[snipped] (Specifically: in the "developing" category >counts orally to 100 by ones and tens, to 50 by fives, to twenty by 2s. >In the "independent" category : counts to 100 by 2s, 5s, and 10s.) Our >collegue feels oral counting is too rote. [snipped] >If this seems too dull for the list, please respond to me personally at >Chapman@apsicc.aps.edu THANKS! Cindy
Just as children learn the "A,B,C's" song, and memorize nursery rhymes long before they understand the meaning of these words. Children learn the "language of number" in the same way. Some psychologists have long believed that thinking about a concept requires the lanugage of the concept. What I am trying, in a not so articulate manner to say is, I believe that the rote memorization of the "language of number" has to happen before or during the development of number sense.
I think, as you also stated, that the objection to "rote" memorization is when "memorization" is the "only" thing tested for. In otherwords, I am with you, rote counting does give a valuable window into a child's knowledge of the "language of number".
If you would be willing to share any of the benchmarks I would love to see them, our district will be embarking on a similar task next year:-)