That being said, the era of the attitude that some people are 'just bad at math' needs to come to an end.
You honestly believe that there are not people who are just bad at math?
Honestly?
I think that overall this method will reach more people. I feel like in our generation there are people who are good at math and those who aren't and there isn't much in between. I think this method helps set more people up for success because they learn to think through the problem, not just go through rote steps to solve it. It's taken a while for me to see the value in it, because much like you I'm good at math and never needed to be taught a certain way. But after seeing my kid work through it, it seems to make sense.
You honestly believe that there are not people who are just bad at math?
Honestly?
I think that overall this method will reach more people. I feel like in our generation there are people who are good at math and those who aren't and there isn't much in between. I think this method helps set more people up for success because they learn to think through the problem, not just go through rote steps to solve it. It's taken a while for me to see the value in it, because much like you I'm good at math and never needed to be taught a certain way. But after seeing my kid work through it, it seems to make sense.
That's fabulous. I'm glad to hear it.
But I simply can't accept this ridiculously rosy notion of "Hey! Nobody is bad at math! It's just how we teach it!"
Because, people.
There are folks out there who are bad at math.
I'm all for a way of teaching that will help, but refusing to acknowledge the fact that some people are good at things and some people aren't is inane.
I think that overall this method will reach more people. I feel like in our generation there are people who are good at math and those who aren't and there isn't much in between. I think this method helps set more people up for success because they learn to think through the problem, not just go through rote steps to solve it. It's taken a while for me to see the value in it, because much like you I'm good at math and never needed to be taught a certain way. But after seeing my kid work through it, it seems to make sense.
That's fabulous. I'm glad to hear it.
But I simply can't accept this ridiculously rosy notion of "Hey! Nobody is bad at math! It's just how we teach it!"
Because, people.
There are folks out there who are bad at math.
I'm all for a way of teaching that will help, but refusing to acknowledge the fact that some people are good at things and some people aren't is inane.
you're being hyperbolic. No one said that. and I literally said everyone has strengths and weaknesses. That does not equal a person who cannot learn which is what "not a math person" means.
And again even if that were true educators don't have the luxury to sit back and stop improving bc it's more difficult for some people.
And I would argue that the world isn't filled with dumb people and smart people.
If we can't agree on this, then we're not going to agree on anything.
the problem is that (statistically speaking) dumb is shorthand for poor, racial minority, immigrant, disabled, etc.
And smart is shorthand for the opposite.
If the vast majority of intellect really was genetic, these differences in life circumstances and privilage shouldn't matter. And there wouldn't be a reason to educate the dumb students past a rudimentary level.
I thought I hated math for half my life. That is until I met my math tutor who was brilliant at figuring out which method was the best (for me) to solve any problem. It wasn't always the fastest but it gave me an idea of the process. I got into math after that and eventually started enjoying the process.
It's good for kids to learn multiple ways to solve any problem. Just in this subtraction problem, if you replace simple whole numbers with negative fractions or decimals, the number line is a faster way to solve the problem than lining up numbers and subtracting them.
One may decide that they suck at math after a few years of education. But should they not be exposed to all the available methods before they make that decision and try to find a career that doesn't involve numbers?
I am not good at math, but I like it. I am not good at English and I hate it. I never got an A in English. Never. And this new math method makes no fucking sense to me even after reading different explanations. Good thing I don't have kids and will never have to deal with it.
I wish the whole "bad at math" concept wound just disappear. Said to a kid and the "right" time /age can really have a long lasting negative impact. It's easy to fall behind which can be the result of a myriad of factors including bad curriculum, bad teacher, illness, laziness etc.
I don't have a whole lot of time to quote research specific to math right now, but I do think these quotes from this linked article speak to my philosophy around the capacity students have to learn…
In my research, I have identified two sets of beliefs that people can have about students’ intelligence (and that students can have about their own intelligence). They may have a fixed mind-set, in which they believe that intelligence is a static trait: some students are smart and some are not, and that’s that. Or they may have a growth mind-set, in which they believe that intelligence can be de- veloped by various means—for example, through effort and instruc- tion. A growth mind-set doesn’t imply that everyone is the same or that anyone could be Einstein, but it does imply that everyone’s intellectual ability can grow—and that even Einstein wasn’t Einstein before he put in years of passionate, relentless effort.
Recent research has shown that students’ mind-sets have a direct influence on their grades and that teaching students to have a growth mind-set raises their grades and achievement test scores significantly (Blackwell, Trzesniewski, & Dweck, 2007; Good, Aron- son, & Inzlicht, 2003). In addition, studies demonstrate that having a growth mind-set is especially important for students who are labor- ing under a negative stereotype about their abilities, such as Black or Latino students or girls in mathematics or science classes.
We found that the students who had gotten training in study skills alone continued to show declining grades. They did not gain the motivation to put their skills into practice. But the students in the growth mind-set workshop showed a marked improvement in their grades. And teachers noticed the difference too. Although the teachers did not know which students had attended which work- shop, they singled out three times as many students from the growth mind-set group as from the control group for having shown clear changes in their motivation to learn—and they wrote extensively about the changes they saw in homework, class attention, study habits, and grades.
When teachers decide that certain students are not capable (or when principals decide that certain teachers are not capable), they may not take steps to help them develop their potential. In a recent study, we took people who had a fixed or growth mind-set and we asked them to respond to a seventh-grade student who had received a poor grade on the first mathematics test of the year. Those who had a fixed mind-set comforted the student and told the student that not everyone could be good in mathematics. In sharp contrast, those who had a growth mind-set said that they knew that the student could do better, encouraged the student to try harder, and gave the student specific suggestions for study and learning strategies. For the educator with a fixed mind-set, learning is the students’ responsibility. If students don’t have what it takes, so be it. But for the educator in a growth mind-set, learning is a col- laboration in which the teacher has great responsibility.
Beyond this, I don't know what to say. I do know that if teacher, parents, and the general population truly believe that some people will simply never learn math, well, we aren't ever going to end up with a better education system.
I feel like, if I were bad at math, the "new" math would be even more frustrating.
But, transitioning to new curriculum assumes that students have not already learned one method. It's not like saying "You were bad with this version, let's try another one."
I have my BS in Math and work in an analytical field - I think there's a lot of value in teaching a different method. People that say "It's easier just to subtract 316 from 427" (like the OP image) assume that a child inherently knows to line up numbers and subtract starting from the ones column. But they don't - that's taught, too. The number line allows children to see a visual and understand the "why" of what they're doing - and I see a lot of value in that.
I think this is the key thing to this method of teaching. DS' school switched to math curriculum similar to this and Common Core last year when he was in second grade. It took me a bit to understand what some of the homework was asking, and I have always been very good at math, but once I did it makes total sense as to why they are making the kids do this. Think about when you took a calculus class -- you don't get the whole problem wrong if you got the wrong ultimate answer. You got points for getting steps correct along the way -- for using problem solving and critical thinking skills to take a correct and logical path toward the ultimate answer. By teaching kids early on how to problem solve using various methods, they can then carry that forward into more complex math, knowing how to use some logical basis for their problem solving as opposed to just focusing on getting the correct ultimate answer based on memorized facts.
I think rugbywife has some great comments on this in this thread.
I was great at math but got stuck at differential equations. I needed a Calculus credit for my architecture degree -- I'm glad I didn't just give up and say "I suck at this," but worked with a tutor to get myself through the class.
Some people have difficulties understanding more basic math concepts. I'm glad teachers present it different ways now so that more kids get the reasoning. It's laborious but some kids need that.
What I don't like is that my kid, who probably could just learn the stuff by rote while working out the logic in her head, has to also take this boring, circuitous route. I wouldn't have wanted the smart kids in my Calc class to have to sit through my super-slow learning curve, either, lol.
the problem is that (statistically speaking) dumb is shorthand for poor, racial minority, immigrant, disabled, etc.
Um, no.
Seriously.
