alongside the curriculum to accommodate different students. But if 'dad' can't comprehend and count at his age to help his kid learn - all is lost.

Life is fuzzy with problems hardly ever coming to us in the way we like to process them; the more complex and information rich the society, the more abstraction required. Ours is a fairly developed service economy, wouldn't you say? America, same? So pretty complex. In a way, questions like the one in this thread are trying to teach kids a valuable skill. Once you have a general idea of number and set, algorithmic efficiency is just a matter of drill and experience for those applications that need it (computing power is cheap though, so wild proficiency in mental arithmetic isn't really worth the effort most of the time even in the most basic of modern jobs).
 
datalol-jack said:
Some learners aren't visual thinkers, so could be stumped at that age, I suppose. Likewise if they're super concrete, so can only count with physical counters, fingers or toys one at a time. This is where the teacher is meant to step in alongside the curriculum to accommodate different students. But if 'dad' can't comprehend and count at his age to help his kid learn - all is lost.

Life is fuzzy with problems hardly ever coming to us in the way we like to process them; the more complex and information rich the society, the more abstraction required. Ours is a fairly developed service economy, wouldn't you say? America, same? So pretty complex. In a way, questions like the one in this thread are trying to teach kids a valuable skill. Once you have a general idea of number and set, algorithmic efficiency is just a matter of drill and experience for those applications that need it (computing power is cheap though, so wild proficiency in mental arithmetic isn't really worth the effort most of the time even in the most basic of modern jobs).
Click to expand...
Exactly. The alternative is we only teach number bonds and then everyone is dead chuffed their kid can recite times table but has no idea what the method is or why the answer is what it is.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom