Current Events > Firefighter DESTROYS modern math teaching

(+) Yeah! (+)

isn't common core just a way of teaching, in excruciating detail, how to pull apart basic math problems into simple to do in your head chunks?

---

From the thumbnail I guess they're using the distributive property?

---

I get it, but got damn was that long winded. I agree that linear algebra and matrices should be taught way way waaaay sooner than college, but goodness.

---

Captain_Qwark posted...

Doing it in your head the standard way is easier to you than breaking it into the tens and ones place? I doubt it

No. Doing it the standard way is not only possible, but easy. I literally can't do that breakdown shit in my head. It's not which is easier, it's which is even possible to do as mental math.

TheOtherMike posted...

I literally can't do that breakdown shit in my head.

Because you didn't learn. Kids these days are learning how to break it down.

Duh

sLaCkEr408___RJ posted...

Because you didn't learn.

TheOtherMike posted...

Yes I did.

it's weird how mad people get about new education techniques
this is more or less how i learned multiplication, and obviously i'm not doing it the fucking long way after i grasped the concept

TheOtherMike posted...

sLaCkEr408___RJ posted...

Then why can't you do it?

Because I can't. How am I supposed to answer that question?

Captain_Qwark posted...

If you can't do it then you didn't learn it lol

If you can't swim would you tell people you still tell peole you learned to swim?

I learned how to swim. I mentally and physically know what to do to swim.

I can barely swim well enough to save my own life. But I know how to swim

---

Captain_Qwark posted...

If you can't do it then you didn't learn it lol

No. I learned common core. I can do it on paper. I can't do it in my head. Why is this so difficult for you to understand?

wackyteen posted...

I can barely swim

You still learned how

TheOtherMike posted...

I can't do it in my head.

You never learned how

The cool thing about using area models to learn numerical multiplication is that it also helps to learn polynomial multiplication.

Instead of place value by 10s, use place value by terms and create an N x M rectangle where N and M are the number of terms in each polynomial. Then multiply and collect like terms. Absolutely stomps FOIL as a way to multiply since it scales with each polynomial and can also be used as a framework for factoring

---

monkmith posted...

isn't common core just a way of teaching, in excruciating detail, how to pull apart basic math problems into simple to do in your head chunks?

Common core is merely a set of standards. They say nothing about how to teach, just what students should know at each grade level.

---

sLaCkEr408___RJ posted...

You never learned how

I did, but apparently you never learned how to read.

Njolk posted...

I didn't waste time watching the video but common core math is only hard for people who didn't grow up on it, it's actually quite clever and allows you to do big equations without memorizing all the intricacies of the old way

Or as the rest of the millennials put it "change! Change bad!"

"Doing something dumb that's worse, slower, and less intuitive is good, trust me! Everybody who doesn't do dumb thing is afraid of change!!!!!"

ok bro.

---

I'm glad I don't have kids because I'd literally boycott this faster than a liberal boycotting creationism.

---

"It is not what I learned growing up so it's bad" that is what anti-common core boils down to. Change being bad.

---

joe40001 posted...

I'm glad I don't have kids

we all are

---

Captain_Qwark posted...

Because multiplying one set of numbers then another and then adding them is like 100x simpler than doing the standard way in your head

It's like you telling me you can juggle 7 balls but not 3

But the firefighter method involves the 3 while the common core method involves the 7 (following her method)

---

Also a lot of people ITT are mischaracterizing what the teacher on the right is doing. The area model is what is known as "scaffolding", it's a conceptual stepping stone used to teach students why multiplication requires careful attention to place value.

In fact, Common Core actually does include the firefighter's method. It's a 5th grade standard.

CCSS.MATH.CONTENT.5.NBT.B.5
Fluently multiply multi-digit whole numbers using the standard algorithm.

Nobody who actually knows what they're talking about expects students to multiply using an area model though middle school. The standard algorithm exists because it's efficient. But without a conceptual foundation kids have no clue what's really happening when they multiply two numbers together.