I refuse to believe the statistical correlation between poverty and poor performance in school is new to you so I'm not sure what you're going for here.
I refuse to believe the statistical correlation between poverty and poor performance in school is new to you so I'm not sure what you're going for here.
What am I going for here?
What are you going for?
I said that there are dumb people in the world, smart people in the world, and everything in between.
Kind of funny, because I'm as old-school as they come, but this is kind of how I do math in my head. I've just never thought to draw it out or analyze it. Believe me, if I'm adding or subtracting (in my head, not on paper), I'm certainly not visualizing carrying the one or borrowing a ten - I'm essentially doing what is shown here!
Me too.
I always struggled with rote math learning, and this is essentially how I taught myself to do it in my head - so this kind of approach might have actually helped me as a kid who had little natural aptitude for math. But I can see how it would be weird for others, if it's not an approach you're used to.
DH is an engineer and kicks my ass at math in every way. I have noticed that he uses a bunch of different strategies when solving math problems depending on the situation/how accurate he needs to be/the information given. ALL I've got is the standard algorithm, and I often make boneheaded mistakes relatd to basic math facts when trying to solve problems quickly. Meanwhile, DH will be all like, "but you know the answer should be at least 300 less than the original number, right?" And I'll be all "Oh, well, yeah. But I don't think like that."
In summary, I think the "new" math (which was around before CCSS) can go a long way in helping kids understand math in many different ways - and is getting much closer to teaching kids how to do math the way people smart at math do it.
Post by stealthmom on Oct 20, 2014 16:50:15 GMT -5
miso if you think someone can be smart despite poor school performance then you should see no problem in trying to improve their education so that their learning reflects their intellect.
But I am curious what you think the alternative is, to school performance, that educators can use to weed out the dumb kids in order to stop wasting their time?
miso…here is my way too long answer to a question you asked me earlier. Sorry it is a dissertation. Read at your own peril, lol.
So you asked me, do I genuinely believe that nobody is ‘bad’ at math (or something like that…). My answer is a cut and dry yes or no, because no aspect of teaching or education is as black and white as yes or no.
I believe that our existence on earth as learners begins before schooling begins, and, unfortunately, there are a good 4-5 years where children are already learners before they enter formal education structures.
When they enter, there is already a benchmark, and they are already measured against that benchmark. This is a reality of life. There were previous benchmarks against which they were evaluated – could they speak by a certain date, roll over, hold their head, etc…but essentially the only people really evaluating them prior to schooling were parents.
Once a child arrives at school there are other people evaluating them against benchmarks…and that child may arrive already believing there are things they can or can’t achieve (they may have already heard that they are a great athlete – or a poor one, or that they are so smart because they know their alphabet already…etc), or they may be a blank canvas, ready to be influenced by what they are told they are capable of. And now they have teachers who may believe that if they have met or exceeded those entry benchmarks, they are capable of learning, but that if they enter without having met them, they are doomed to a destiny where they will never truly be able to learn. I know this is hyperbolic, but I think that if you ask parents of children who traditionally struggled in school they will likely tell you that they feel like many teachers simply don't believe their child is capable of learning.
Growth mindset tells us that we must BELIEVE that all students are capable of learning and then we must TEACH them that this is true.
I remember the first time I believed that I couldn’t do art. My mom playfully made fun of me at the age of 8 for only being able to do stick drawings. I remember being heartbroken because she had always commented on how artistic my brother was, visually and musically. This was the beginning of the end of any interest in the arts for me. My brother grew to play the bass, take fine art at college at one part, played in a band. When I signed up to take art in grade 11 my mom asked me if I was sure I wanted to do that, since I could only draw stick figures. I still did it (I didn’t have much choice in the matter, I needed an elective) but I didn’t feel I was capable of ever being great at it…and not because I hadn’t tried, but because I had been made to feel like I already lacked the skills.
I don’t blame my mom…she never intended for her comments to have long lasting effects. But the comments we make as educators matter.
