Common Core math question is Algebra!!!! *gasp*
-
Yeah, there was a good reason that I spoilered that one.
-
What's the double of 10, under Common Core?
Twen...
No, bitches, it isn't 20... it's 5.
-
-
When you look at
2
Does it appear red to you, or does it make you think of the color red?
--
Whooshed by popular acclaim. -b
-
it isn't 20... it's 5
That makes sense iff you define "double of something" to mean "what you double to get something". No, no rational English-speaking person would define it that way.
-
Most of it being roadworks at the moment hasn't improved it.
Even without that, it's not a nice road. The scenery between J21 and J25 is pretty darn good (when the weather agrees), but there's always the problems with the weather and the traffic levels. The biggest problem through most of the year is where you've got a heavy truck struggling up to a summit and another one trying to pass it at maybe 1mph faster. Now you've got 3 lanes of traffic trying to squeeze past in one lane. Both Windy Hill and Pole Moor summits are complete bitches like this.
The name “Windy Hill” is also highly apposite. That's where vehicles get blown over on a fairly regular basis, causing road closures every time…
WTF is up with the wikipedia page? It seems to be claiming that J21 and J22 are in the same location, with only -0.1 mile between them. TDEMSYR!
-
J21 and J22 are in the same location, with only -0.1 mile between them.
Oh, right, Wikipedia.
-
Relevant link to the OP:
And if you just want the the article is based on:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LQ8Nr3_2724
The man in the center of the screen cap is (with the beard) is Dr. David Pook, one of the people who helped write the Common Core standards. As he states in the video, his motivation for helping write the Common Core standards was (emphasis mine):
The reason why I helped write the standards and the reason why I am here today is that as a white male in society I am given a lot of privilege that I didn't earn.
Don't forget to check your privilege, people. ;)
-
@JazzyJosh said:
Which is as dumb as saying you got a trig problem wrong because you used a different method or an integration problem wrong because you used u-substitution when it wasn't needed.
But if you're testing a certain technique, that solution should be marked as wrong.
Only if you've explicitly said to use that technique. If you just say "solve this problem" then any valid method of solution must be accepted.
-
-
shitlord!
-
Horrible, horrible, joke time:
How do you keep the neighborhood kids off your lawn?
[spoiler]Molest one of them.[/spoiler]
Is there supposed to be something humorous here?
Edgy + Inappropriate can make good humor, but are not sufficient for it.
-
The man in the center of the screen cap is (with the beard) is Dr. David Pook, one of the people who helped write the Common Core standards. As he states in the video, his motivation for helping write the Common Core standards was (emphasis mine): <...>
On one hand, I fail to see what them privileges have to do with different ways to teach. (Unless he's trying to claim the old way to teach was purposely bad so that kids that don't have outside tutoring would be more likely to fail?)
On the other hand, his comment generated quite an embarrassing(/ed?) response.
-
There are 8 boys and 5 girls playing on your lawn.How do you chase 10 of them away?
Wouldn't the correct answer be "tell your three kids to come inside and tell the others to go home"?
-
Wouldn't the correct answer be "tell your three kids to come inside and tell the others to
go homeget off your lawn"?BTFY
-
resistor-color-code
Resistors are always my first "colour to number" mapping but don't automatically associate them with each other. My son, on the other hand, associates numbers with animals, after a series of cards a supermarket here had.
-
BTFY
I'm not that old just yet.
Discourse CSS bug: I can't select the "boomzilla" text for quoting.
