Common Core math question is Algebra!!!! *gasp*



  • @HardwareGeek said:

    <small><small><abbr title="Fixed the Punctuation For You">FPFY</abbr></small></small>

    lolquote
    lolpunctuation

    "Panda. Large black-and-white bear-like mammal, native to China. Eats, shoots and leaves."


  • BINNED

    HAI
    CAN HAS STDIO?
    VISIBLE "HAI WORLD!"
    KTHXBYE
    

    lolcode



  • ❤



  • @HardwareGeek said:

    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.

    We had a rather weak flamewar a while ago when I said I occasionally print out source code for analysis, and some thought that printing source code under any circumstances is a supreme abomination.

    @Bort said:

    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".

    @Onyx said:

    Nobody does that, so your point is mott.


  • BINNED

    Well, now you killed the joke :(



  • @Onyx said:

    Well, now you killed the joke :(

    Do we have a badge for that? :trollface:



  • @tar said:

    Those who can do; those who can't teach.
    Those who are selfish, do; those who care about having an educated and competent population, teach.

    /See, I can use hyperbole to make a completely and utterly false statement too.



  • @mott555 said:

    We had a rather weak flamewar a while ago when I said I [b]occasionally[/b] print out source code for analysis, and some thought that printing source code under any circumstances is a [b]supreme abomination[/b].

    I feel the emphasized parts are worded in a slightly misleading way. I remember it more like this:

    @mott555 said:

    We had a rather weak flamewar a while ago when I said I [b]print out all my source code, pinning it to the walls like a serial killer hanging up newspaper stories about his murders and never write code on the computer directly because I don't want the computer-illuminati to use the computer to re-program my brain, which is their plan to bring down all mankind[/b], and some [b]tried to have me thrown in a mental institution but then discovered I'm already in one.[/b].

    I have no other-guy-who-posts-on-this-forum-and-has-a-cool-cacodemon-avatar!



  • I keep most of my source on the computer now. It's safe from the Computer Illuminati who have a backdoor firmware hack on my cell phone that allows them to take pictures of my cubicle walls when I step away from the desk. At least on my PC I can WinKey + L before I leave for the restroom, so my exposed phone on the desk can't see my codez.




  • BINNED

    They still might be recording and OCRing your screen! Have you never watched Antitrust, you fool???



  • No, because when I'm at my desk my tinfoil ballcap jams their transmissions. Plus I look out the window, they're only watching me when the chemtrails are overhead so when that happens I "get sick" and go home just to be safe.



  • Tinfoil hats don't block electromagnetic radiation, they actually amplify certain frequencies. Including some used by the US government.



  • @CarrieVS said:

    Tinfoil hats don't block electromagnetic radiation, they actually amplify certain frequencies.

    @mott555 should line his entire office, including the windows, with tinfoil to make a Faraday cage. Real tin foil, not aluminiiiiiiiiium foil, because you can't (easily) solder the aluminum to ensure good electrical contact between the pieces.



  • @Weng said:

    epeatedly 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 = ?

    The hell? Why 12 specifically? I had to learn the tables up to 9. And it makes sense, because multiplying numbers with many digits requires repeatedly multiplying single digits. 25 x 25 = 5 * 5 + 2 * 5 * 10 + 2 * 5 * 10 + 2 * 2 * 100 = 25 + 100 + 100 + 400 = 625

    Or, more nicely formatted:
    [code]
    25
    x25

    125
    50-

    625
    [/code]
    What possible use could knowing the tables for 11 and 12 serve? It just shows that the teachers are dumb and don't understand the purpose of knowing the tables in the first place.



  • @Kian said:

    What possible use could knowing the tables for 11 and 12 serve?

    As far as I can tell, this is something that's been in British-descended education systems since the days of shillings and pence.

    In fact the whole notion of times tables is redundant since it's completely practical to do multi-digit multiplications by hand in binary.

    A Night Of Numbers - Go Forth And Multiply – 04:21
    — Dario Volarić



  • I can't be the only one disturbed by the phrase, "it is a way of breaking multiplication down into a series of additions" am I? I mean, that is the definition of multiplication(not exactly but we aren't having a pedant contest on who was the most attentive in abstract algebra right now).

    I get the idea that adding powers of 10 is easier but to suggest multiplication is some form of wizardry bugs me.



  • @MathNerdCNU said:

    to suggest multiplication is some form of wizardry bugs me

    As the world we inhabit continues to fill up with labor-saving devices, specialized forms of labor such as doing multiplication mentally or on paper do move further and further from the orbit of the everyday and there is basically nothing else to file them under but wizardry.

