this post was submitted on 18 Oct 2024
393 points (96.0% liked)

Curated Tumblr

3850 readers
725 users here now

For preserving the least toxic and most culturally relevant Tumblr heritage posts.

Image descriptions and plain text captions of written content are expected of all screenshots. Here are some image text extractors (I looked these up quick and will gladly take FOSS recommendations):

-web

-iOS

-android

Please begin copied raw text posts (lacking a screenshot that makes it apparent it is from Tumblr) with:

# This has been reposted here to Lemmy as part of the "Curated Tumblr Project."

I made the icon using multiple creative commons svg resources, the banner is this.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
(page 2) 33 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 54 points 13 hours ago (3 children)

Common core made an effort to teach kids to think about numbers this way and people flipped the fuck out because that wasn't how they were taught. Still mad about that.

[–] [email protected] 27 points 12 hours ago* (last edited 12 hours ago) (5 children)

The problem with common core math was not that they taught these techniques. It's that they taught exclusively these techniques. These techniques are born from the meta manipulation of the numbers which comes when you have an understanding of the logic of arithmetic and see the patterns and how they can be manipulated. You need to understand why you can you "borrow" 1 from the 7 or the 9 to the other number and get the same answer, for example. It makes arithmetic easier for those who do it, yes, but only because we understand why you are doing it that way.

When you just teach the meta manipulation, the technique, without the reason, you are teaching a process that has no foundation. The smarter kids may learn to understand the foundational logic from that, but many will only memorize the rules they are taught without that understanding of why and then struggle to build more knowledge without that foundation later.

Math is a subject where each successive lesson is built on the previous lessons. Without being solid on your understanding, it is a house of cards waiting to fall.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] [email protected] 8 points 12 hours ago* (last edited 12 hours ago) (1 children)

There's ~~people~~aliens who would add 9+7 instead of 10+6 or 8+8 in their heads?

[–] [email protected] 12 points 11 hours ago (2 children)

I do, because 9 plus anything is just a 1 in front of the other digit minus 1.

Weirdly enough, I just thought about using the methods here for the first time in my life earlier today. Weird.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 11 hours ago (2 children)

9 plus anything is just a 1 in front of the other digit minus 1

This is also how it works in my head, but isn't it the same as the other guy was saying, 10+6?

[–] [email protected] 6 points 9 hours ago

The difference would just be how you think of the process. I sometimes shuffle around the numbers to make math easier, but the shortcut for adding 9s just feels different. Instead of 9+7 = 10 + 6, it's more like 9+7 = 17-1. It feels less like solving it with math and more like using a cool trick, since you didn't really use addition to solve the addition problem.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 10 hours ago (1 children)

Sort of, same numbers different logic. Its like mixing up the order of operations. You could learn both tricks but it seems redundant if they do the same thing. Like having two of the same hammer.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 hours ago

And it scales with multiplication too. 9*7 is (7-1) and whatever adds to 9, so 63. This breaks down for larger numbers, but works really well up to 9*10. I don't know what "common core" teaches for that, but you can't change the 9 to a 10 for multiplication (well, you could, but you'd need to subtract 7 from the answer).

Treating 9s special makes math a lot easier. Doing the "adjust numbers until they're multiples of 10" works for more, but it's also more mental effort. 9s show up a lot, so learning tricks to deal with them specifically is nice. I just memorized the rest instead of doing "common core" math to adjust things all the time.

That said, I do the rounding thing for large numbers. If I'm working with lots of digits, I'll round to some clean multiple of 10 that divides by 3 (or whatever operation I need to do) nicely. For example, my kid and I were doing some mental math in the car converting fractional miles to feet (in this case 2/3 miles to feet). I used yards in a mile (1760) because it's close to a nice multiple of three (1800), and did the math quickly in my head (1800 - 40 yards -> 6002 yards - 40 yards to ft * 2/3 -> 1200 yards - 120 ft2/3 -> 3600 ft - 80 ft -> 3520 ft). I calculated both parts of the rounding differently to make them divisible cleanly by 3. I don't know what common core math teaches, but I certainly didn't learn this in school, I just came up with it by combining a few tricks I learned largely on my own (i.e. if the digits add to 3, it's divisible by 3) through years of trying to get faster at math drills. If I wasn't driving, I would have done long division in my head, but I needed to be able to pause at stop signs to check for traffic and whatnot, and just remembering two numbers w/ units is much easier than remembering the current state of long division.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 11 points 12 hours ago

Whatever number is closest to 10 steals enough to make itself 10. Same goes for hundreds, thousands, whatever. Get your round numbers first, add in the others later. All numbers must become 10. In a pinch, a number may become a 5, but if so, it's really just become a half-10, and it should feel bad about itself that isn't a full 10 yet.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 10 hours ago (1 children)

8+8 and 8X2 are literally the exact same thing, why did they feel the need to make that an extra step?

