The Math Forum



Search All of the Math Forum:

Views expressed in these public forums are not endorsed by NCTM or The Math Forum.


Math Forum » Discussions » Professional Associations » nyshsmath

Notice: We are no longer accepting new posts, but the forums will continue to be readable.

Topic: Geometry Question #3
Replies: 39   Last Post: Jun 18, 2009 5:05 PM

Advanced Search

Back to Topic List Back to Topic List Jump to Tree View Jump to Tree View   Messages: [ Previous | Next ]
Sharon

Posts: 427
From: NYC
Registered: 6/26/05
Re: Geometry Question #3
Posted: Jun 18, 2009 7:25 AM
  Click to see the message monospaced in plain text Plain Text   Click to reply to this topic Reply
att1.html (7.6 K)


Yes - you are right in that the companies were forced to make some educated guesses as to what the final content of the curriculum would be.  But most companies did include a New York State chapter at the end of their texts to cover items not normally covered in other states at that grade level.  So this is yet another example of New York's poor planning.  The full curriculum with all the standards, should have been available to the book companies well before they were ready to go to press.  But looking at the Amsco and Prentice Hall books, you can see that each strand has been covered.  So I'm wondering whether or not they did have something, although not completely detailed, from the state to work with. 

I, for one, would like to hear that from now on, the regents cannot have duplicate questions, especially in part one.  Stop taking the easy way out and prepare a test that demonstrates the all around knowledge of a student in the given subject.  If they can't come up with 28 questions without duplication of material then the people writing this exam should take a good hard look at the course.

Sharon


"Mandatory" in whose opinion?  My guess is that most companies took their national or some other previous text and tweaked it to what they felt was the 'mandatory' curriculum.  They didn't even have the sample Geometry Regents at their disposal when they attempted to accomplish this task.  And I bet if you monitor this lis
t for a few years you will hear grumbling "They never tested this before".









-----Original Message-----
From: Eleanor Pupko <epupko2@hotmail.com>
To: nyshsmath@mathforum.org
Sent: Thu, Jun 18, 2009 7:08 am
Subject: RE: Geometry Question #3













"Mandatory" in whose opinion?  My guess is that most companies took their national or some other previous text and tweaked it to what they felt was the 'mandatory' curriculum.  They didn't even have the sample Geometry Regents at their disposal when they attempted to accomplish this task.  And I bet if you monitor this list for a few years you will hear grumbling "They never tested this before".

 

Eleanor Pupko
 




To: nyshsmath@mathforum.org
Subject: Re: Geometry Question #3
Date: Thu, 18 Jun 2009 06:27:50 -0400
From: msedfun@aol.com



I want to raise a question here.  Yes - we teach beyond the textbook because we have the background - but isn't the textbook supposed to represent the mandatory curriculum?  If it is, then should the students be tested beyond the textbook?  I don't think so. 

Sharon









-----Original Message-----
From: eleanorevo@aol.com
To: nyshsmath@mathforum.org
Sent: Thu, Jun 18, 2009 12:12 am
Subject: Re: Geometry Question #3



With all this discussion about question number 3 and which resource has the definitive answer.... it is important to remember that a large number of "math teachers" are, in fact, NOT math majors.  The n
umber of people who are teaching math "out of certification" is a problem that needs to be addressed.  They use the student text as their "Bible," and may not have a willing and capable math mentor in their building.





The majority of the posters here are "math people" and teach beyond the textbook, because we have the background.  I am really puzzled at how a history teacher who fulfilled the minimum math requirement in high school and college suddenly can teach math because there is a math position open and the history position was excessed.






And we wonder why the students don't know math ?!?


-----Original Message-----
From: MathCaryl@aol.com
To: nyshsmath@mathforum.org
Sent: Wed, Jun 17, 2009 9:55 pm
Subject: Re: Geometry Question #3





I can tell you as a middle school teacher myself, I discussed or introduced dilation by negative scale factors however, it was not the item I tested. But it is possible for a student to remember a dilation of scale factor negative one. In class, I asked the students which scale factor would not change the size in the hopes of reminding them of the mult iplicative identity.


I believe the discussion is worthwhile as it hopefully prevents other errors in the future.


Caryl Lorandini







Dell Days of Deals! June 15-24 - A New Deal Everyday!









Dell Days of Deals! June 15-24 - A New Deal Everyday!








Make your summer sizzle with fast and easy recipes for the grill.
0A

Microsoft brings you a new way to search the web. Try Bing? now=






Date Subject Author
6/16/09
Read Geometry Question #3
edward mertson
6/17/09
Read Re: Geometry Question #3
Jonathan Halabi
6/17/09
Read RE: Geometry Question #3
Roberta Silver
6/17/09
Read RE: Geometry Question #3
reuterg@canandaiguaschools.org
6/17/09
Read RE: Geometry Question #3
edward mertson
6/17/09
Read RE: Geometry Question #3
reuterg@canandaiguaschools.org
6/17/09
Read RE: Geometry Question #3
edward mertson
6/17/09
Read RE: Geometry Question #3
BHowitt@wlsv.org
6/17/09
Read RE: Geometry Question #3
Tom Kenyon
6/17/09
Read Re: Geometry Question #3
Storey, Dolores
6/17/09
Read RE: Geometry Question #3
Roberta Silver
6/17/09
Read Re: Geometry Question #3
Storey, Dolores
6/17/09
Read Re: Geometry Question #3
reuterg@canandaiguaschools.org
6/17/09
Read Re: Geometry Question #3
Virginia Kuryla
6/17/09
Read Re: Geometry Question #3
PJ Manzo
6/18/09
Read Re: Geometry Question #3
cindy@wcs
6/17/09
Read RE: Geometry Question #3
kgilbert@twcny.rr.com
6/18/09
Read Re: Geometry Question #3
cindy@wcs
6/17/09
Read Re: Geometry Question #3
ElizWaite@aol.com
6/17/09
Read Re: Geometry Question #3
Jonathan Halabi
6/17/09
Read RE: Geometry Question #3
Roberta Silver
6/17/09
Read Re: Geometry Question #3
Storey, Dolores
6/17/09
Read Re: Geometry Question #3
Tom Kenyon
6/17/09
Read RE: Geometry Question #3
Kathy
6/17/09
Read Re: Geometry Question #3
Tennantij@aol.com
6/17/09
Read Re: Geometry Question #3
MathCaryl@aol.com
6/18/09
Read Re: Geometry Question #3
ELEANOREVO@aol.com
6/18/09
Read Re: Geometry Question #3
Sharon
6/18/09
Read RE: Geometry Question #3
Eleanor Pupko
6/18/09
Read Re: Geometry Question #3
Jonathan Halabi
6/18/09
Read Re: Geometry Question #3
Sharon
6/18/09
Read Re: Geometry Question #3
djud@optonline.net
6/18/09
Read Re: Geometry Question #3
Tennantij@aol.com
6/18/09
Read non-regents geometry textbook
Brent Neeley
6/18/09
Read Re: Geometry Question #3
Tennantij@aol.com
6/18/09
Read Re: Geometry Question #3
Sharon
6/18/09
Read Re: Geometry Question #3
Jonathan Halabi
6/18/09
Read Re: Geometry Question #3
Sharon
6/18/09
Read Re: Geometry Question #3
StGOLD2112@aol.com
6/18/09
Read Re: Geometry Question #3
MathCaryl@aol.com

Point your RSS reader here for a feed of the latest messages in this topic.

[Privacy Policy] [Terms of Use]

© The Math Forum at NCTM 1994-2018. All Rights Reserved.