search results matching tag: algebra
» channel: learn
go advanced with your query
Search took 0.000 seconds
| Videos (15) | Sift Talk (0) | Blogs (1) | Comments (102) |
go advanced with your query
Search took 0.000 seconds
| Videos (15) | Sift Talk (0) | Blogs (1) | Comments (102) |
Not yet a member? No problem!
Sign-up just takes a second.
Forgot your password?
Recover it now.
Already signed up?
Log in now.
Forgot your password?
Recover it now.
Not yet a member? No problem!
Sign-up just takes a second.
Remember your password?
Log in now.
bobknight33
(Member Profile)
newtboyThe courts are fake news now? 😂
If you earned it with your 3rd grade grammar and math skills, it’s not just easy, it’s simple. Most degrees require at least a basic grasp of English, math, and science, and you have displayed a total lack of understanding in every category consistently for years.
Perhaps I’m Jethro…but highly unlikely, but I wasn’t the very top student in my class. That said, he got a 6th grade mountain education, by 6th grade I (and my entire class) was reading at college level, doing algebra, and taking biology. At what grade did you achieve those milestones, or did you ever?
it’s undeniable factual reality on your fake news spun outlets that you drink.
Sorry but a BSEET from Penn State was not easy.
Sorry perhaps possibly you are the simple Jethro.
A boring class (Short animated film)
BSRTrue. True. Me in high school *yawn* algebra class.
Viking Fingerprint Trigger Lock Picked FAST
bremnet says...The reason I'd use a biometric vs a keyed trigger lock is for speed and ease of use in the dark. If I have to give it a little squeeze to get it to release, zero concern. Does it secure the firearm? Yes. Is it 100%, no. Show me one that is.
p.s. in a random sampling, the twenty-three 15 year old boys in my algebra class, none of them own or plan to buy a flat piece of bent metal that precisely fits in a lock of this type, let along lock picking tools. The determination that this lock is no good is based on tests that have little to do with the intended function.
New Math vs Old Math
bcglorf says...The problem is that it's confusing theory with the method. The right hand method(henceforth referred to as right method) shows that 35*2+35*10=35*12. It takes all of a couple minutes to show a class that. Spend a little time reminding them of the theory, put have them practice the right method. This isn't a mathematical theory exercise, this is performing basic arithmetic. It's why you segway into algebra later and show kids a(x +y)=ax+ay
"Get the answer faster" is not the point.
The left explains why multiplication works, whereas the one on the right is a process for multiplying.
The left makes it visually obvious that scalars are separable.
That : (35*2) = (30*2) + (5*2) = (30+5) * 2
The only thing missing (which may have been covered elsewhere) is that : 35 'IS" (3*10^1) + (5*10^0), and that multi-digit-numbers are already presented as separate scalars in sum.
-scheherazade
New Math vs Old Math
PaybackI would piss off my teachers, and later profs, by never showing "my work" on complex algebra. Kept doing it in my head.
"Find for X"
X=3.56
WRONG!!!
It isnt 3.56?
Yes, but you didn't show your work.
Meh.
Beats me, I learned the old way and it worked for me through algebra 1/2, and geometry.
New Math vs Old Math
MordhausIt's part of common core. Supposedly it makes it easier to understand the theory behind math so later in higher level classes (algebra, trig, etc) they can easily break the harder equations down.
Beats me, I learned the old way and it worked for me through algebra 1/2, and geometry.
What the fucking fuck is that all about?
That's ridiculous. All she's doing is spreading the equation apart.
Turning a compact process into a Gordian knot.
TIMELAPSE OF THE FUTURE: A Journey to the End of Time
BSRI hated algebra.
Hrmmm... "Thousand Billion" "Million Billion"?
How about just using Quadrillion, Quintillion and Sextillion like an adult?
Let's Talk About Teaching the Bible In School
BSRWhen it comes to algebra, I knew I picked the right guy.
When it comes to the differences of other cultures did you find the common thread?
Lol. I actually found both incredibly interesting.
Comparative religions taught me tons about other cultures and why they might act differently on top of some great mythology. Algebra taught me that math COULD be used in the real world to solve real problems, not just to waste 6th grader's time.
