I don’t know that way! Why would they change math? Math is math!
 Nothing Ever Happens Shirt $21.68 |
 DMT Has Friends For Me Shirt $21.68 |
Nothing Ever Happens Shirt $21.68 |
I dont know that way! Why would they change math? Math is math!
I don’t know that way! Why would they change math? Math is math!
Nothing Ever Happens Shirt $21.68 |
DMT Has Friends For Me Shirt $21.68 |
Nothing Ever Happens Shirt $21.68 |
Fricking stupid. Is this a way to help dumb kids make themselves feel smarter? And by dumb, I don’t mean autistic, I mean just dumb.
This doesn't seem scalable at all. How would you do even basic algebra if this is how you had to do every subtraction step?
It doesnt. It only works for basic addition and subtraction. After that, it literally just goes back to standard math. Because the morons who thought up common core as a way to help stupid black kids never expected them to get past counting on their fingers and toes. It was all just a marketing scheme to pull taxpayer money.
Sell new books with a "new method". Sounds about right. Same way they need to convince schools to buy new history books that are just the same shit but now they include footnotes on who is gay, two spirit, and allegedly trans.
when the frick did they change math?
For a shorts time in the 60s, then returned to normal
oh that makes sense
I don't understand the new way
Is the goal here to count up from 12 to 32 to get 20 using smaller numbers? If so the person who did this is moronic. They should add 8 to get 20, then 10, then 2.
Are you supposed to graduate out of having to do it this way or something? I had highschool tests where you got ONE looseleaf paper for showing your work and you were supposed to manage it properly. This would have fricked that up so bad.
I always just assumed stuff like this was meant to give kids a more intuitive grasp of numbers when they're just starting out and isn't meant to be a replacement for traditional problem solving, which they then go on to learn.
Show your work, chud.
go frick yourself, i did it in my head.
What does 15 + 5 have to do with anything??
Thae implication of that pic of yours are untimately objetively right but you chose to argue in such bad faith I'm changing sides and proving you wrong with facts and that the new way is better out of pure spite.
First, you willingly ignore the steps of the old way to make it simpler. The old way is, implicitly
2-2 = 0 (units)
3-1 = 2 (dozens)
20 + 0 = 20
You also picked a example that doesn't have any withholding. A piss-easy calcul that shouldn't need any special begin with too to begin with. Let's try
32 - 13
The old way becomes
2 -3
doen't workd so
12 - 3 = 9 (units)
3 - 1 = 2
2 - 1 = 1 (dozens)
10 + 9 = 19
Meanwhile, the much simpler and better new way works the same, consistently and just as efficiently in both case
13 + 7 = 20 (You made up the useless 'going to the next 5' part because you knew you were wrong from the start)
20 + 10 = 30
30 + 2 = 32
7 + 10 +2 = 19
There. Better new way to do math.
Checkmate math boomer.
Sorry that Science knows better than you do.
>First, you willingly ignore the steps of the old way to make it simpler. The old way is, implicitly
>2-2 = 0 (units)
>3-1 = 2 (dozens)
>20 + 0 = 20
???
No, the old way is shown on that paper. You could write it out that way on a college test and it would count as showing your work.
>Refuses facts
Typical bomer. That's why you can't argue on 32 - 13. That one is too hard for your dusty, prehistoric maths
>can't argue
13+20=33
33>32
33-32 = 1
20-1=19
Boom. Suck and get fricked homosexual.
Anon...
We're discussing between two methods of teaching math to babies
If (You) need anything more than
32-19 = 13
Then you don't belong on the internet at all
Adding dozens and unit is the implied adition after the two sub-sustraction
It's quite easy to understand.
I'm not surpised that you're stuck at doing only one math
>need
>this isn't automatic in your brain
It's kinda sad when morons out themselves like this. Nice stealth math learning thread but you can learn faster on other sites instead of shitposting.
>Adding dozens and unit is the implied adition after the two sub-sustraction
It's quite easy to understand.
But the old way would be just 12-3 and then 2 -1 to get you 19. Unless you're doing some different old way I'm not seeing.
Now try writing it in English, zoomer.
>Calling for english competence while discussing maths
I accept your surrender
This is exactly why your generation had a small technological boom compared to the others that came before.
>discussing english competence while pluralizing "math"
lmao
that anon is likely a euro
I'm not reading your manifesto on why you can't breed. Make columns, do your singles, problem solved.
>I'm not reading
We know
>20+0=20
>10+9=19
Why do you add these steps? You don't need them. Once you have the answer you have the answer.
I'm not really trying to defend new math here, but it's obvious whoever made it intentionally presented the new way as complicated as possible.
Where did they get all those numbers from?