When a student hears… “Don’t worry, I am really bad at math too”, they don’t hear that they can succeed in life without math, they just hear that their teacher, the person in charge of their education, the person entrusted with the job of teaching them new things, thinks that they are bad at math. The whole subject, all of it.
Are all students going to become math professors or engineers or whatever else you want to do with amazing math skills – no, nor should they be expected to.
Growth mindset is about believing that the capacity to learn is not fixed, it is a skill that can be taught and mastered. Students can increase their capacity to learn but they must first believe that they can learn and in order to believe that those around them must believe it too.
I think that when we write ourselves off as being poor mathematicians, or poor spellers, or whatever…we saying that we don’t have the capacity to improve our ability to learn those skills, that even if we tried, even if we learned to embrace challenge, to learn in new ways, to persevere through mental blocks about ourselves as learners, we wouldn’t ever improve.
You are correct, not ever kid is ever going to learn complicated calculus…but if they, at an early age, come to believe that they just ‘can’t do math’, not only will they never do complicated calculus, they may never be able to do simple math that would allow them to function more adeptly in the real world. And, more significantly, they will have learned as a child to put limits on their ability to learn.
As for reform math vs. traditional math, a response to that, and the need for both in a balanced mathematics program, is a totally different discussion.
Post by open24hours on Oct 20, 2014 17:41:18 GMT -5
In defense of the worksheet, frustrated parent misses the whole point of this assignment. The point of this homework is not to subtract 316 from 427. If it was, I don't think many would argue that the standard practice of subtraction is the easiest, fastest, most efficient way to solve the problem. The point of this assignment is to look at someone else's (the fictitious Jack)faulty work and clearly explain how to fix it. In order to teach kids how to critically analyze something like this, we need to give them practice with easy examples before they can tackle more difficult assignments (and be successful when they are required to fix someone else's mistake as part of their job).
Math isn't just math. It is logic and reasoning and the language needed to explain it. It is quantities and values and the relationships between them. It is analyzing a problem and picking an approach to solve it. I say this all as someone who hated showing my work until I had to write a two page essay on why 2+2=4.
miso if you think someone can be smart despite poor school performance then you should see no problem in trying to improve their education so that their learning reflects their intellect.
But I am curious what you think the alternative is, to school performance, that educators can use to weed out the dumb kids in order to stop wasting their time?
You fail to understand my point.
Not everybody is good at math. Not everybody is good at anything and everything. A different method of teaching still may not help those who simply lack the aptitude for whatever is being taught.
Different people learn in different ways. A new way that is purportedly superior for certain people could be inferior for others. It's no more fair to force something like common core upon those who learn better the old way than it is to teach via the old way to those who do not fare well with the old way.
Why do you keep jumping to this bizarre conclusion that I am advocating "weed[ing] out the dumb kids"? I don't even understand what you are getting at here.
In defense of the worksheet, frustrated parent misses the whole point of this assignment. The point of this homework is not to subtract 316 from 427. If it was, I don't think many would argue that the standard practice of subtraction is the easiest, fastest, most efficient way to solve the problem. The point of this assignment is to look at someone else's (the fictitious Jack)faulty work and clearly explain how to fix it. In order to teach kids how to critically analyze something like this, we need to give them practice with easy examples before they can tackle more difficult assignments (and be successful when they are required to fix someone else's mistake as part of their job).
Math isn't just math. It is logic and reasoning and the language needed to explain it. It is quantities and values and the relationships between them. It is analyzing a problem and picking an approach to solve it. I say this all as someone who hated showing my work until I had to write a two page essay on why 2+2=4.
Plus fixing a mistake is a high level type of task. It is great for kids to do. We do it all the time in the classroom. Find the error and explain what it is/why it is wrong.
miso…here is my way too long answer to a question you asked me earlier. Sorry it is a dissertation. Read at your own peril, lol.
So you asked me, do I genuinely believe that nobody is ‘bad’ at math (or something like that…). My answer is a cut and dry yes or no, because no aspect of teaching or education is as black and white as yes or no.
I believe that our existence on earth as learners begins before schooling begins, and, unfortunately, there are a good 4-5 years where children are already learners before they enter formal education structures.