Let's Talk About Teaching the Bible In School
newtboyLol. I actually found both incredibly interesting.
Comparative religions taught me tons about other cultures and why they might act differently on top of some great mythology. Algebra taught me that math COULD be used in the real world to solve real problems, not just to waste 6th grader's time.
I would fall asleep in that class like I did in algebra class.
Let's Talk About Teaching the Bible In School
BSRI would fall asleep in that class like I did in algebra class.
What he's talking about is a course called comparative religions. I think it would be good if that was a required freshman year high school course.
10000 more years of the scientific method
PaybackBitch, I shit Algebra RIGHT. FUCKING. NOW.
"Alternative Math" - The confusing times we live in
bremnet says...Thank you for taking the time to lay this all out and provide links to the curriculum, I appreciate it. As a Canadian abroad, I had heard that some of the requirements were going a bit sideways, and down here in Texas the schools are a bit of a mixed bag as well, but your situation is worse (my wife teaches Algebra and Calculus at the junior high). Just "Wow" ... I have no words. I feel sorry for the poor kids who are smart enough to know the answer in their head, but are forced to spend their progressively fewer hours of free time to figure out this bullshit.
Thanks again.
@drradon: I agree with you 100% on teaching both and teaching basic arithmetic first and then leading on to proper math once that foundation is established.
@dannym3141,
I was first blindsided by it when my kids came home with multiplication homework and were adamant they couldn't answer it the way I was showing them because it would be marked wrong, it was the wrong way to do multiplication.
The link to the full Manitoba math curriculum is below. The worst sections are under 'Mental Math' with the idea being that you should be able to add/subtract/multiply/divide all numbers in your head with a dozen pages worth of tricks. The tricks being what newtboy was calling 'proofs'. Our curriculum calls them 'techniques' though and I've included an example from the Grade 3 curriculum verbatim after of how it is supposed to be 'taught'.
Overall Math curriculum:
http://www.edu.gov.mb.ca/k12/cur/math/index.html
Grade 3 example:
http://www.edu.gov.mb.ca/k12/cur/math/support_gr3/number.pdf
From page 56:
Describe a mental mathematics strategy that could be used to determine a given basic fact, such as
-doubles (e.g., for 6 + 8, think 7 + 7)
-doubles plus one (e.g., for 6 + 7, think 6 + 6 + 1)
-doubles take away one (e.g., for 6 + 7, think 7 + 7 – 1)
-doubles plus two (e.g., for 6 + 8, think 6 + 6 + 2)
-doubles take away two (e.g., for 6 + 8, think 8 + 8 – 2)
-making 10 (e.g., for 6 + 8, think 6 + 4 + 4 or 8 + 2 + 4)
-commutative property (e.g., for 3 + 9, think 9 + 3)
-addition to subtraction (e.g., for 13 – 7, think 7 + ? = 13)."
Now before you think me and observe there's nothing wrong with showing kids some extra tricks to help them, that is NOT how this is supposed to be used. If you read further, students are REQUIRED to "explore" multiple methods of calculating answers and must demonstrate they know and can use all these 'tricks'. So instead of providing assistance for difficult calculations as it should be, it's used to make ALL calculations difficult, and create extra work, AND makes kids just learning the concept completely overwhelmed with everything you MUST know to get a right answer to 2+2=4.
And here's the link to the Grade 11 review of the basic arithmetic:
http://www.edu.gov.mb.ca/k12/cur/math/ess_mm_gr11/full_doc.pdf
And for the Grade 11 students and teaching them to add/subtract/multiply and divide, the teacher's guide describes this like a subjective discovery process with quotes like this:
"Consequently, mental calculation activities should include periods for thought and discussion.
During these periods, the teacher should encourage students to
-suggest a variety of possible solutions to the same problem
-explain the different methods used to come to the correct answer and their
effectiveness
-explain the thought process that led to an incorrect answer"
An important note is we are not talking about solving complex word problems here or anything, but specifically for calculating a basic arithmetic operation with the different methods being those described from back in Grade 3 already outlined above.
