What's new
By:
Filters

** Meme **

arse_sidewards said:
I also have a "real math required" degree and generally really good at those sort of "well X is just Y more/less than Z and Z is convenient to work we so if we W T to Z and then A by Y you get V which is the <blah> of T and X like we wanted in the first place" type tricks and it still makes no fucking sense. You need to have a good handle on add, subtract, multiply and divide in order to learn the kind of tricks you need to learn to beat more complex math problems into submission. I'm all for teaching tricks because tricks give you better understanding of things but the trick is harder than just assaulting the problem head on in this case.
Click to expand...

This. Unfortunately, math teachers are instructed to use the tricks as alternative ways to teach math for kids who struggle with the traditional methods. Then the teachers go a step further and decide every child needs to master every alternative method. I can't count the number of late nights spent trying to figure out my kids homework that involves a "new" way to do a computation that could be done simply in a couple seconds with a traditional method, and my kid, who didn't understand what the teacher taught poorly, asking why cant they just do it the "normal" way, which would earn them a zero, despite the answer being correct, because they didn't use the correct method. Truly aggravating when you have a masters in engineering and can't work through some crackpot new math graphic solution method presented for elementary math class that takes significantly more time and is prone to minor calc errors along the way.

math-meme.jpg
 
clodhopper said:
This. Unfortunately, math teachers are instructed to use the tricks as alternative ways to teach math for kids who struggle with the traditional methods. Then the teachers go a step further and decide every child needs to master every alternative method. I can't count the number of late nights spent trying to figure out my kids homework that involves a "new" way to do a computation that could be done simply in a couple seconds with a traditional method, and my kid, who didn't understand what the teacher taught poorly, asking why cant they just do it the "normal" way, which would earn them a zero, despite the answer being correct, because they didn't use the correct method. Truly aggravating when you have a masters in engineering and can't work through some crackpot new math graphic solution method presented for elementary math class that takes significantly more time and is prone to minor calc errors along the way.

Click to expand...

I've been using many of the common core method (or as you call "tricks") for years to do math in my head. Its much easier to break a lot of problems into chunks like common core does without writing anything down.

Writing out the problem is usually much easier the "classic" way though.
 
non-OP said:
I've been using many of the common core method (or as you call "tricks") for years to do math in my head. Its much easier to break a lot of problems into chunks like common core does without writing anything down.

Writing out the problem is usually much easier the "classic" way though.
Click to expand...

Sure, no problem. I probably do too. Using them as alternative methods for the kids that struggle with classic computation methods also makes total sense. However, on the inverse, the kids that get the traditional methods are more likely to struggle with the new math methods. My youngest son is an off the charts math mind, struggled greatly with the new math because it twists up logical thinking into unnecessary knots and wasted time. His class would sometimes start with a traditional computation method, sometimes not, then spend days and days learning a seemingly neverending list of alternative new math methods to get to the same answer. Every kid had to learn and excel at every method, regardless. So instead of using the time to get to more advanced topics, stupid amounts of time was expended learning obscure and overly complex ways to do simple things.
 
arse_sidewards said:
I also have a "real math required" degree and generally really good at those sort of "well X is just Y more/less than Z and Z is convenient to work we so if we W T to Z and then A by Y you get V which is the <blah> of T and X like we wanted in the first place" type tricks and it still makes no fucking sense. You need to have a good handle on add, subtract, multiply and divide in order to learn the kind of tricks you need to learn to beat more complex math problems into submission. I'm all for teaching tricks because tricks give you better understanding of things but the trick is harder than just assaulting the problem head on in this case.
Click to expand...

clodhopper said:
This. Unfortunately, math teachers are instructed to use the tricks as alternative ways to teach math for kids who struggle with the traditional methods. Then the teachers go a step further and decide every child needs to master every alternative method. I can't count the number of late nights spent trying to figure out my kids homework that involves a "new" way to do a computation that could be done simply in a couple seconds with a traditional method, and my kid, who didn't understand what the teacher taught poorly, asking why cant they just do it the "normal" way, which would earn them a zero, despite the answer being correct, because they didn't use the correct method. Truly aggravating when you have a masters in engineering and can't work through some crackpot new math graphic solution method presented for elementary math class that takes significantly more time and is prone to minor calc errors along the way.

Click to expand...

non-OP said:
I've been using many of the common core method (or as you call "tricks") for years to do math in my head. Its much easier to break a lot of problems into chunks like common core does without writing anything down.

Writing out the problem is usually much easier the "classic" way though.
Click to expand...

Anybody else think that common core is meant to handicap this generation? If you're all mathy, I'd value a good/ bad

math-meme.jpg
 
clodhopper said:
Sure, no problem. I probably do too. Using them as alternative methods for the kids that struggle with classic computation methods also makes total sense. However, on the inverse, the kids that get the traditional methods are more likely to struggle with the new math methods. My youngest son is an off the charts math mind, struggled greatly with the new math because it twists up logical thinking into unnecessary knots and wasted time. His class would sometimes start with a traditional computation method, sometimes not, then spend days and days learning a seemingly neverending list of alternative new math methods to get to the same answer. Every kid had to learn and excel at every method, regardless. So instead of using the time to get to more advanced topics, stupid amounts of time was expended learning obscure and overly complex ways to do simple things.
Click to expand...

I get it. I am an engineer with minor in statistical thermodynamics and quantum mechanics (yay math!) and I had a hard time switching back and forth in methods helping my kids with homework because I had one kid in HS doing things the old way and a younger one in middle school learning the "new way".

yo_momma_so_mean.jpg
 
Projectjunkie said:
Anybody else think that common core is meant to handicap this generation? If you're all mathy, I'd value a good/ bad

Click to expand...

Guess I am certified old fart, cannot see a single redeeming quality in this new math bullshit. And feel sorry for the kids that have been taught this method. No wonder the Chinese and Indian kids are the hope of the future, not little 'Merican kids. Well that and not keeping score in soccer, so we don't get our feelers hurt - you can be the little Indian kids keep score

Between the engineering on a race car, and calling strategy during racers - yup just a little math going on. The young engineer I mentor is amazed that I come up with the numbers in my head (and am right most of the time), quicker than he can enter the lap times into a spread sheet and wait for the program to kick out the desired result (or not). Not sure if learned math old school or not, will have to ask.

Trading on the market, most of the day trade scalps I don't have the luxury of the time to calculate positions and risk in some spreadsheet, got to do that in your head, and be pretty damn accurate, or you lose actual $$$. No wonder so may Robinhood account holders are losing their ass, if they are on the other side of the trade to me, and are attempting to figure out their risk using common core, or even plugging the numbers into an app or spreadsheet.

Another example of how the 'Merican education unions have totally failed the last few generations. And are leaving this country in a poorer place because it.
 

What the actual fuck, I went cross eyed with that shit. Start with 368, now subtract the tens from 293...wtf? That is either incredibly poorly worded, or good lord i'm glad i didn't grow up with that math.
 
Drummer79 said:
What the actual fuck, I went cross eyed with that shit. Start with 368, now subtract the tens from 293...wtf? That is either incredibly poorly worded, or good lord i'm glad i didn't grow up with that math.
Click to expand...

I have never done common core math till this thread, but having the reasoning explained it makes a little (keyword little) more sense now. I do it that way in my head all the time in the field, but when I write it out, I always do it the old way.

However that meme is dumb. I solved it by adding 7 to both. 568 - 293...add 7 to both...575 - 300 = 275

and because meme thread.
861733540f17483f97ee4d11.md.jpg
3209165661_9fd33d6145_o.jpg


photo23853.jpg


3209165661_9fd33d6145_o.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Back Refresh