-
1 + 2 + 3 + 4 + 5 + 6 + 7 + 8 + ... = -1/12 Proof: Let S = 1 + 2 + 3 + 4 + 5 + 6 + 7 + 8 + ... Let S1 = 1 - 2 + 3 - 4 + 5 - 6 + 7 - 8 + ... Let S2 = 1 - 1 + 1 - 1 + 1 - 1 + 1 - 1 + ... Then S - S1 = (1 + 2 + 3 + 4 + 5 + 6 + 7 + 8 + ...) - (1 - 2 + 3 - 4 + 5 - 6 + 7 - 8 + ...) = 4 + 8 + 12 + 16 + ... = 4( 1 + 2 + 3 + 4 + ...) = 4S Therefore 3S = -S1 S = -S1 / 3 S1 + S1 = (1 - 2 + 3 - 4 + 5 - 6 + 7 - 8 + ...) + (1 - 2 + 3 - 4 + 5 - 6 + 7 - 8 + ...) = 1 - 1 + 1 - 1 + 1 - 1 + 1 - 1 + ... = S2 Therefore S2 = 2S1 Therefore S = -S2 / 6 Grouping terms of S2 from the second onward yields S2 = 1 - (1 - 1 + 1 - 1 + 1 - 1 + ...) But the bracketed term is identical to S2 itself. Therefore S2 = 1 - S2 2S2 = 1 S2 = 1/2 Therefore S = -1/12 QED.
-
Hooray for naive multiplication of infinities and divergent series
-
If it's good enough for physicists it's good enough for me.
-
Physicists are my kind of bunch.
Q: What do you get when you divide by 0?
Mathematicians: You can't! Undefined! Danger Will Robinson! Does not compute!
Physicist: 0. So just ignore the damned thing.See? Practical. Get it outta my equation and I'm happy. No need to go into a fucking lecture about it.
-
I mean. I see what they're doing. I did it when I was a kid for certain operands (the ones that are 'sufficiently close to' 10/5)
Problem: I fucking sucked at actually performing math. I still do. I get the theory, I just can't actually crunch numbers beyond everyday arithmetic in my head.
First grade was all numberline stuff. Theory of addition and subtraction, basically. Second grade was all theory of multiplication and division. By third grade they decided we needed to actually be able to do it quickly to move on, so the main focus was on repetition, and repeatedly chucking big 1x12 sheets of problems at us until we could complete them accurately in 30 minutes each.
1x1 = ? 1x2 = ? ..... 1x12 = ?
2x1 = ?
etc. through 12x12 = ?One each for addition, subtraction, multiplication. Throughout the course of the year, I eventually got through addition and subtraction in the allotted 30minutes.
It wasn't a terribly effective way for me to learn, but I'll be fucked if it didn't work just fine for literally everybody else.
Just give the dumb ones (like me) who can't memorize ~500 discrete facts calculators. Don't drag down the kids that are actually capable to doing things in that hobbled-ass manner.
-
I like this mathematician too
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Oazb7IWzbA
-
Problem: I fucking sucked at actually performing math. I still do. I get the theory, I just can't actually crunch numbers beyond everyday arithmetic in my head.
Almost anything that I potentially do in my head and is beyond blindingly obvious is almost always in the realm of "close enough is good enough". 12x12? Even though I know this one, I'm happy with 150-ish in most cases when I might need it in a situation where I don't have a calculator handy.
"Hey, they brought in all these boxes."
"Cool. How many?"
"Let's see... 12 rows, 12 columns, so 12x12... that's... carry the one..."
"I ain't carrying shit. The result is: get the forklift!"
-
I ultimately settled on memorizing multiplication of 2's and 10's (and 5 by way of multiply by 10 divide by 2), squares through 144, division by 2, and addition/subtraction from 10, and the first couple primes. Literally everything else gets a smartphone pulled out or Win-R-calcEnter.
And for this reason, you will NEVER get me to use a keyboard without a god damned numpad. It is NOT optional. Taking it away is NOT trendy. Fuck you.
(at the end of a normal workday I have 10 or 15 calc.exe instances running. I never close it and never reuse them)
-
Unless he's trying to claim the old way to teach was purposely bad so that kids that don't have outside tutoring would be more likely to fail?
It seems to me that it is more like making the new way so bad that even the privileged kids fail, too.