[–] [email protected] 9 points 10 hours ago

Probably because they were forced to memorize times tables, but not arithmetic so they wanted to show where they are leveraging that memorization from

[–] [email protected] 10 points 13 hours ago (1 children)

Let's make that 9 a 10 because it's good enough, it's smart enough, and goshdarnit people like it. Also, I don't wanna add with a 9. So 10 + 7 would be 17, but we added 1 to the 9 to make it 10 so now we take 1 away, 17 - 1 = 16.

ezpz

[–] [email protected] 7 points 12 hours ago (2 children)

9 plus a number? No. 10 plus a number, minus 1. Yis.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 6 points 11 hours ago* (last edited 11 hours ago) (1 children)

9 is 3+3+3, 7+3 is 10, 3+3 is 6, 6+10 is 16. I'm also a fucking heathen.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

What the fuck

Might as well do:

9 is 1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1, 7 is 1+1+1+1+1+1+1 therefore 9+7 is 1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1 which is 16.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 3 points 11 hours ago

I explained to a teacher one time this as my method, the get to ten version, and she looked confused as hell like why would anyone do that. She was cool with it though, gave me a whatever works for you kind of response.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 12 hours ago* (last edited 12 hours ago) (3 children)

Okay this is nice and all but how do people do 3974* 438 mentally, without paper? And bigger and some outright freaks seem to do it in an instant

[–] [email protected] 4 points 10 hours ago* (last edited 10 hours ago) (1 children)

Not any great easy way I can think of to do that one but I would attempt to do 400 by 3974 and then add chunks of 438 x 10 or x5 until I got really close and then add individual blocks.

So like 400 by 3974, you can round to 4000 and remove 4 x 26 = 104 after doubling 4000 twice. So we have 4000 to 8000 to 16000 remove 104 is 15896, add zeros is 1,589,600. Forget all other numbers but this one.

We are missing 38 x 3974. We can do the same round and remove trick to add 10 x 3974 by changing it to 10 x 4000 - 10 x 26. We need four of those though, so we can double it and turn from 40000 - 260 to 80000 - 520 and then 160,000 - 1040 or 158,960. Need to remove 2 x 3974 though, so remove 8000 and add 52 so 151,012.

Hopefully ive been able to keep that first number fresh in my head this whole time, which involves repeating it for me, and I'd add 1,589,600 and 151,012. Add 150000 and then 1,012 so 1,739,600 and then 1,740,612.

That all said, I make way more mistakes than a calculator, and I was off by 400 or so on my first run through. Also its really easy to forget big numbers like that for me. I'd say if you gave me ten of these to do mentally I'd get maybe 2 correct.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 8 hours ago* (last edited 8 hours ago) (1 children)

That's great but this is juggling numbers in memory and I simply cannot do this reliably. I will have this one current operation and put the other ones into the mental basket so to say and it evaporates and blurs as I calculate the other thing right so I wonder how these folks can do this and really fast. Not that I ever seriously tried other than some rare bored moments so maybe it is simply a matter of training?

Its very impressive though when you give these ppl two big numbers and they say result nearly in an instant

[–] [email protected] 2 points 7 hours ago

Over time those bigger numbers become more common too. Someone who can mentally do the type of problem I just did and get it right quickly likely have a ton of practice and will know quicker tricks, and be able to simplify it in a way.

Another part is they would be able to recognize a wrong answer more accurately as well. I didnt realize my answer was off by a lot until I put it in a calculator, but someone with more practice might know intuitively they were wrong.

I just don't consistently do this type of math, I used to be good at it in school but its become mostly irrelevant for me outside impressing someone a slight bit. It is helpful to have the ability to do things manually but it just rarely comes up.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 11 hours ago* (last edited 11 hours ago)

Depends how much neuron density you have in the part of the brain that handles this. It's mostly about memory, being able to accurately and quickly remember all the little steps you have already done and what the results of those steps were. Then just keep going one digit pair at a time keeping in mind all the results so you can deal with the carry overs.

But the whole reason we can focus on teaching everyone shortcuts for smaller math now is because we do literally always have a calculator on us now. So while it's still good to know how to do bigger math more efficiently, you'll never catch up to a calculator anymore. It's more important that they know the foundational concept well enough to move on to the next step now rather than practicing doing big math faster and faster. Can leave that to the individuals with talent in the area.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›