When they enter, there is already a benchmark, and they are already measured against that benchmark. This is a reality of life. There were previous benchmarks against which they were evaluated – could they speak by a certain date, roll over, hold their head, etc…but essentially the only people really evaluating them prior to schooling were parents.
Once a child arrives at school there are other people evaluating them against benchmarks…and that child may arrive already believing there are things they can or can’t achieve (they may have already heard that they are a great athlete – or a poor one, or that they are so smart because they know their alphabet already…etc), or they may be a blank canvas, ready to be influenced by what they are told they are capable of. And now they have teachers who may believe that if they have met or exceeded those entry benchmarks, they are capable of learning, but that if they enter without having met them, they are doomed to a destiny where they will never truly be able to learn. I know this is hyperbolic, but I think that if you ask parents of children who traditionally struggled in school they will likely tell you that they feel like many teachers simply don't believe their child is capable of learning.
Growth mindset tells us that we must BELIEVE that all students are capable of learning and then we must TEACH them that this is true.
I remember the first time I believed that I couldn’t do art. My mom playfully made fun of me at the age of 8 for only being able to do stick drawings. I remember being heartbroken because she had always commented on how artistic my brother was, visually and musically. This was the beginning of the end of any interest in the arts for me. My brother grew to play the bass, take fine art at college at one part, played in a band. When I signed up to take art in grade 11 my mom asked me if I was sure I wanted to do that, since I could only draw stick figures. I still did it (I didn’t have much choice in the matter, I needed an elective) but I didn’t feel I was capable of ever being great at it…and not because I hadn’t tried, but because I had been made to feel like I already lacked the skills.
I don’t blame my mom…she never intended for her comments to have long lasting effects. But the comments we make as educators matter.
When a student hears… “Don’t worry, I am really bad at math too”, they don’t hear that they can succeed in life without math, they just hear that their teacher, the person in charge of their education, the person entrusted with the job of teaching them new things, thinks that they are bad at math. The whole subject, all of it.
Are all students going to become math professors or engineers or whatever else you want to do with amazing math skills – no, nor should they be expected to.
Growth mindset is about believing that the capacity to learn is not fixed, it is a skill that can be taught and mastered. Students can increase their capacity to learn but they must first believe that they can learn and in order to believe that those around them must believe it too.
I think that when we write ourselves off as being poor mathematicians, or poor spellers, or whatever…we saying that we don’t have the capacity to improve our ability to learn those skills, that even if we tried, even if we learned to embrace challenge, to learn in new ways, to persevere through mental blocks about ourselves as learners, we wouldn’t ever improve.
You are correct, not ever kid is ever going to learn complicated calculus…but if they, at an early age, come to believe that they just ‘can’t do math’, not only will they never do complicated calculus, they may never be able to do simple math that would allow them to function more adeptly in the real world. And, more significantly, they will have learned as a child to put limits on their ability to learn.
As for reform math vs. traditional math, a response to that, and the need for both in a balanced mathematics program, is a totally different discussion.
I appreciate your thoughtful response.
But are you or are you not a good artist?
I am all for learning for all. I am all for fostering positive reinforcement. I am all for encouragement.
But, at the end of the day, whether or not your mother made any comments, you could just...not be a very good artist.
And that's ok.
I feel like nobody here is getting what I'm saying. LOL.
Post by stealthmom on Oct 20, 2014 18:14:54 GMT -5
We do understand what you're saying. What we're saying is- you could have been taught to play soccer if better methods had been used. Not that you could have gone pro- but that you could have learned to play.
miso…here is my way too long answer to a question you asked me earlier. Sorry it is a dissertation. Read at your own peril, lol.
So you asked me, do I genuinely believe that nobody is ‘bad’ at math (or something like that…). My answer is a cut and dry yes or no, because no aspect of teaching or education is as black and white as yes or no.
I believe that our existence on earth as learners begins before schooling begins, and, unfortunately, there are a good 4-5 years where children are already learners before they enter formal education structures.