A couple of the "related" videos YouTube suggested at the end of that one were interesting. Some of it seems like tin-foil hat stuff, but one thing was interesting and seems like it should be fairly easy to verify (for someone who's sufficiently motivated; I'm not).
Allegedly, of all the people who were involved in developing the standards, the majority had education degrees. Only one mathematician was involved in developing the math standards, and one English expert in developing the English standards. Both of the subject matter experts rejected the standards in their fields, but were out-voted by the educators.
Edit: B*****m! I'm still leaving out of my posts.
-
On one hand, I fail to see what them privileges have to do with different ways to teach. (Unless he's trying to claim the old way to teach was purposely bad so that kids that don't have outside tutoring would be more likely to fail?)
That's a good point, and I haven't been able to find anything to indicate whether he was actually able to accomplish anything toward his stated motivation. But it does worry me that he states that is his motivation. Not that he wants the educational system to be better. He just wants to end white privilege.
-
Q: What do you get when you divide by 0?Mathematicians: You can't! Undefined! Danger Will Robinson! Does not compute!Physicist: 0. So just ignore the damned thing.
Mathematicians would ask you to define the way you're approaching the division by 0. They could then tell you if the result tends to plus or minus infinity as your denominator tends to 0, or if the result depends on the approach meaning that the answer is divergent and completely undefined
-
Don't know about the English expert but looks like Professor R James Milgram was on the validation committee and called no-joy, in 2011.
Interesting paper where he calls shenanigans on a fellow Stanford Professor of [spoiler]Education[/spoiler]'s paper on Mathematics education.
-
you will NEVER get me to use a keyboard without a god damned numpad. It is NOT optional. Taking it away is NOT trendy. Fuck you.
QFT
-
So, 0 ± fuckall. Got it.
I have no problem with mathematicians having fun with their stuff. As long as they allow me to say it's 0 because, honestly, when I use numbers it's because I need them, not because I'm having fun. 0 is close enough for me.
-
-
As long as they allow me to say it's 0
I guess this is country dependent. We have pretty strong protection for freedom of speech here. I have no idea what it's like in your country.
Now, if you want them to think that you're right, you have a difficult task ahead of you.
-
TIL 0 is close enough to infinity.
... fuck. Ummm... there are posts up there that need deleting... because
contextspam. Yes, All spam. Delete all of it, now, kthxbai.Now, if you want them to think that you're right, you have a difficult task ahead of you.
I'm right enough for my purposes. Especially nefarious ones.
-
Interesting paper where he calls shenanigans on a fellow Stanford Professor of Education's paper on Mathematics education.
[i]"Stanford Professor of Education, Jo Boaler, and her student, Megan Staples, published a very influential paper, [BS], on improving math outcomes for high school students in 2008."[/i]
A lesser writer would have cited the paper in the traditional CMS way: "(Baler Staples 2008 608-645)[1]". Points to Milgram for referring to it as BS while still remaining carefully neutral on the subject.
-
Allegedly, of all the people who were involved in developing the standards, the majority had education degrees. Only one mathematician was involved in developing the math standards, and one English expert in developing the English standards. Both of the subject matter experts rejected the standards in their fields, but were out-voted by the educators.
To be fair, when you're talking at that level I think that's almost the way it should be. Now, the people making the standards should specifically have a lot of experience in teaching mathematics and not just teaching in general; but as most people have discovered with a couple teachers/professors, just because you're good at something doesn't mean you can teach it. If you randomly select an elementary school teacher and a college math professor and put them in front of me and said "which would you rather ask how we should teach elementary arithmetic," I'd take the elementary teacher in an instant.Now, of course there should be some mathematicians involved to make sure that what is being taught is correct or you wind up with things like Feynman's experience on the textbook committee, and it sounds like they could have done things better. (I have even remotely enough experience with either the common core curriculum or education research to form an opinion.) But you say "the subject matter experts...were out-voted by the educators" as if it were a bad thing, and I'm not convinced it is, at least in the general case. It depends on what the objections were of the field experts.
