/sci/ - Science & Math

[Anonymous No.16159748]

Why does america intentionally teach kids retarded math?

[Anonymous No.16159753]

the top is a braindead algorithm, while the bottom shows actual comprehension of arithmetic

[Anonymous No.16159765]

>>16159748
wtf do kids know about "old ways" just teach ffs

[Anonymous No.16159769]

>>16159748
ZOG wants people to be dumb so they don't realize how badly they're being ripped off by the government. If you can't do math then you can't do accounting

[Anonymous No.16159777]

>>16159753
The top is not an algorithm.

[Anonymous No.16159780]

>>16159777
yes it is
>>16159753
unironically

[Anonymous No.16159789]

>>16159780
>unironically
>>16159753
can you elaborate then?

[Anonymous No.16159795]

>>16159748
subtraction is a lot harder than addition for brainlets

[Anonymous No.16159796]

>>16159748
Is the point of this stupid nonsense to avoid “borrowing” by instead performing addition operations to reach rounded numbers until the end result is obtained?

Holy shit I think I just realized, they are trying to break the larger number into increments of 5 so niggers can count everything on one hand, AND so they dont have to count backwards as counting backwards is more difficult than counting forwards. This cant be it right?

Holy fuck. This is absolutely pathetic.

Okay, now lets do 10275720274-1727485927.

Have fun!

[Anonymous No.16159802]

>>16159748
>Why does america intentionally teach kids retarded math?
who is "america"?

[Anonymous No.16159812]

>>16159796
i don't see how OP's image could be less complicated than just subtracting 1 twelve times using your fingers. and since i don't understand what the method is, i don't see how it's any better/more useful.

[Anonymous No.16159818]

>>16159748
anyone who knows any math will agree that the second is better

[Anonymous No.16159820]

>>16159818
can you elaborate?

[Anonymous No.16159821]

>>16159769
this
a dumb population is an easily controlled one

[Anonymous No.16159822]

>>16159796
that subtraction is not a common practical occurrence. small subtractions are much more common in every day life. Good on the school system for teaching generally useful techniques instead of useless ones that people won't use in adulthood.

[Anonymous No.16159827]

>>16159769
do you have any hints/examples of how we're being ripped off? i know of some but i'm sure there are some i don't know about
>>16159822
what is the technique? does anyone have an explanation/link?

[Anonymous No.16159833]

>>16159827
example: 123 - 97
"old way": apply algorithm like a machine
3 minus 7 carry the 1 commit result to memory
2 minus 9 minus 1 carry the one commit result to memory...

"new" way:
look at numbers and try to shuffle them into easier problems that you can do instinctively:
do 123 - 100 first because that's easy, just remember you need to add 3 later
then add the missing 3

[Anonymous No.16159850]

>>16159833
>look at numbers and try to shuffle them into easier problems that you can do instinctively:
well that makes sense, but the technique in OP's image must be more explicit, right?
in the case of 32 - 12, why not break it down into 30 - 10 and 2 - 2?

[Anonymous No.16159852]

i don't understand why they would start with 12, then add 3, then continue adding shit until it's 32, then somehow conclude that the answer is 20.
i think i need to be put in a re-education camp or something.

[Anonymous No.16159855]

>>16159850
probably because kids in school don't have sufficient training and intuition and need to take more explicit steps
but later in life on they will be primed to use this technique as they see fit instead of whipping out their phone to do it

[Anonymous No.16159864]

>>16159833
Yes but if you use this method in your head, are you supposed to simultaneously remember the four numbers you need to add? Not just that but because these numbers are derived from arbitrary operations designed to break apart the problem into “chunks” what youre remembering actually has no relation to the original numbers, and is thus disorganized gibberish to the mind. The mind seeks simple, clean patterns, not arbitrary, discombobulated messes. The mind, like a computer, is capable of operating in a manner that we are unaware of. We want kids adding and subtracting as a second nature, not dragging everything out and wasting their time like this.
>just remember to add that 3 back at the end!

Memory is fallible, to rely on memory like this to perform otherwise sinple mathematical operations is to doom yourself to failure.

We are bending over backwards to let dumb kids count on their hands. You can let the retards learn this trash, its not like theyre ever going to use real math anyway, just counting on their hands or subtracting numbers from the balance in their bank account (which is never over 100 dollars anyway) so for them it makes sense.

Dont drag gifted kids down with this shit. Let their minds run algorithms like computers. Leave this shit for the slow kids who need to count 5 at a time.
>>16159850
>why not do 30-20
The whole point is that all of the operations are addition. Subtraction is too scary and risky, just be safe and count forwards.