When they enter, there is already a benchmark, and they are already measured against that benchmark. This is a reality of life. There were previous benchmarks against which they were evaluated – could they speak by a certain date, roll over, hold their head, etc…but essentially the only people really evaluating them prior to schooling were parents.
Once a child arrives at school there are other people evaluating them against benchmarks…and that child may arrive already believing there are things they can or can’t achieve (they may have already heard that they are a great athlete – or a poor one, or that they are so smart because they know their alphabet already…etc), or they may be a blank canvas, ready to be influenced by what they are told they are capable of. And now they have teachers who may believe that if they have met or exceeded those entry benchmarks, they are capable of learning, but that if they enter without having met them, they are doomed to a destiny where they will never truly be able to learn. I know this is hyperbolic, but I think that if you ask parents of children who traditionally struggled in school they will likely tell you that they feel like many teachers simply don't believe their child is capable of learning.
Growth mindset tells us that we must BELIEVE that all students are capable of learning and then we must TEACH them that this is true.
I remember the first time I believed that I couldn’t do art. My mom playfully made fun of me at the age of 8 for only being able to do stick drawings. I remember being heartbroken because she had always commented on how artistic my brother was, visually and musically. This was the beginning of the end of any interest in the arts for me. My brother grew to play the bass, take fine art at college at one part, played in a band. When I signed up to take art in grade 11 my mom asked me if I was sure I wanted to do that, since I could only draw stick figures. I still did it (I didn’t have much choice in the matter, I needed an elective) but I didn’t feel I was capable of ever being great at it…and not because I hadn’t tried, but because I had been made to feel like I already lacked the skills.
I don’t blame my mom…she never intended for her comments to have long lasting effects. But the comments we make as educators matter.
When a student hears… “Don’t worry, I am really bad at math too”, they don’t hear that they can succeed in life without math, they just hear that their teacher, the person in charge of their education, the person entrusted with the job of teaching them new things, thinks that they are bad at math. The whole subject, all of it.
Are all students going to become math professors or engineers or whatever else you want to do with amazing math skills – no, nor should they be expected to.
Growth mindset is about believing that the capacity to learn is not fixed, it is a skill that can be taught and mastered. Students can increase their capacity to learn but they must first believe that they can learn and in order to believe that those around them must believe it too.
I think that when we write ourselves off as being poor mathematicians, or poor spellers, or whatever…we saying that we don’t have the capacity to improve our ability to learn those skills, that even if we tried, even if we learned to embrace challenge, to learn in new ways, to persevere through mental blocks about ourselves as learners, we wouldn’t ever improve.
You are correct, not ever kid is ever going to learn complicated calculus…but if they, at an early age, come to believe that they just ‘can’t do math’, not only will they never do complicated calculus, they may never be able to do simple math that would allow them to function more adeptly in the real world. And, more significantly, they will have learned as a child to put limits on their ability to learn.
As for reform math vs. traditional math, a response to that, and the need for both in a balanced mathematics program, is a totally different discussion.
I appreciate your thoughtful response.
But are you or are you not a good artist?
I am all for learning for all. I am all for fostering positive reinforcement. I am all for encouragement.
But, at the end of the day, whether or not your mother made any comments, you could just...not be a very good artist.
And that's ok.
I feel like nobody here is getting what I'm saying. LOL.
I totally get what you are saying. I totally might have been a shitty artist either way, but, maybe with more practice (and the willingness to do the practice because I believed I could improve), I might have at least been a better artist.
Some people believe that all talent and skill is innate. Others believe in the 10 000 hour philosophy - it takes 10 000 hours to master something. If you do the math (lol, great pun for this thread), someone who gets their PhD in math has easily spent 10 000 hours working on math over the course of their studies…the bulk of which would have been done AFTER elementary school and even still, the bulk of which is really done at the University level.
So what about someone who, rather than believing they are good at math, comes to believe they are actually, innately bad at it. Not because they tried and still couldn't learn, but because somewhere along the way they were made to believe they couldn't learn, or rather, that it wasn't worth trying because they would never be great and therefore they lost interest and motivation.
