Oh geez. No, not all that to avoid subtraction.
So many issues here. I’m sure I’ll be flamed. This thread looks to have become a magnet for tin foil heads behaving like LIVs.
The video asserts that this is a “new, standard way” of doing a calculation. That’s totally wrong. It is not. It’s one example of a higher level of numeracy. It’s not a method it’s an example... just like you always expect when you’re learning. The hook or magnet for the ignorant is simply to assert that this is a “new, standard method” and those LIV types just believe that because they want to believe it.
Common core math is structured around the [erroneous] belief that kids learn simply by being exposed to higher level concepts and that no practice is required. Common Core is the complete opposite of learning by rote memory [for example, the individuals on this thread who say “where’d the 3 come from” were likely individuals who learned by rote.]
Learning at such a high level is great for kids who are really bright and motivated - but as aptitude and motivation reduces so must the methods for helping kids learn... simply a sliding scale. The brighter and more motivated a kid is, the more advanced/conceptual he can absorb and the less drill/rote he needs. The less capable and less motivated [most of what kids are today], the less advanced/conceptual he can absorb and the more drill/rote memory he needs.
So common core [math] is not what it’s being portrayed as - here on this video. It is misrepresented in hopes of eliciting a political response from LIV types who precipitously attack a bogus asserton. Later, posts from this thread will be extracted and used against us “wackos”.
Common core [math] is erroneously [note that I did not say it is evil, from the devil, etc] constructed around the assumption that most kids are super bright and super motivated. That’s bogus big time.
There is plenty wrong with common core - please pick something that’s actually wrong with it. This is silly.
I agree with you that Common Core math techniques will be grasped by the very bright, but that everyone else will struggle with it. However, many of the Common Core examples that you call “tin foil” stuff are taken verbatim from the teaching materials.
This statement is correct.
Learning at such a high level is great for kids who are really bright and motivated
This statement is false.
Really bright kids have the same issues that poorly motivated or less gifted children have with this approach to mathematics. The history, which we started accumulating in 1963 with the advent of "New Math" is clear: teaching conceptual mathematics at the starting point does not work in any cohort. It is simply less damaging to smarter people, who are able to recover from misteaching. That's all.