[Anonymous No.16159866]

>>16159855
yeah i like the idea of getting kids to think about it that way.
i don't know if existing techniques should be considered "the old fashioned way", though (i'm not saying you said this, just making the claim).

[Anonymous No.16159874]

>>16159864
>Yes but if you use this method in your head, are you supposed to simultaneously remember the four numbers you need to add? Not just that but because these numbers are derived from arbitrary operations designed to break apart the problem into “chunks” what youre remembering actually has no relation to the original numbers, and is thus disorganized gibberish to the mind. The mind seeks simple, clean patterns, not arbitrary, discombobulated messes. The mind, like a computer, is capable of operating in a manner that we are unaware of. We want kids adding and subtracting as a second nature, not dragging everything out and wasting their time like this.
>>just remember to add that 3 back at the end!
>Memory is fallible, to rely on memory like this to perform otherwise sinple mathematical operations is to doom yourself to failure.
well the operations aren't arbitrary, as long as the chunks add back up to the correct answer. myelin works wonders, any technique done enough will eventually feel simple. this is why people can learn to play musical instruments.
you seem to be making more of a spiritual judgment against the technique. what do you think should be taught instead?

[Anonymous No.16159884]

oh and i'm not saying that just because any technique will eventually feel simple, the technique taught doesn't really matter. it absolutely does. i'm just saying that you might be intuiting that the technique would take a long time BECAUSE you're used to a different one.

[Anonymous No.16159899]

>>16159789
NTA, but column addition is practically the textbook definition of an algorithm. It's a rigorous procedure for completing a mathematical operation (in this case addition between two numbers).

>>16159850
The most conceptually intuitive way to do complex addition or subtraction (without a calculator) is the linear algebra method - breaking the problem down into a sum of products (in numerical cases, powers of ten, but it's especially handy to apply to symbolic problems with multiple variables).
>10275720274 - 1727485927
[math]= (1-0) \cdot 10^{10} + (0-1) \cdot 10^9 + (2-7) \cdot 10^8 + (7-2) \cdot 10^7 + (5-7) \cdot 10^6 + (7-4) \cdot 10^5 + (2-8) \cdot 10^4 + (0-5) \cdot 10^3 + (2-9) \cdot 10^2 + (7-2) \cdot 10^1 + (4-7) \cdot 10^0[/math]
[math]= 10^{10} - 10^9 - 5 \cdot 10^8 + 5 \cdot 10^7 - 2 \cdot 10^6 + 3 \cdot 10^5 - 6 \cdot 10^4 - 5 \cdot 10^3 - 7 \cdot 10^2 + 5 \cdot 10^1 - 3 \cdot 10^0[/math]
[math]10^{10} - 10^9 = 9 \cdot 10^9[/math]
[math]9 \cdot 10^9 - 5 \cdot 10^8 = 85 \cdot 10^8[/math]
[math]85 \cdot 10^8 + 5 \cdot 10^7 = 855 \cdot 10^7[/math]
[math]855 \cdot 10^7 - 2 \cdot 10^6 = 8548 \cdot 10^6[/math]
[math]8548 \cdot 10^6 + 3 \cdot 10^5 = 85483 \cdot 10^5[/math]
[math]85483 \cdot 10^5 - 6 \cdot 10^4 = 854824 \cdot 10^4[/math]
[math]854824 \cdot 10^4 - 5 \cdot 10^3 = 8548235 \cdot 10^3[/math]
[math]8548235 \cdot 10^3 - 7 \cdot 10^2 = 85482343 \cdot 10^2[/math]
[math]85482343 \cdot 10^2 + 5 \cdot 10^1 = 854823435 \cdot 10^1[/math]
[math]854823435 \cdot 10^1 - 3 \cdot 10^0 = 8548234347[/math]

The problem is that you can't really teach kids this method without them already knowing multiplication and some basic algebra.

[Anonymous No.16159910]

>>16159899
interesting, ty, i hadn't seen that before
>>16159899
>NTA, but column addition is practically the textbook definition of an algorithm
i was mainly curious what they meant by "the bottom shows actual comprehension of arithmetic", i also thought it would help me understand what the bottom technique was.

[Anonymous No.16159913]

Subtract 10

Then subtract 2

Done.