    Programming has already been there for twenty years; computers started morphing into appliances after the release of the original Mac. It's only a matter of time before what's considered basic numeracy now will eventually succumb to the same trend.


  • Discourse touched me in a no-no place

    @MathNerdCNU said:

    I get the idea that adding powers of 10 is easier but to suggest multiplication is some form of wizardry bugs me.

    All abstract thought is inclined to the wizardly, not just mathematics. It's just that we are some of the wizards. We know what's going on behind it all. (Well, a lot of it anyway.) In this case, it's just plain old long multiplication — an algorithm you learned in school — in base 2. It's just that base 2 has some nice properties, such it being very easy to multiply by each of its digits.

    The video is probably part of a series that is trying to introduce more advanced mathematical concepts to people. The target audience won't be up to formally handling number bases yet.





  • @abarker said:

    given a lot of privilege that I didn't earn

    Tautology is a tautology.



  • The first rule of the tautology society is the first rule of the tautology society.



  • @EvanED said:

    /See, I can use hyperbole to make a completely and utterly false statement too.

    You should do well here.



  • @CarrieVS said:

    Tinfoil hats don't block electromagnetic radiation,

    You need aluminium foil hats for that.



  • @tar said:

    Those who can do; those who can't teach

    @EvanED said:

    those who care about having an educated and competent population, teach

    So, you have a caring incompetent part of the population, hoping that their generous sacrifice will somehow produce a competent population?

    I'm sorry, there are factors about work that you cannot teach unless you have experienced them, and properly demonstrated them.


  • Discourse touched me in a no-no place

    @xaade said:

    I'm sorry, there are factors about work that you cannot teach unless you have experienced them, and properly demonstrated them.

    Yeah, but if you only teach with those people, you'll be stuck leaving most people completely untaught. Perfection isn't attainable as a goal, so we just have to be good as we can at advancing towards it anyway…



  • You only need 1-2 years industry experience to understand these things.

    Maybe make it a part of the teacher curriculum.

    Take it from all the stuff the teacher to be should have already learned in high school. Then the teaching degree would be more like a trade school?

    Which high school teaching should be.

    If you want to be a professor, that's where you need scholarly training, because you WILL be writing papers, textbooks, etc.


  • Discourse touched me in a no-no place

    @xaade said:

    If you want to be a professor, that's where you need scholarly training, because you WILL be writing papers, textbooks, etc.

    That's called a PhD round these parts (or MPhil if you wash out earlier than expected)…



  • Um, yes....

    Ok, let me rephrase.

    A high school teacher, should have 1-2 years industry related experience.
    That's not necessary for an elementary teacher, and probably not a middle school teacher either.

    But I've reimagined high school, and in my mind it isn't just a rehash of middle school with maybe harder math (if the student chooses it).


  • Discourse touched me in a no-no place

    @xaade said:

    But I've reimagined high school, and in my mind it isn't just a rehash of middle school with maybe harder math (if the student chooses it).

    The problem with such things is that while they might be a good idea, you can't get there from here. You're never starting from a blank slate, you're starting from having a system in place with students going through the system right now, and you can't just upend everything to improve things, no matter how much that improvement is needed.

    Doing stuff at the “business end” of education is going to be just as hard as doing stuff in production in many other areas of endeavour, and I'm not sure I'd trust you much more (as a someone who isn't a practical educator) than I'd trust either myself (damnit Jim, I'm a software engineer not a high-school teacher!) or a school administrator.



  • Let's not forget the Peasant Method of multiplication. (I must admit I didn't believe this when I saw it and had to check with Excel. It works).



  • It seem that no one here understands basic arithmetic, so I'll explain;

     8 + 5   =   8 + (2+3)   =   (8+2) + 3   =   10 + 3   =   13
    

    Now, you might be saying "Why go through all the trouble? I know that 8 + 5 is 13"

    In which case I commend you on your masterful ability to do single-digit math.

    So, now try "187 + 25"

    Some of you are saying, "Well, 7 + 5 is 12, carry the one....um.. where's some paper...??."

    And those who know how to do math in their heads are saying.

     "That 187 + 13 + 12 which is 200 + 12 which is 212"
    

    That's what Common Core is trying to teach.

    I find it funny that most Americans hate math, and insist that they are no good at it, yet get incensed at it being taught any way other than the way the clearly failed for them.



