No Kidding: Common Core Will Give Credit for 3 X 4 = 11

Social Engineering: Creating A Ruling Elite While Undermining Society’s Ability To Think


 I want you to read the story and watch the video clip in this link:

4 x 3 = 11? Did School Official Really Say It Doesn’t Matter if Students Get Simple Math Wrong Under Common Core?

The truncated clip features August’s statement: “But even under the new Common Core if even if they said 3 x 4 was 11, if they were able to explain their reasoning and explain how they came up with their answer, really in words and oral explanations and they showed it in a picture but they just got the final number wrong? We’re more focusing on the how and the why.”

It gets worse, read the rest…

14 thoughts on “No Kidding: Common Core Will Give Credit for 3 X 4 = 11

  1. Reblogged this on Dak's Bays and commented:
    So it is better to be a good Bull Shitter than a good student? Absolutely Brilliant, because we don’t have enough low life, oxygen wasting, parasites, I mean politicians.

  2. Ground Control to Major Tom . . . . . We misplaced a decimal in our trajectory calculations, and while we can fully explain the correct formula, you will be flying into the Sun tomorrow morning. Sorry . . . . .

    • Exactly, but IMO, this is a weak example and does not support the negative response.

      By rote memorization, 3 X 4 = 12. By other processes (3 X 2) + (3 X 2) = 12 or 3(2)(2) = 12.

      • Steve,

        You just demonstrated that this is an excellent example of the problem. If you understand HOW to get the answer — as you just demonstrated your own understanding — then you would not get the wrong answer because you would recognize it is wrong.

        This means, even if the “explain how they got there,” they are getting credit for a wrong answer because their process is as wrong as their answer.

        Do you see the problem?

        • Yes I see the problem. In math, the answer is either right or wrong. That’s why I think the lady in the video chose a bad example to make her point. However, what they are attempting, was always the goal when I was in school.

          Teaching children to think and to reason is not a new concept. The relatively new concept that desires all children to be able to do it with equal ability is a losing proposition. I view “Common Core” as just another failed attempt by the federal government to solve a problem which has its roots in the local community. I don’t see it as a plot by the communists and atheists.

          Even if it’s a prayer and the pledge of allegiance, public schools include a certain amount of indoctrination, but again, the counterbalance always has to be on the local level, right down to the individual family unit.

          • Steve,

            You need to start reading Dewey. Our kids do not belong to us. They belong to the State. And the State’s job is to make them into good citizens of the new world order and not like their parents. And if you doubt this, go read the posts under education at the top of this page. They flat out say it. This is what Hillary means when she says it takes a village.

            So, as I said: if you trust the fruit from this tree, you trust the tree; and if you trust this tree, you trust from where it came — which puts you standing with Marx, Lenin, Stalin, Hitler, Wilson, Dewey, Bernays, FDR and Bill Ayres. Is THAT where you want to be standing?

            • I share your concern, because so many people have abdicated their parental responsibilities. The welfare systems tends to perpetuate a certain amount of apathy and a lackadaisical attitude. If the welfare system could be eliminated by proper functioning of a capitalist economy, truly geared toward our national interests, the concern about a surge in socialist leanings would also be eliminated. Capitalists have been in control for some time, and the results have been less than stellar.

              Socialism is a reactionary response to the shortcomings of capitalism. To simply say that one is bad and the other is good ignores those shortcomings, and lays the foundation for partisan politics. It precludes the possibility that the system can be tweaked in order to provide better outcomes. I do not stand with anyone per se, and I guess I have been indoctrinated enough to believe that, even with all the ills of the world, America should come first.

              I think Hillary wrote a book about the village, but I have not read it. I would guess it has more to do with something Tyler Perry once described in an interview, but I could be wrong; especially since she is so adamant about the U.S. being a driving force for women’s rights throughout the world. Anyway, when and where he grew up, everyone knew everyone else, and if a kid was acting up, any neighbor thought nothing of stepping in and correcting them. We seem to have lost that sense of community.

              • To make the statement that Socialism is a reactionary response to the Shortcomings of Capitalism is itself an example of Partisan Politics. And an example of the highest degree.

                The statement completely ignores the True history of Socialism …. in favor of the Socialist version of it’s history. Which would center around early Marx and the slightly earlier English socialist apologists and Utopians like Robert Owen ( one of the founders of Utopian Socialism) . Antecedents like Thomas More and others including Weishaupt tell a much fuller anf truer story. While the appeal to socialism was and remains a promise of a life without undue pain …. it also appealed ( and appeals ) to simplistic logic and a warping of “wants” into “rights”.

                The fact is The Aristocracy was loosing powers to the Burgers and Craft guilds… the movements afoot to free people….some of it was the Protestant movements and some of it was an extension of the Political movements in the middle ages….The Magna Carta … the Swiss Confederation…the Declaration of Arboath ( Above this page no less )….later the Dutch Republic ( 1600s)……

                This Movement of the People towards more freedom had to be Conquered if the Aristocracy wasn’t to disappear altogether. What they did was CO_OPT this Popular movement…… and their version was a Socialist model which essentially left a Ruling Elite in place and substituted “The State”…..The Society” for the “Individual” ……… their model played one group off another as scape goats….the French Revolution was it’s first big success……………..The very Antithesis to the American Revolution’s solution to the Freedom of the Individual. And History has been a play on this basic divergeance ever since.

                • Other than laws that can be viewed as being “socialist” or having a socialist component, has socialism ever been the economic model employed in this country?

Talk Amongst Yourselves:

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.