-
But you say "the subject matter experts...were out-voted by the educators" as if it were a bad thing, and I'm not convinced it is, at least in the general case. It depends on what the objections were of the field experts.
The people who claim to be subject matter experts on education look like TRWTF in pretty much any situation where they're involved. Let's be clear, these guys aren't educators in the sense of someone who is actually a teacher.
These are more like the MBAs in charge of a group of engineers. These guys went to Education school (which is where stupid people go to graduate school) and are either academics studying their bullshit to get tenure or administrators at a school.
If you were bringing in crusty old teachers who had seen it all in their classrooms, I might respect their opinion. These "educators" should fuck off and try to do something useful with their lives.
-
And for this reason, you will NEVER get me to use a keyboard without a god damned numpad. It is NOT optional. Taking it away is NOT trendy. Fuck you.
For desktop keyboards, sure. But on a laptop, real estate is at such a premium, I hate it when they waste all that space with redundant number buttons that are almost never useful to me. And then they leave off F keys.
(at the end of a normal workday I have 10 or 15 calc.exe instances running. I never close it and never reuse them)
...why?
Could you not copy+paste those values over to a text editor or do you not have Excel or something?
How do you keep track of which calc is holding which value?
This has the same smell as "I need to be able to print from my code editor so I can manually compare two long (printed-off) files line by line".
-
This has the same smell as "I need to be able to print from my code editor so I can manually compare two long (printed-off) files line by line".
Nobody does that, so your point is mott.
-
-
Both of the subject matter experts rejected the standards in their fields, but were out-voted by the educators.
Those who can do; those who can't teach.
-
Oh, it's not for archival purposes. It's an efficiency thing. Less effort to spin up a new calc than to find it in the taskbar or alt tab.
And closing it is pure inefficiency.
-
At least 3 people got it. More than I expected, honestly. Mission accomplished.
@dkf obviously wooshed, but given how obtuse that was I cannot, in good faith, blame him.
Also, I spend way too much time here -.-
-
I usually use
echo $((...))in any handy terminal. I have so far not run into 'oh shit that one's on csh', but it's bound to happen soon.Numpad obligatory on all keyboards. Laptops to be equipped with external keyboards.
-
I usually use
echo $((...))in any handy terminal. I have so far not run into 'oh shit that one's on csh', but it's bound to happen soon.I fire up a Python interpreter ;) either that, or whip out my TI-89...
-
Well, now that he has a cacodemon for an avatar, he's back to being alright in my book.
-
This is one of those situations where the more explanation you offer, the more bizarre your behavior is revealed to be and the more I wished I had not asked in the first place.
-
1 + 2 + 3 + 4 + 5 + 6 + 7 + 8 + ... = -1/12
Proof:
Let S = 1 + 2 + 3 + 4 + 5 + 6 + 7 + 8 + ...
Let S1 = 1 - 2 + 3 - 4 + 5 - 6 + 7 - 8 + ...
Let S2 = 1 - 1 + 1 - 1 + 1 - 1 + 1 - 1 + ...Then S - S1 =
(1 + 2 + 3 + 4 + 5 + 6 + 7 + 8 + ...)- (1 - 2 + 3 - 4 + 5 - 6 + 7 - 8 + ...)
= 4 + 8 + 12 + 16 + ...
= 4( 1 + 2 + 3 + 4 + ...)
= 4S
Ack! Wall of math! Do not want!
Instead, try your hand at "simplifying fractions":
- (1 - 2 + 3 - 4 + 5 - 6 + 7 - 8 + ...)
-
your point is mott
What does @mott555 have to do with this?
Edit: Or is he the one who wanted to do that? I vaguely remember some discussion about that, but I don't remember who was involved.
-
Those who can, do; those who can't, teach.
FPFYAnd those who can't teach become administrators. Which is probably what most of these "educators" are, or at least people who sit in ivory towers and study education, but have never actually, themselves, taught in an elementary or high school classroom.