"Alternative Math" - The confusing times we live in
dannym3141@bcglorf
I'll have to take your word for how they're marked on this, because you've talked to the teachers and whatnot, and i've spent 20 mins looking at the document without finding any regulations on it. I spent most of my time reading the examples. The rest was chock full of text and a bit hard to digest so like a true scientist i gave up.
I can't defend that, i think in essence they've got a very good idea. I've always been good with maths, and i remember when i was learning what i thought were hard bits, i'd find shortcuts a lot like they suggest. And by luck that helped me a lot with more advanced maths. I think these methods are great to set people up for algebra, infinitesimals and therefore calculus. But it's also a very top heavy burden to place on a learning mind, and you're presuming they'd have a use for it, or have the knack for it. And then if you test them on it, you're testing their ability to do stuff they don't need yet.
The way you say it, it's like it was designed by someone with a bit of a gift for maths but no idea about teaching, or kids, or how other people think. These are great ideas for pushing kids to better understanding though. Could easily confuse people.
"Alternative Math" - The confusing times we live in
newtboyI don't disagree with that. I don't understand how one could do any advanced mathematics without knowing arithmetic, so clearly it should be taught first.
As far as I was concerned, proofs were just demonstrating an understanding of arithmetic and how numbers and functions can be deconstructed in different ways. I hate showing my work, and almost failed that portion of algebra 2 because I just refused.
I disagree with both newtboy and bcglorf to a degree - one approach to teaching is arithmetic and the other is math. There is a place for both in the curriculum: teach arithmetic to enable students to gain facility with numbers; in the higher grades, introduce concepts of mathematics theory so that they understand why arithmetic works and extends to higher math...
"Alternative Math" - The confusing times we live in
newtboyWell, that's what I was taught were proofs, even if just proving simple addition....but that shouldn't be an introduction to math, I got them in geometry/algebra 2 my sophomore year.
Well, kids not understanding basic math isn't new either, senior year remedial math existed when I was in school, but wasn't the norm. If your assessment is correct, that's pretty sad.
All that said, I got paddled in 5th grade for insisting 4-5=-1. My teacher didn't understand negative numbers. Just saying, poor educators aren't a new thing, but they do suck ass.
The big problem is education is so politicised now that it's near impossible to figure out what's actually being taught and what stories are pure hyperbole. Here in the U.S. we've heard all kinds of insane claims about 'common core', most of which were bullshit, because making a federal standard for education wasn't what many wanted (how dare they tell us the war of northern aggression was about slavery, these slanderous accusations will not stand, sir) so a movement was born to oppose it by all means possible, which usually meant outrageous lies.
I'm really glad I don't have kids in school, I would probably home school them if I did.
Your missing the point though.
They start in grade 1/2 teaching you that 2+2=4 is incorrect. Instead you were supposed to write down:
2 is 1+1 and 1+1+1+1=4.
Then by grade 3/4 they are asked to solve 2+2. They now answer:
2 is 1+1 and 1+1+1+1=4
and are told incorrect. They are now supposed to use two different methods to solve the same problem and the correct answer is:
2 is the same as 1+1 so 1+1+1+1=4.
Alternately, 2 is 1 more than 1. I know 1+2 is 3, so If I add 1 that's 4.
Those aren't proofs. The addition operator isn't even a theorem to be proven, it's a definition.
I'm on board with teaching more advanced and abstract concepts in grade school. However, actually DO THAT. The stupidity of our provincial system is that they aren't doing that at all. They are performing all this mental masturbation to make basic arithmetic into some bastardised thing that kinda resembles proofs. You know, except the part where your 'proof' is worthless because solving 2+2 by replacing 2 with 1+1 is just substituting one axiom for another.
Teach kids the arithmetic and then teach them actual MATH proper, ideally easing them into the abstract aspect through algebra and not stupid tricks that fail to give them a good understanding of the actual concepts.
The point I underlined about Grade 11 still covering it is important. The students are being left so confused about what they are expected to give as an answer that so many still don't know basic arithmetic by Grade 11 that they still include it as part of the basic curriculum.