Well that person wouldn't even come close to 10 000 hours of practice. That would be me and art (and music, and tennis, and piano, and German, and lots of other things, lol). Obviously people aren't going to do 10 000 hours of practice at everything - that's not the point.
But if a kid gives up on themselves in math because they 'just aren't good at it', well…I guess it depends when they give up…at 8? 12? 16? How many hours did they ever really give to it?
What if instead, they are taught to believe that they can increase their capacity to learn, that rather than 'just being bad at math' they can actually 'get better at math'…well then, maybe they won't give up as early. No, they likely won't get to 10 000 hours. But what if they got to 1500 hours instead of only 750. What might doubling their positive exposure lead to?
I guess my question is, how can believing that all students ARE capable of learning math hurt?
LOL. It makes sense, but I'm still not convinced that this is a superior way to learn math.
Can somebody please explain why rote learning is so discouraged?
Seems to work all around the rest of the world.
rote learning isn't discouraged, it simply isn't the only thing taught anymore. It is about meeting the needs of different thinkers AND, more importantly, extending critical thinking skills beyond the rote operation and into more complex thinking.
Here is one example...
Mental math is considered an important life skill and a great way to assess number sense vs. operational skill. The ability to work flexibly with numbers in your head (vs. pen/paper or calculator) is a really easy way to tell how well someone can manoeuvre numbers to work in the most efficient way.
Example…if the only way you know how to add and subtract is using the traditional algorithm, 8744-1298 would involve borrowing and would be tough to do in your head. But if you can manipulate numbers easily in your head because you have strong number sense you would see that 1298 is essentially 1300. But since you added 2 to the subtrahend you need to add 2 to the minuend…so if you add 2 to 1298 to get 1300, you need to add 2 to 8744 to get 8746. It is really easy to subtract 3000 from 8746 in your head, it is 8446.
This is just one strategy for mental math (I want to say the strategy is called compensation but I would have to check)…there are many others (front end estimation, friendly numbers, etc). But these strategies all require more than a rote understanding of how to do the standard algorithm.
Well, based upon this example with 8744-1298 and using 8746-3000 to get to the answer of 8446 I think miso is right and there are more superior ways But, I feel so incredibly out of the math learning loop and had no idea that the teaching methods have completely changed. Feel sorry for my kids
We do understand what you're saying. What we're saying is- you could have been taught to play soccer if better methods had been used. Not that you could have gone pro- but that you could have learned to play.
We do understand what you're saying. What we're saying is- you could have been taught to play soccer if better methods had been used. Not that you could have gone pro- but that you could have learned to play.
Anybody can learn something.
Not everybody can be good at that something.
When did I ever say that somebody couldn't learn?
I ask this genuinely, one day, if a teacher says to you, "your child just isn't good at ….", will you be okay with that? Are you okay with the educators in her life being okay with her being mediocre, or, worse, being bad at something?
The point is that if students believe they aren't good at something, that they won't be good at it, they give up on learning. That IS a problem.
Edit: I am having a sudden fear that misobaby isn't a girl…but I feel like she is. If I am wrong, I am sorry!
I ask this genuinely, one day, if a teacher says to you, "your child just isn't good at ….", will you be okay with that? Are you okay with the educators in her life being okay with her being mediocre, or, worse, being bad at something?
The point is that if students believe they aren't good at something, that they won't be good at it, they give up on learning. That IS a problem.
Edit: I am having a sudden fear that misobaby isn't a girl…but I feel like she is. If I am wrong, I am sorry!
This is why some kids need tutoring in certain subjects, getting through something and being good at it aren't the same. I got kicked out of gymnastics as a child, lol, however, I excelled at piano.
Do we really put gymnastics and piano on the same level as numeracy and literacy? Are we okay with kids just 'getting through' something?
How can people complain about the horrible test results and then not want to listen to what people who research these things say will help? If we can change our mindset and believe that students CAN succeed at math, more of them WILL.