I love math, unless it starts getting retarded like in calc2.
but I don't see the problem with people looking at problems their own way as long as they can show their work... 

http://www.wattpad.com/myworks/37837996theforestthebeginningpreview1


Common core is a way of decomposing math into ways which avoid memorization. Common core is an amalgamation of how more intelligent people teach themselves to make things easy for them like shortcuts and the like. Unfortunately teaching someone how smart people do it does not make them smarter. Unfortunately parents have more substantial developmental effects on their children than most teachers ever will. Laissez faire is great for business, not for your children.
Reference: This is how I used to do long division in my head in 4th grade and pissed off my teacher. 



times when you need to do "quick" computations mentally and have no calculator at hand or nearby: 0


お帰りなさいませご主人様。それでは、ご一緒に美味しくな～れ


bluelaguna1 wrote: Common core is a way of decomposing math into ways which avoid memorization. Common core is an amalgamation of how more intelligent people teach themselves to make things easy for them like shortcuts and the like. Unfortunately teaching someone how smart people do it does not make them smarter. Unfortunately parents have more substantial developmental effects on their children than most teachers ever will. Laissez faire is great for business, not for your children. Reference: This is how I used to do long division in my head in 4th grade and pissed off my teacher. Dude are you joking? ? They want you to do 10000 / 40 without canceling out the zeros 

http://www.wattpad.com/myworks/37837996theforestthebeginningpreview1


I hate math. It's evil.


Kamui of the Yato Clan


Damn, glad I'm not in elementary school right now


I almost forgot about this....


a> "Our education system needs to change. Our kids are falling behind in math compared to other countries"
b> "agreed" a> "which is why i'm making math more complicated than it used to be.." b> "wait what?" a> "so that the kids can solve basic algebra when stranded in the Sahara desert with no calculators and smartphones" b> "but would it even help them in real life jobs?" a> "who cares? so long as it seems as though we're making progress. i need more votes" 

お帰りなさいませご主人様。それでは、ご一緒に美味しくな～れ


Dear Jack, I will first outline what you should have done and then show you where you went wrong: 427  316 427  300 = 127 127  10 = 117 117  6 = 111 You did this instead: 427  316 427  300 = 127 127  20 = 107 107  50 = 57 In other words, you carried out the step where you remove 10's twice and never performed the 1's step at all. You also got the 10's value to take away wrong both times. You get the value for your 100's, 10's, and 1's steps from the value to be subtracted in the original problem, or 316. In this case you were to take away 3 100's, 1 10's, and 6 1's. Incidentally, this is a very practical method that wouldn't get you terminated and (as I have just shown) generates the correct answer in an equivalent number of steps. You might wonder why one would ever use this method if the number of steps is the same. Well, that's because this method can sometimes end up having fewer steps and doesn't work your short term memory as hard. I'll show you what I mean with another problem. 427  336 427  300 = 127 127  30 = 97 97  6 = 91 See how it's still just 3 steps, and you don't have to keep anything in your short term memory? Now let's do it the way Frustrated Parent wants to. 427 336 When you do it this way you start at the right and work your way left, treating each column as a separate subtraction problem and combining the results at the end. 7  6 is 1, so the rightmost value for your answer is 1 just like above. But uhoh. Now we can't take 3 from 2, so we have to add in a borrowing step. So let's borrow 10 by reducing the 4 to a 3, which results in 3 12 7 3 3 6  ? ? 1 Now we can proceed. 12  3 is 9, so the next value is 9. Then we go to the next column and take 3  3 (not 4  3, we borrowed from the 4 earlier), which is zero. That means you end up with: 3 12 7 3 3 6  0 9 1 So you get 91 either way, but doing it the way Frustrated Parent wants you to involves four steps instead of three and requires you to remember when you have to borrow and how much you're borrowing. That is why you might want to use the other method sometimes, because it can end up being faster and less complicated. Jack, if you find the Frustrated Parent's method easier to understand that's fine. It doesn't make you dumb. Sometimes problems can be solved two or more ways, and lots of people find one way easier than another. Your teacher should understand both ways completely, and should show the Frustrated Parent's way to you if you're having trouble using the number line method. Both are going to give you the right answer in comparable time if you properly understand the processes for both methods, and you're not going to be fired for using the "wrong" subtraction method if your answer is right and you get it quickly enough. Frustrated Parent is just plain wrong on that point. Sincerely, Blue Oni 



Okay; what is this "Common Core" I've been hearing about? Is this something like the NCLB Act?
I Googled "common core" and there's even a news article titled about how it keeps getting bashed. I've reason to assume that this "Common Core" thing is a bad idea, that could dumb down academic standards, which are already dumbed down enough as it is. 



Rujikin wrote: Spoiler Alert! Click to show or hide Fuck that shit. I had trouble showing my "proof" with the old method but I got the right answers and typically got A's in math. I would fail todays math. lol. The parent's letter is very funny. But I don't disagree with the common core approach to teaching maths. Instead of teaching the kids to memorize algorithms and lookup tables, common core is trying to give the kids some feeling for the idea of numbers and methods. The teachers need to be better though, be more flexible in marking. 