I've realized that I've been doing "new math" ever since I was a kid as a way to quickly do mental math. I think it's a better way to do math, but I figured out it AFTER learning the old school way as a base level understanding and how "slow and inefficient" it is. Skipping that step and just teaching kids the "better" way to do math just causes confusion with non-genius kids and parents.
New Math is different from Common Core. Yes the entire joke was about the 'changing math' experience for the American audience was about Common Core. But New Math was about introducing number theory, sets, and most notorously performing math in non-base 10.
So there'd be questions like 13 x 4 = ?? In a page instructing to calculate the numbers in base 8. That answer is 54 but if you're only used to base 10 you'd instinctual answer 52.
Frick math, old and new
This is hurting my brain just to even look at
Like this I can understand, add the two and compare the difference instead, but fpbp is just a confused clusterfrick.
Subtracting with columns is clumsy when the term that's being subtracted has smaller digits.
Take an equation like 431 - 86 = 345.
Using columns would have you subtract 6 from 1 to get 5, then 80 from 30 to get 50 , but then subtracting 10 from said 50 to get 40 since 6 from 1 is negative, and finally subtracting 100 from 400 to get 300 since 80 from 30 is negative.
Subtraction through addition reframes subtraction as "what numbers do you need to add to the the second term to get the first term?"
86 + 14 = 100
100 + 331 = 431
14 + 331 = 345
But all of this is a moot point because both of these methods work for doing subtraction and dumb kids are going to be equally confused by both of them.
We used to have a solution for dealing with the minority of students who were too dumb for this shit. They were put in special classes or special schools that catered to their special needs.
Now 99% of students have to slow down so we can "level the playing field" for the other 1%. Hell, the Common Core curriculum doesn't even have students learning the concept of a function until fricking 8th grade.
>the Common Core curriculum doesn't even have students learning the concept of a function until fricking 8th grade
To be fair, that's about when they started teaching functions when I was in school. But that was 50 fricking years ago; you're telling me they haven't improved teaching methods since then?
8th grade is when everybody learns about functions, you fricking idiot.
>We used to have a solution for dealing with the minority of students who were too dumb for this shit.
Trade? Military? Sex work? Beatings? Politics?
For anyone who can't understand wtf it's doing in the bottom example. Here's an explanation and a situation where it is easier than the "old" way:
Still not convinced it's a good way to teach kids. It's a trick that happens to work rather than really understanding the sums. Reminds me of the finger trick for the 9 times table.
It's an algorithmic method that effectively folds a bunch of linear algebra into a significantly process.
ex.
32-12 =
3X - X + 2Y - 2Y =
2X =
20 for X = 10, Y = 1
ex.
342 - 173 =
3X - X + 4Y - 7Y + 2Z - 3Z =
2X - 3Y - Z =
169 for X = 100, Y = 10, Z = 1
What is it in base 8? X becomes 64, Y becomes 8, Z stays 1
2X - 3Y - Z =
103 base 10 =
147 base 8
The problem is you can't explain all this linear algebra to a class of fricking seven year olds who haven't even learned multiplication yet.
*significantly shorter process
It's always a bit of a problem when you teach someone to run before they can walk.
It's like teaching differentiation without working through the proof. It's just magic that's "correct" but you don't know why it's correct (or even what the question is)
This is like when England removed multiplication from their school's curriculum
The fact they just have him "suddenly" understand how it works during the montage is idiotic.
>Smart character does a smart thing and that's bad
>Smart thing
Okay moron. Have fun doing extra steps for something simple
No it's not, he's a grown adult going through child level math of course he's going to figure it out
That's how I feel about the Koreans
i'm by no means a smart man, but i have been noticing that the new kids who get hired at my job have a hard time doing simple math.
Really wonder how these kids are going to survive in the world without basic math.
Something terrible has happened to math comprehension. My high school had to change the schedule for Tuesdays so kids 2 grades under me could get math tutoring.
I don't know why kids can't grasp math. Maybe it's because the schools can't afford to give them all text books anymore. So now kids have to go through shitty website like IXL to do their math homework.
Calculators and computers have diminished the need to do basic math operations. No practice equals a rust in skill or forgetting it if it wasnt solid to begin with.
What's the fricking difference? No career path involving math trusts hand written notes anyways, you use calculators and excel formulas and CAD software at a professional level for anything but personal notes.
>it's so simple, so very simple, that only a child can do it!
the hilarious thing is
neither old math nor new math were ever useful in any way to anyone. the government forces us all to pour our tax money into this so they can keep our kids in a building all day, so both parents can go to work and make less money and the government can tell your kids what to think
only the top best-at-math percent need to learn any higher math than multiplication and division/fractions. nobody else will ever use it.
This is why your dirt country couldn't gather the intelligence to build an atomic bond shamael.
>better to have and not need it then to need it and not have it
What they should cut is gym and instead bring back gun classes, hunting, and hand to hand.
I still don't know my fractions very well