  • @JamesCurran said:

    And those who know how to do math in their heads are saying.

    "That 187 + 13 + 12 which is 200 + 12 which is 212"

    That's what Common Core is trying to teach.

    I find it funny that most Americans hate math, and insist that they are no good at it, yet get incensed at it being taught any way other than the way the clearly failed for them.


    And I just did that addition problem in my head -- using the longhand method *laughs* Although mental-math does have a place in the curriculum...



  • It shouldn't be taught that way from the beginning, though.

    Long addition is a default that is easy and always works.
    The creative approach can get taught later.


  • ♿ (Parody)

    @JamesCurran said:

    That's what Common Core is trying to teach.

    Yes, we all know that. We just think it's stupid.



  • @JamesCurran said:

    So, now try "187 + 25"

    Some of you are saying, "Well, 7 + 5 is 12, carry the one....um.. where's some paper...??."

    And those who know how to do math in their heads are saying.

    "That 187 + 13 + 12 which is 200 + 12 which is 212"

    That's what Common Core is trying to teach.

    Actually, in my head I'm going:

    7 + +5 = 12, carry the 1; 1 + 8 + 2 = 11, carry the 1; 1 + 1 = 2. So 187 + 25 = 212.

    Your "shortcut" of 187 + 13 + 12 = 200 + 12 = 212 is not how my brain works. That's the entire argument. Teach people the long way, the way you do it on paper, and let them figure out their own shortcuts. This shortcut shit doesn't work for everyone. I would've just ignored these teachers because it doesn't make any sense to me. And yes, I have been known to ignore teachers that I can't understand (or that are just idiots).


  • Discourse touched me in a no-no place

    @Boner said:

    Peasant Method

    From that page:

    18 is 1x24 + 0x23 + 0x22 + 1x21 + 0x20
    Common Core Arithmetic detected!


  • I'm never for upending systems.
    It's a process, that would probably take 50 years to get right.

    But just because we can't do it now, doesn't mean we should.

    Slow processes are better because you get feedback through the process and have opportunities to correct mistakes. I wish more people would think like that, rather than the waterfall approach with no back out opportunities.

    Honestly, there's no point in making things worse, just to have made a change at all.



  • 187 + 25

    That's um

    187 + 5 + 20, carry the 1, 182 + 10 + 20 = 212.

    Of course the other way is slightly easier, but the problem inherently needs knowledge of the final answer, something these kids don't have the skill yet to do.

    That's what you're missing out on.

    Everyone who thinks this is a great idea, are thinking from a vantage point of having already learned math, and already developed the easy mental way after overcoming the pen and paper way. The mechanics of math must be taught first, with optional shortcuts at the same time if you so wish.

    You have to realize, in order to know that 187 + 13 = 200, and that 25 - 13 = 12, you're using the addition/subtraction tables you've already built in, that these kids don't have. That's the point of the tables, the ultimate shortcut, just plain memorizing facts.

    In fact, all they've done is shortened the add/sub tables to powers of 10 only. Then expect them to learn the rest as they go.

    So your answer would look more like.

    187 + 25 = 188 + 24 = 189 + 23 = 190 + 22 = 200 + 12 = 212.

    My way would be.

    187 + 25 (well, that 20 will fit easy) = 207 + 5 (7 + 5 instant recognition, no carry, no effort answer) = 212

    In fact, savants use these cheats to evaluate things really quickly. Like, how to determine if a number is prime, well you don't have to test every divisor, just the divisors up to the square root.

    You don't start teaching derivatives by coming into class and saying, "The derivative of x2 is 2xdx, and don't ask why."

    But most importantly is to observe the children, and change up your teaching strategy per child to one that works for them.

    All this did was move all the children from one bucket to another bucket, and now the other set of kids are failing. Good job.


  • Discourse touched me in a no-no place

    @xaade said:

    It's a process, that would probably take 50 years to get right.

    I'm not convinced we could ever sustain a plan (well, with more than a very few people involved) to achieve something over a span of 50 years. At the very least, it is necessary to have plenty of interim benefits along the way, and there probably also needs to be ways to stop politicians management people in general from tinkering with stuff along the way.



  • @dkf said:

    necessary to have plenty of interim benefits along the way

    That's the point of a process.

    @dkf said:

    from tinkering with stuff along the way.

    That's just risk, which can also be a benefit.

    You've just exposed the common problem with politicians. Changing stuff to look like they did something.
    There's a lot I would change about politicians.