---

creativerealms posted...

"It is not what I learned growing up so it's bad" that is what anti-common core boils down to. Change being bad.

"We are teaching the kids to learn to read, we think the first and most important step is teaching them to take every word, convert it into japanese, sound it out, use the phonetic japan to english dictionary we made and then understand the word from that"

"That's dumb"

"YOU JUST HATE CHANGE!!!!"

---

joe40001 posted...

"We are teaching the kids to learn to read, we think the first and most important step is teaching them to take every word, convert it into japanese, sound it out, use the phonetic japan to english dictionary we made and then understand the word from that"

"That's dumb"

"YOU JUST HATE CHANGE!!!!"

Take the L lmao. This is embarrassing.

---

At the risk of stating the obvious, people are different. We think differently and as such we can have different methodologies that can get us to the same place that won't be as fast for others to use. Sadly we've gotten more interested in teaching kids a "correct" way to think and set up problems rather than letting them find their own easiest way to a correct answer that isn't the calculator. Micromanaging education as it were.

As for why people care, sadly, too many can't get into this stuff without being huge condescending dicks about it. Parents are still somewhat expected to help with homework, and after a day of work, chores, cooking dinner and other adult things, the last thing they need is to have to struggle with their own homework that largely has to re-write ingrained techniques with online asshats going "hurr durr, this is so simple, why can't you get it easily you stupid person" so that their kid doesn't flunk while getting the accurate answer. Hell, it's rough on the kid that prefers old tactics because you get marked down for not thinking the right way.

---

AngelsNAirwav3s posted...

Wouldn't this method require a lot of memorization too, if you have a more difficult set of numbers that aren't just base 5 or 10? Something like 86 * 78?

How do you do that in your head?
86*78 = 86*80 - 86*2 = (if that's too hard) 90*80 - 4*80 - 86*2
7200-320 = 6900-20=6880
6880-172 = 6708
But this is a mental math strategy, not common core. Again, it's important to understand WHY this works, not that it does.

---

That is way too long.

Also, if thats whats being taught in elementary school, they might as well introduce variables and factoring.

Example:
6x^2+10x-6

Captain_Qwark posted...

Because multiplying one set of numbers then another and then adding them is like 100x simpler than doing the standard way in your head

Obviously it isn't for me. I can visualize a standard multiplication problem in my head and solve it. The moment I try to mentally break it down in the common core method I completely lose track of what's going on with the equation.

joe40001 posted...

"We are teaching the kids to learn to read, we think the first and most important step is teaching them to take every word, convert it into japanese, sound it out, use the phonetic japan to english dictionary we made and then understand the word from that"

"That's dumb"

"YOU JUST HATE CHANGE!!!!"

"I know change is hard" - someone that can't quite catch on someone may not enjoy doing something hard on the command of another.

---

Captain_Qwark posted...

Elementary does introduce variables

Really? I dont remember. I did elementary in the 90s. I think my first exposure to variables was middle school.

lmao the joe melty

---

joe40001 posted...

"Doing something dumb that's worse, slower, and less intuitive is good, trust me! Everybody who doesn't do dumb thing is afraid of change!!!!!"

Nevermind that the Greeks figured out the box method 2600 years ago: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greek_mathematics#/media/File:Pythagoras_Euclid.svg
Here's proof of the irrationality of sqrt(2) using the same method in one picture: https://www.cut-the-knot.org/proofs/SqRootOf2.gif

But, learning multiplication this way gives you better understanding of future problems, gives you tools to multiply faster than the standard algorithm, and is perfectly intuitive as shown by its repeated use throughout history.

---

op's Ls keep multiplying

---

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=VJf8XAhC550

I think this is better than that method used in the video.

ultimate reaver posted...

op's Ls keep multiplying

I mostly wanted to share a funny video.

