# Is There Such Thing as Reaching Half a Standard?

I like the Common Core State Standards for Math as they focus on objectives that students need to reach. However, some standards have way too many parts for them.

For instance, the standard CCSS.MATH.CONTENT.HSA.REI.D.11 is stated below. It would be ridiculous to teach this standard in an Algebra 1 class as students don't know logarithms yet. What do other teachers do in the way of teaching this standard for intersection of lines for Algebra 1? Is there such thing as reaching half a standard? What do others do?

Explain why the x-coordinates of the points where the graphs of the equations y = f(x) and y = g(x) intersect are the solutions of the equation f(x) = g(x); find the solutions approximately, e.g., using technology to graph the functions, make tables of values, or find successive approximations. Include cases where f(x) and/or g(x) are linear, polynomial, rational, absolute value, exponential, and logarithmic functions.

• One work around would be to give logarithm graphs so the intersection points don't require actual knowledge of logarithm properties etc. But, perhaps a better solution is simply to strike exponential and log functions from the list since they are not central to the actual idea of this standard. Surely this would be returned to once more in a later math course where the missing functions get added to the list. The larger question, do you cover functions ? That is more the question here. Jul 7, 2020 at 2:09
• This just shows that CCSS(M) standards are half-baked, that the promise of them being continuously improved and updated has fallen flat, and that it would be better if they were a proper curriculum, not just a set of goalposts. Jul 7, 2020 at 5:22
• I truly believe that in the near future that the CCSS(M) will add, remove, and modify standards from time to time to better fit math, educational learning. However, this question is not focused on that but rather what teachers need to do in order to break up a standard, etc. when teaching multiple course levels. Jul 7, 2020 at 12:04
• The standards are not a curriculum. They are not meant to be a curriculum. Rather, they are meant to give curriculum designers an idea of what students are supposed to know at certain times in their education. In most situations, a classroom instructor should implement the curriculum which is mandated by their institution (in the best cases, the instructor helped to select that curriculum, but this is often not the case), which may or may not hit all of the standards perfectly. The job of the classroom instructor is to know how the curriculum interacts with the standards. Jul 7, 2020 at 19:35
• I don't understand the close votes here -- experts in the interaction between curriculum and these standards should be able to write an answer that clarifies the core issue here, no? I think it's pretty clear what is being asked. Jul 7, 2020 at 20:05