Banned

BlueOni wrote: Dear Jack, I will first outline what you should have done and then show you where you went wrong: 427  316 427  300 = 127 127  10 = 117 117  6 = 111 You did this instead: 427  316 427  300 = 127 127  20 = 107 107  50 = 57 In other words, you carried out the step where you remove 10's twice and never performed the 1's step at all. You also got the 10's value to take away wrong both times. You get the value for your 100's, 10's, and 1's steps from the value to be subtracted in the original problem, or 316. In this case you were to take away 3 100's, 1 10's, and 6 1's. Incidentally, this is a very practical method that wouldn't get you terminated and (as I have just shown) generates the correct answer in an equivalent number of steps. You might wonder why one would ever use this method if the number of steps is the same. Well, that's because this method can sometimes end up having fewer steps and doesn't work your short term memory as hard. I'll show you what I mean with another problem. 427  336 427  300 = 127 127  30 = 97 97  6 = 91 See how it's still just 3 steps, and you don't have to keep anything in your short term memory? Now let's do it the way Frustrated Parent wants to. 427 336 When you do it this way you start at the right and work your way left, treating each column as a separate subtraction problem and combining the results at the end. 7  6 is 1, so the rightmost value for your answer is 1 just like above. But uhoh. Now we can't take 3 from 2, so we have to add in a borrowing step. So let's borrow 10 by reducing the 4 to a 3, which results in 3 12 7 3 3 6  ? ? 1 Now we can proceed. 12  3 is 9, so the next value is 9. Then we go to the next column and take 3  3 (not 4  3, we borrowed from the 4 earlier), which is zero. That means you end up with: 3 12 7 3 3 6  0 9 1 So you get 91 either way, but doing it the way Frustrated Parent wants you to involves four steps instead of three and requires you to remember when you have to borrow and how much you're borrowing. That is why you might want to use the other method sometimes, because it can end up being faster and less complicated. Jack, if you find the Frustrated Parent's method easier to understand that's fine. It doesn't make you dumb. Sometimes problems can be solved two or more ways, and lots of people find one way easier than another. Your teacher should understand both ways completely, and should show the Frustrated Parent's way to you if you're having trouble using the number line method. Both are going to give you the right answer in comparable time if you properly understand the processes for both methods, and you're not going to be fired for using the "wrong" subtraction method if your answer is right and you get it quickly enough. Frustrated Parent is just plain wrong on that point. Sincerely, Blue Oni I passed Witchcraft level 2 Calculus 2 and what you posted is confusing me. 
Linux Mint master race! Death to Windows 8+! Try out linux mint


I don't know why I would bother with that approach for ten base operations. The point is to create ten base operations and minimize the amount of actual math required to complete a problem. Your example could be a mid step in a problem like 10041/40
10000/40=250 40/40=1 1/40.025 The answer of 251.025 can be achieved in seconds with proper decomposition. Works better for more complicated problems obviously, but since ten base math is the whole point it would be superfluous to use a common core type (I call it type because their intention is to make everyone do all math this way) approach. Nor do I want to be seen as a proponent of this method of teaching. To read more into what I had previously stated, I hope you in no way took me as an ally of this nonsense approach. It was more along the lines of saying smart people teach themselves versus be taught by others. 



That's the point, though: the common core method works, but not everyone is as comfortable with its process and its process isn't always more efficient for arriving at the solution than alternative methods (though sometimes it is). As a result you should use whatever approach works best for you, and if you can work your way through it I recommend going through the process with fewer steps and memory objects. Sometimes that will be the common core approach, sometimes it won't. 



I understand common core and what it is trying to accomplish, even though I was taught math in the 90s. I also understand why it's controversial.
You are taught basic math at such a young age, it becomes deeply ingrained in you and understanding alternate methods can be tough. Nobody wants to feel stupid because they can't understand grade school arithmetic. Especially when the way you were taught seems so simple. A friend in high school actually showed me some parts of common core as "tricks" to help process larger numbers in my head. It works very well. In my everyday life I rarely need to do this, but on the rare occasions I do need to quickly add/subtract 3+ digit numbers, it comes in handy. 

A friend of the devil is a friend of mine


Banned

BlueOni wrote: That's the point, though: the common core method works, but not everyone is as comfortable with its process and its process isn't always more efficient for arriving at the solution than alternative methods (though sometimes it is). As a result you should use whatever approach works best for you, and if you can work your way through it I recommend going through the process with fewer steps and memory objects. Sometimes that will be the common core approach, sometimes it won't. The problem is they want you to "prove" it using the common core method. Even if you can get the right answer you have to use the method they want you to use. Also has anyone else noticed the funky setup of the posts? Newer posts are before older posts 
Linux Mint master race! Death to Windows 8+! Try out linux mint


I can't deal with math. Every time I try math. I fall asleep.
You want me to write a biography? I can do that but math? Fuck whoever invented that crap. 

One kiss breaches the distance between friendship and love.