I do wish he had explained it. Probably could've at least put his suit on after that

---

There's nothing special about it. I learned that technique all on my own in 11th grade. It's ideal for squaring numbers or multiplying numbers of the form (a+b)(a-b). So 27 times 23 is just (25^2)-(2^2)=621.

---

ChocoboMog123 posted...

Nevermind that the Greeks figured out the box method 2600 years ago: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greek_mathematics#/media/File:Pythagoras_Euclid.svg
Here's proof of the irrationality of sqrt(2) using the same method in one picture: https://www.cut-the-knot.org/proofs/SqRootOf2.gif

But, learning multiplication this way gives you better understanding of future problems, gives you tools to multiply faster than the standard algorithm, and is perfectly intuitive as shown by its repeated use throughout history.

My biggest issue is that students are going to be graded down and maybe get turned off from math if the traditional way makes more sense to them.

I see this new method teaching a whole bunch of kids that "proper math" is obtuse and unintuitive if they are punished for being efficient and numbers just normally make sense to them.

---

joe40001 posted...

My biggest issue is that students are going to be graded down and maybe get turned off from math if the traditional way makes more sense to them.

I see this new method teaching a whole bunch of kids that "proper math" is obtuse and unintuitive if they are punished for being efficient and numbers just normally make sense to them.

Nobody's being punished for doing it the traditional way jfc

---

kage_53 posted...

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=VJf8XAhC550

I think this is better than that method used in the video.

i really hope you're joking

---

That video is unintentionally hilarious, because the longer, more complicated process comes with clear instructions in a series of steps, while the firefighter just does the multiplication with no instructions or step-by-step directions.

If this video was used as the basis for instruction on multiplication, and students were given a worksheet to do multiplication problems, they would overwhelmingly depend on the method demonstrated on the right side of the video instead of the left.

---

joe40001 posted...

My biggest issue is that students are going to be graded down and maybe get turned off from math if the traditional way makes more sense to them.

I see this new method teaching a whole bunch of kids that "proper math" is obtuse and unintuitive if they are punished for being efficient and numbers just normally make sense to them.

Yes, if you don't understand WHY something works you get marked down on a question asking WHY something works. Why does the video above work? For the same reasons the method explained in the OP works. Why does the standard algorithm work? Because it follows the method explained.
What is "proper math"? Do you need to go into calculus, set theory, and proofs? Virtually every beginning course on integration is going to start with Riemann sums. They're not efficient and they give a warped understanding of what integration means, but they SHOW the WHY of why integration works.

Explain the standard method of multiplication and explain WHY it works. Go ahead, take 35*12 step by step and explain why each step is correct. If you can't do that, you don't really understand mathematics and it's going to cause issues when you start needing to multiply (12x^2+2x-1)(3x^3-6x+2).

---

untrustful posted...

That video is unintentionally hilarious, because the longer, more complicated process comes with clear instructions in a series of steps, while the firefighter just does the multiplication with no instructions or step-by-step directions.

If this video was used as the basis for instruction on multiplication, and students were given a worksheet to do multiplication problems, they would overwhelmingly depend on the method demonstrated on the right side of the video instead of the left.

lol true

---

Not to mention, if the fire fighter took his time to explain multiplication the way he was taught, it would take just as much time as the woman teaching her method of multiplication.

---

They're trying to teach kids how to break problems down and do them easily in their head.

Doing a pretty basic multiplication problem faster than a teacher explaining that to children doesn't prove anything.

---

The rough thing is that kids growing up being taught the method on the right don't internalize it in their heads. They hit walls and struggle, and they get less problems in earlier grades cause they take longer to do each one

But it carries through into high school where they're still not internalizing, and still getting less problems, so they're both slower and also less capable with the material

I was taught the method on the left and internalized the method on the right to save time, and the kids I work with can't fucking do either in a timely manner. It's rough

---

As a teacher I can say that nobody wants to teach math this way. I get the point but it just is slower and in a way more complicated.

---