Data Celebration: Statistics and Probability in 6th Grade Math

One of my goals for the second half of the 2014-2015 school year is to use this blog to celebrate some of the growth we can see through our student data at Southeast Polk. I'll kick off those celebrations with the growth we've seen from our sixth grade math students in the area of statistics and probability.

For the past three years, our sixth graders have been assessed on four statistics and probability standards:

• MA.6.6.SP.1 Recognize a statistical question as one that anticipates variability in the data related to the question and accounts for it in the answers.
• MA.6.6.SP.2 Understand that a set of data collected to answer a statistical question has a distribution which can be described by its center, spread, and overall shape.
• MA.6.6.SP.4 Display numerical data in plots on a number line, including dot plots, histograms, and box plots.
• MA.6.6.SP.5 Summarize numerical data sets in relation to their context.

AVERAGE SCORES

The average scores of our sixth grade math students rose in all four students, including a jump of 14 percentage points from last year in standard SP.2.

PROFICIENCY LEVELS

Last year, sixth grade math students met our district proficiency goal by scoring at least 80% in only two of the four statistics and probability standards. This year, they met that goal in all four standards, including a fantastic leap from 52% to 83% of our students testing proficient for standard SP.2.

STUDENTS WITH IEP's

Another impressive gain was made by our special education students. Last year, only one-third of IEP students tested proficient in unit 5, where all four statistics and probability standards were assessed. This year, 44 out of 55 IEP students scored at least 80% on the unit 5 post-test. 

Sixth grade math students include most of the students at Spring Creek, as well as 35 accelerated fifth graders. 

Common Core Mythbusting

If you've been on Facebook for any amount of time, one of your online friends has probably posted a video similar to this one:

There is a plethora of videos similar to this one, and most of them have sensationalized, click-bait titles:

• Arkansas Mother Obliterates Common Core in Four Minutes!
• COMMON CORE MATH MAKES SIMPLE ARITHMETIC AS COMPLEX AS CALCULUS!
• Proof Common Core is Killing Common Sense
• Teaching Math in Bizarro World
• New Common Core Math Doesn't Add Up
• Common Core Teacher Takes Nearly a Minute to Solve 9+6=15
• Common Core Assignment Makes No Sense to Dad
• Common Core Makes Me Mad

Along with the headlines, these videos tend to share a common two-pronged thesis: There is a specific Common Core method in math, and it is ridiculously hard and confusing in comparison to how math has traditionally been taught. 

For anyone who accepts the information in these videos at face-value, this is an effective argument. The method shown in the video I've posted and in so many others does seem at first to be overly-complicated, especially when explained in a confusing manner by someone whose intent is to make you believe that it is. And we're all familiar enough with basic addition and subtraction that when the video goes on to make a comparison to the carry and borrow method we learned in grade school, our initial reaction is probably agreement with the narrator that it doesn't make any sense.

Fortunately, in education, we're not in the business of accepting information at face value, and a critical look at either part of the argument shows that there is nothing complex about it, that it does add up in a way that is far more natural for the human brain than borrowing and carrying, and that it makes perfect sense when explained well by a good teacher. 

The first part of the anti-Core argument--that there is a specific method prescribed by the Core--is patently false. There isn't one, and I would challenge anyone who says there is to go to the Common Core website or the excellent Iowa Core website and find it. (For that matter, I would encourage anyone to explore these sites whether they believe the myth or not, just to be more informed about the standards that have become so vital in American education.)

The second part of the argument--that "Common Core math" is confusing and over-complicated--involves a little more critical thinking. In the case of the video above, it took a second viewing for me to realize that what was being shown was simply how I do math in my head. It's been said that there are three kinds of people: Those who are good at math, and those who aren't. (On Facebook, that sentence would be followed by an obligatory "LOL.") That may be true to an extent, but for many people who struggle with mental math, it's possible they're trying to carry and borrow in their heads. That method works well on paper, but poorly when attempted mentally. Mental math is a different animal, and it looks like the method that is ridiculed in so many anti-Core videos. 

In fact, when it's explained by a teacher whose purpose is for his students to learn an effective math strategy, it's not complicated at all.

For more information on debunking Common Core mythology, google "Common Core myths."