EGAD! HOW WOULD ONE EVER ACCOMPLISH SUCH A RIDICULOUS TASK?
I never had trouble in math, and this common core crap looks like bullshit. Though I guess you could say I'm biased since it's a different approach than I'm used to, so I'm not going to knock it if a majority of people out there think it's easier. But it looks to me like it's doing nothing more than complicate a simple problem. 

https://youtube.com/watch?v=AdfhFm7347w


I understand the reasoning behind it but I don't think it's a solution to the problem, which is that kids are taught to memorize and not understand what they're doing. Common core teaches another process that can be memorized like the others, so all it does is makes math more confusing to understand. If you want kids to understand math, change how teachers teach the subject. This is hard to do and I've only had one teacher who could do this. It starts by explaining to the students what your goal is in a less confusing way.
They've tried fixing this before by requiring teachers to recite the standard they are working on and having it written somewhere in the classroom. The problem with it is nobody really understands what they mean when the teacher recites them, so they stop listening. Basically, teachers are just taking the students for a ride but the students have no clue where they are or where they're going. If the teacher can better explain what the goal is and why the students are doing this, they will have a better foundation to work off of and will for the first time understand why they are here. That also requires that the standards are in a specific order so they flow together. Some teachers understand this so they skip around the list, but others just start at the first written standard and go through them without any thought about how they're organized. Standards should work like this: you learn a standard, and that standard will be used in the next one and you get where I'm going. From my experience, the standards are just thrown in there and you rarely use what you just learned and apply it after you start working on another. Now of course this might not be possible at all times, and the basic math functions like addition and subtraction probably just need to be taught, but once you get into math beyond the utter basics, this helps a lot. So really for elementary school math, it simply needs to be taught in a way that is simple. The old way is fine for this because really, students just need to know how to add, subtract, multiply, and divide so that they can learn to apply it. The basic math functions are where the usefulness of math can be directly seen so keep it very simple. Don't worry about kids not fully understanding why long division works because they probably still wont understand even after you explain it in the limited time you have. Once you hit algebra, then students should be taught in a different way that goes away from direct usefulness to indirect problem solving that applies the basic math functions. You continue to add, divide, etc in the way you were originally taught, you understand ways to solve problems, and those logical problem solving ideas are used to introduce higher maths. TLDR: Choose what students need to understand and what they should just memorize in a better way. 

Derp Souls 3


I'd also like to add that we're falling behind because American culture works like this: hate math, learning, and school all together. This is the real problem that messes everything up. If you don't have the motivation to learn, and you keep telling yourself that you can't do math, you'll probably suck at math. I doubt other countries have advanced math teaching techniques that make their students better at math. They're probably just trying harder and getting better grades, which results in potentially better opportunities.
Think about this. Many kids in America grow up wanting to become a professional sports player. The overwhelming majority never will because they aren't good enough, or lack motivation in even this because they're idiots. Some of them try really hard and are successful, while many try really hard and aren't successful. Meanwhile in other countries, students want to go to a great school and better their career that way. The same stuff happens there, just one is for a sport and one isn't. Both these situations happen everywhere, but it can easily be seen in the US because there is baseball, hockey, basketball, soccer, football, and other ones to a lesser extent. It's cooler to be great at sports than it is to be smart in the US. And you have to remember that in many other countries that we're trying to catch up to in regards to education, they are usually in a worse economical situation than us. Most people in the majority of Asian countries don't live as good of a lifestyle as we Americans do. That alone is motivation to become better. When people get to the top, they usually lose the motivation to get better and almost always lose that spot to the ones who do. It's a never ending cycle unless you always have a goal to attain and someone to beat. 

Derp Souls 3


Rujikin wrote: The problem is they want you to "prove" it using the common core method. Even if you can get the right answer you have to use the method they want you to use. For the problem Jack was given it would go something like this: Spoiler Alert! Click to show or hide Find a valid set of values for x, y, and z for the following system of equations: x  300 = y y  10 = z z  6 = 111 From there it's just solving for z and then performing back substitution twice. x = 427, y = 127, and z = 117 is the result. I would never expect a primary school student learning how to subtract to break the method down into its algebraic components, though, so aren't they just asking students to "prove" that the result is what it is by tracing along a number line? That's what Jack the Imaginary Kid did even if he ultimately did it wrong. Also has anyone else noticed the funky setup of the posts? Newer posts are before older posts This happens sometimes, particularly if someone deletes a post. It's a quirk of the system that's existed for some time now. We call it "doing the Time Warp" over in the tournament threads. Eh, some people find it inconvenient when they have to do it multiple times in their heads. It's the simple things that can really trip people up sometimes. I never had trouble in math, and this common core crap looks like bullshit. Though I guess you could say I'm biased since it's a different approach than I'm used to, so I'm not going to knock it if a majority of people out there think it's easier. But it looks to me like it's doing nothing more than complicate a simple problem. It simplified 427  336 by one step, but it didn't improve 427  316 at all in terms of this measure. It's a mixed bag, really. Dibs on the cashews. 