[Anonymous No.16159924]

>>16159874
I think this method is for the slow kids, as it is objectively slower, while the higher IQ kids can be in the other class learning more complex material, while these kids struggle desperately to train their myelin to do something that isnt natural. You havent explained how a “chunk” is determined. Do we just choose multiples of 5 because they are nice and round? Can we choose 7 or 8 or 9? Why assign arbitrary numbers to this problem? Why not operate within the realm of the numbers actually associated with the problem? If I “borrow” from the 3 and it becomes a 2, its easy for me to remember that because of the associations between the two numbers. If im trying to simultaneously remember four numbers based on addition to create multiples of 5, im forced to retain 4 pieces of information at once instead of just two. Its an inherently inferior operation that requires more work, more addition, more strokes of the pen, and more memorization. Its trash, designed to drop everyone down to the same low level. Remove the intuitive and replace it with arbitrary abstraction. Ill tell my kid its okay to get Cs in elementary school math so long as he gets the right end results. I would actively encourage my kids to ignore this shit.

[Anonymous No.16159929]

>>16159899
This is great, but notice the straightforward relationships between how the numbers are all derived. The chucklehead advocating for common core still hasnt explained what makes a “chunk” a chunk and even if they manage to do so, my point still stands that it is totally arbitrary.

Ive never seen this method in my life, I mean maybe I have but I havent really internalized it, and yet now that ive seen it I understand it perfectly and could even deploy it myself.

I still dont know what the fuck common core is even trying to do.

[Anonymous No.16159943]

>>16159818
For idiots

[Anonymous No.16159945]

>>16159899
Faggot
>>16159913
/Thread

[Anonymous No.16159946]

>>16159910
While it's obviously a lot more work, the big advantage is that once you understand the fundamentals, it becomes much easier to do more complex operations or even operations in other bases (ex. you can easily convert the problem above to base 8 by substituting the tens with 8s)
[math]8^{10} - 8^{9} = 7 \cdot 8^9[/math]
etc.

And of course where it really shines is that this how complex systems of linear equations are solved - you break something into powers of x or powers of y or what-have-you and then solve for things at each power. Which makes learning methods of algebra simpler in the long run.


>>16159929
True, "chunks" aren't rigorously defined, largely because it depends on what operation you're doing, what simpler operations you can identify within the larger problem, and what your proficiency level is.

The common core method isn't fundamentally that different from >>16159899 , the main issue is it sort of takes it as a half-measures where it tries to break it into factors of 2s, 5s, 10s, whatever happens to be convenient for a particular problem instead of something more consistent.

I think a lot of the issues could be solved if multiplication was introduced much earlier in math education. Obviously addition and subtraction still need to come first, but you could have a bit of an overlap with trivial multiplication operations (like times tables) being introduced before building up to more complex addition and subtraction.

[Anonymous No.16159953]

>>16159946
>the chunks arent rigorously defined because of XYZ
Kids need organization not vague confusing bullshit designed to keep them counting on their fingers like retards

[Anonymous No.16159966]

>>16159953
I know, and I'm agreeing that the current system is flawed. The roots of the right idea are there, it's just half-assed because the people who wrote most of the curriculum are fucking English and Social Studies teachers.

[Anonymous No.16159980]

>>16159966
>teaching linear algebra in elementary school

One day bro, one day

[Anonymous No.16160008]

>>16159753
All trash like you need to be burned alive.

[Anonymous No.16160009]

>>16159980
We need to phase out this rigid thinking that you've got to separate out topics completely into different courses/years.

[Anonymous No.16160013]

>>16159818
Only a complete imbecile like you would believe such stupidity.

[Anonymous No.16160016]

>>16159833
Fuck off you stupid idiot.

[Anonymous No.16160019]

>>16159929
i never advocated for it

[Anonymous No.16160022]

god fucking damnit i really wish i had been here earlier, it's so frustrating that you thought i was advocating for common core, i've spent the entire thread trying to figure out what it's trying to do as well.

[Anonymous No.16160045]

>>16159899
You can teach that to kids using a Yupana and beans of different colors. The rules to move around beans are simple enough for kids, and handling the physical tokens make it more enjoyable for them. Also the physical tokens make it harder to make mistakes, so even small kids can do operations on very large numbers.

[Anonymous No.16160059]

>>16159748
Why do children need to be taught the mechanics of mathematics, anyway? Just teach them the concepts, no one does addition using either of those methods anymore.

[Anonymous No.16160073]

>>16160059
lol, so what? Just chuck a calculator at them day one and let them go to town on it? Yeah, that's worked real well with tablets and phone apps. No generational mental atrophy at all.