  • Discourse touched me in a no-no place

    @xaade said:

    You've just exposed the common problem with politicians. Changing stuff to look like they did something.There's a lot I would change about politicians.

    That's why they're allowed to pick the colour of the bikeshed, and the direction of the pile of the carpet in the executive washroom.



  • It's very disturbing to me that you let the same group of people write laws and vote on them. Laws that affect everyone. Laws they encourage people not to read. Or even can hide from people reading them.

    Like, I hope no one has some radical change of conviction while they're in office during their 4 year sprint. Or lied about their platform.

    It's amazing that we don't vote to kick out politicians more often. Us Americans actually have that avenue.


  • Discourse touched me in a no-no place

    @xaade said:

    Like, I hope no one has some radical change of conviction while they're in office during their 4 year sprint. Or lied about their platform.

    You know they're lying about their platform, at least in part. You don't know how much they're lying about it, or which bits they're going to keep anyway. Experience suggests that they keep the parts you'd rather they didn't, and ignore or actively go back on the bits you like.



  • That's why.

    1. Term Limits.
    2. And we need a better system for laws anyway.

    I don't know what would be most effective, but I'm thinking about having legislators write laws, and people vote on them.
    Especially income raises should be popular vote.

    Honestly, it shouldn't even be a career opportunity.

    It should be a part-time job.


  • kills Dumbledore

    @dkf said:

    Experience confirmation bias suggests that they keep the parts you'd rather they didn't, and ignore or actively go back on the bits you like

    ­


  • BINNED

    @xaade said:

    Honestly, it shouldn't even be a career opportunity.

    It should be a part-time job.

    This. In my perfect, never-gonna-happen, rivers-of-chocolate world, it would be like jury duty. You get called upon, do a year (or however long), get paid for your effort and get back to your job when done. You could potentially have a system where someone could get an extension if they are really good and want it, but no longer than one extra term.

    Yeah, I know, you can't throw every idiot off the street into a "ruling" position. And it would require extra education us plebs don't really get (unless we go out of our way to get it). As I said, never gonna happen, but I can invent shit and act smart about it, yes? Free country and all that? Good. Now flame away while I go off not caring about you explaining to me how stupid my idea was.



  • @xaade said:

    So, you have a caring incompetent part of the population, hoping that their generous sacrifice will somehow produce a competent population?
    You must have needed more attention from your teachers.

    It's almost like when I said "I can use hyperbole to make a completely and utterly false statement too" I was indicating that I don't believe either of the two things you quoted are true.

    @xaade said:

    I'm sorry, there are factors about work that you cannot teach unless you have experienced them, and properly demonstrated them.
    If we were talking about some college class or vocational high school class, I'd largely agree. But we're talking about early-elementary education. The math skills are such that I suspect most people use one somewhat of a daily basis. (Actually I don't quite believe that, but they're skills that people could productively use on a daily basis if they cared. Point being is you don't need some industry position to get there.)

    Edit: I see you said that later. I'll leave my response though, I guess.



  • @Onyx said:

    This. In my perfect, never-gonna-happen, rivers-of-chocolate world, it would be like jury duty. You get called upon, do a year (or however long), get paid for your effort and get back to your job when done. You could potentially have a system where someone could get an extension if they are really good and want it, but no longer than one extra term.

    + limn → 2+ Σ1/(n)

    I've actually wondered about a political system like this as well. It could address a lot of issues with current systems, but I wouldn't be surprised if it came with its own new set of problems...
    Filed under: the fundamental problem with most political systems is that they're made of people.



  • @JamesCurran said:

    So, now try "187 + 25"
    And those who know how to do math in their heads are saying.
    "That 187 + 13 + 12 which is 200 + 12 which is 212"

    Well, I said "180 + 20 is 200, 7+5 is 12, so it's 212."
    On a different problem I'd use a different shortcut, or none. (For instance if it was 196 + 25 I'd probably do it the Common Core way of taking four off the 25 to make 200.) I think we've seen at least three different methods for this problem in the thread. And that's my point: there are typically several different ways to approach a problem like this and teaching any one shortcut as the way to do it is wrong.

    If we want to encourage the use of shortcuts, which is not a bad thing, we should be asking questions like "how many different ways can you work out this answer?" The end skill we should be trying to develop is selecting the most useful shortcut - and that's something that will vary from student to student and problem to problem. But that skill will come in very useful later on when the question is "which technique is going to be the best way to start on this integration problem?"


Log in to reply