Even ignoring the applications, it's building basic quantitative reasoning skills and helping make vital neural connections.

[Anonymous No.16160103]

>>16159748
I honestly do not think it's America teaching children faulty math at all because if I were president I wouldn't mind saying something like Earth is a family. I think it's other nations out there that really think we're stupid or something to begin with so they tease us and meddle with us. It's such a tragedy. I'm just gonna speak my mind here but when I saw your question I was like geez I'm an American. For instance natives of Italy seriously have some beef with us a number of European countries do some Asian—just because we screwed up our Lunar Landing. I'd assume they said something like we're going to despise your embarrassment to your grave.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nTn9gVqRfKY&pp=ygUkbWVudGFsIG1hdGggdHJpY2tzIG9yZ2FuaWMgY2hlbWlzdHJ5

The link provided is a great video. I downloaded the video my self. It's about how to do mental math easier. My teachers taught me the old fashioned way which is tough. You don't have to do it mentally either. It's also efficient if you wanna do math on paper.

"Evil people do stupid things." - ???

Sry if tl;dr. Great thread btw.

[Anonymous No.16160111]

>>16160103
ty
the butterfly effects caused by big cultural events like that are definitely interesting to think about

[Anonymous No.16160161]

>>16159833
The new way is stupid but it's close to the Patrician way.

123-97
123-100 , keep 3
100-100= 0, keep 23 and add 3, = 26.

[Anonymous No.16160166]

>>16159864
>it's disorganized
Fuck you. They learn what adding or substracting means when learning algebra. Arithmetic is pure computation and breaking shit in easier to remember operations is more important than to remember the process of an algorithm that involves memorizing 8 ciphers at the same time. People don't have enough operational memory.

[Anonymous No.16160343]

>>16159924
>You havent explained how a “chunk” is determined.
you're a slow kid ironically

[Anonymous No.16160351]

>>16159748
>Why does america intentionally teach kids retarded math?

Common core was designed with the goal of 'standardizing education' ... that means removing the racial and sexual gaps.
NOTE: teaching BETTER is NOT a goal.
Common core math is the absolute simplest it can be so minorities can learn it.
THAT is reason that America intentionally teaches kids retarded math

[Anonymous No.16160693]

>>16159780
>yes it is
It's not. It's an equation, and you are a retard.

[Anonymous No.16160774]

>>16159796
why are you supposed to count backwards when subtracting? difference is difference, it doesn't matter which direction you choose

[Anonymous No.16160806]

>>16160161
12-9=3
3-7=-4
so, 30-4=26

[Anonymous No.16160837]

>>16159820
It's better to teach understanding than rote computation.
>>16159796
Bad faith post. There is realistically no need to perform that subtraction on paper today, and if you teach understanding they'll be able to work it out themselves anyway.
>>16159820
>>16160013
>>16159943
Lets be real this entire thing is about culture war THEYRE TEACHING KIDS DEMONRAT MATH AHHH SAVE US TRUMP bullshit stuff for you people. The point is getting dumb and angry. Enjoy yourselves.

[Anonymous No.16160843]

>>16159753
Top is an efficient algorithm, bottom is a retarded algorithm, you imbecile ignorant piece of shit.

[Anonymous No.16160846]

>>16159748
There are far too many jews in positions power, that is why there is so much stupidity going on.

[Anonymous No.16160854]

>>16160843
Imagine how retarded the guy who made this post actually is...

[Anonymous No.16160856]

>>16159864
>Dont drag gifted kids down with this shit. Let their minds run algorithms like computers. Leave this shit for the slow kids who need to count 5 at a time.
Something only a complete retard could post.

[Anonymous No.16160857]

>>16159899

[Anonymous No.16160867]

>>16160843
lol you're mad
but really, the bottom one is superior, it's just been presented in the most obtuse and convoluted way, which isn't surprising because the person who took that photo is some dumb boomer who can't understand his child's kindergarten math homework and is thus trying to push an agenda

[Anonymous No.16160869]

>>16159748
Govt wants to keep Americans dumb. They need more young Biden voters who will hate Russia and worship Jews

[Anonymous No.16160879]

>>16159748
32-12 is trivial and self evident
if you were to do something like 32-17, to some it may be more intuitive to do it the other way
17+3=20
32-20=12
12+3=15

that said, if you have trouble with basic counting, you will probably have no idea when to choose the more effective algorithm or fumble it by forgetting what to add or substract

[Anonymous No.16160944]

>>16159748
Retarded (majority nonwhite, bastard) kids + retarded teachers