What is Digg?168 Comments
- NtHammer, on 10/12/2007, -5/+69although the standard method for multiplication works good on paper, the "cluster" problems i find to be way easier to do mentally
- fearofcorners, on 10/12/2007, -1/+49So THAT'S how you do long division.
- sicheah, on 10/12/2007, -6/+47Sorry about the misleading title, but this partially explains why we're slacking in math.
- TheLinux, on 10/12/2007, -1/+33Dugg because i went to school with morons!
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+32If I become a math teacher, I'm going to require my students to show their work... in binary.
26 * 31 = ?
0000011010
0000011111 *
--------------------
0000011010
0000110100
0001101000
0011010000
0110100000 +
--------------------
1100100110
26 * 31 = 806
See, wasn't that simple? - chrisrad, on 10/12/2007, -4/+22In Australia we got taught both ways, when we were younger (primary school) the first method she showed, then as we got older into high school the TERC method..
To be honest, the TERC method is awesome, my parents have troubles doing math without paper infront of them to 'work it out', I can handle splitting up several smaller equations in my head much more efficiently..
I don't really agree with this video. - quakerorts, on 10/12/2007, -1/+16I use the Terc method in my mind for doing math because it's easier and less error prone, but it should be taught along with the way we've done it for 5,000 years!
- trunkster, on 10/12/2007, -1/+16Hey it's the local weather lady which I have never seen before, I call channel 13's news the amateur news report... anyway...
Students in colleges use calculators more often now because the books give you a ***** load of problems. Due to the fact they expect you will be using a calculator during the problem for the basics. True though you shouldn't be using the calculator for the concepts you are learning, but it really helps to be able to type in a function to see the graph so you learn more about the problem. I was able to get through calculus and now on physics with calculus, and I expect the current generation in college don't know these crap ass ways to do basic math.
What it comes down to is that the culture needs to hold math up to a higher level of importance. These textbook publishers are trying to find a way to teach it to kids to help them better understand but in reality, they are not the problem (well now it appears they are part of it). If you look at foreign countries, education has a higher importance because the parents teach that to their kids. Now a days we have too many crappy parents whose attitude reflects on their children. - thewump, on 10/12/2007, -0/+15Ideal for kids to be taught BOTH traditional and TERC - personally I hate the latice!
Here is some logic:
1) Traditional algorythm requires paper and pen, TERC you can do in your head ( if you are good with numbers )
2) If you ever want to play professional darts, you'd better be good at TERC or you'll look like a moron ;-)
There are times though that TERC isn't ideal, and she's using that as an eg. 30 x 26 = (30x25)+30. Now THAT is very doable.. so personally I think the process should be:
1) Are the numbers doable by TERC.. like can they be broken down into 2 easy tasks?
2) Do it the old fashioned way - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -2/+15WOW, what F'd up schools did you all go to? I was never taught how to do math this way... EVER.
- saintdesy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+13I use the so called "TERC Method" even though I was never taught it. It is just something I naturally started using. It is NOT a "on the paper" type method, but it works excellent in your head if you can keep track of numbers. I think the algorithms that she says is best (the old fashioned way) is fine if you have a pencil and paper, but if you're in the situation where you are going to be pulling out pencil and paper to multiply in real life, you mind as well use your cell phone calculator.
306 x 15 (TERC Method) = 3000+1500+60+30 = 4590 = Piece of F***ing cake.
306
x 15 (old method)
--------
Umm, lets break out the pencil
Its top down vs. bottom up. Personally, my brain works better starting with the bigger numbers and working down than building up. Deductive reasoning FTW. - ahuxley, on 10/12/2007, -0/+12Thanks
Hope they all get math books from Singapore :-) - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+11Nice to know I've been doing this in my head for years. Now let's figure out why I suck at calculus.
- benbread, on 10/12/2007, -1/+11You're right, my post doesn't make a huge amount of sense to me, must have been the blind fit of rage i was in...
Here's what i was trying to say:
Maths is an alternate and very common spelling, so the poster is not making a spelling error. Also, it's not a good idea to tell people their way of spelling is wrong here ;) - D3koy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+9Dugg because I'm in school with idiots..the kind that say "take-away" instead of "minus" (i.e. 7 take away 4 is 3)
- trubbleshute, on 10/12/2007, -0/+9Terc? I figured that out myself -- we called it mental math back in the day. It's easier to write out the standard algorithm, but easier to mentally figure it out.
But how many times are we in a place where we don't have a calculator? If I am in a place where I do not have access to a calculator (phone, pda, laptop-- no jokes please) then my biggest problem is not whether I can successfully multiply 26 and 31 - Waterispoison, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8Here at Georgia Tech we are not allowed any calculators in any math course. I'm pretty sure most of all this "zomgourkidzrst00pid" is sensationalist *****. While there is a problem with our education system, it is not nearly at the scale most people think it is.
- Jemulov, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8Children need more concrete things to base reasoning off of. These new methods like TERC and whatnot, are developed as reasoning from the basic or standard ways of doing simple math (addition subtraction multiplication and division.) We've all learned how to do large number multiplication in our heads by splitting the numbers into manageable pieces like 200 x 10 is 2000 and 16 x 5 is 80, combine the two pieces into each other and you have 216 x 15. But we've all figured out through repetition of countless problems that the above is true. You can't expect regular kids to start this sort of reasoning skill off the bat, they need years of practice like we all did. Hell, when I was in grade school my teachers used flash cards and constant problems for the board and homework. I remember an addition assignment way back from 1st grade that easily had 100 problems on it, or at least seemed like it did to my tiny tot mind. It was more likely 20 or so.
Another thing that gets me is how those books reference the fact that kids could always use a calculator to figure out the problem so that defeats the purpose of learning these skills intensively anyways. This scares me because I have friends that argue why we need to learn things like integration and graphing by hand when we can easily do so with that TI-83/89 we keep handy in our backpacks in school. I feel the same way sometimes, but I prefer to rely on myself for knowing how to do integrals in my head or at least in a 2 inch square area of a sheet of paper because I know I won't always have my little 3-ounce hunk of plastic to save my ass. The introduction of the Texas Instruments Graphing calculators really has caused disillusionment among students nowadays. It does wonders for those who need a cheap way to solve complex equations but has made younger students lazier and lazier.
I apologize for the long winded reply, but I felt rather compelled to say it. - igibson, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7the terc method is something you develop, not necessarily learn in a classroom - i use it all the time for mental math and it works great for me, but a lot of people i know find it too complicated to use
- alwaysmc2, on 10/12/2007, -2/+9I live in VA and I learned it the efficient way. I think most schools don't use that stupid book. (I have never heard of it.)
- Urusai, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8So is working at McDonalds for minimum wage. Choose your poison.
- chicken101, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7'rediculous"
I hate when people do that. - vhold, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6Let's go shopping.
- SpeedyG, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7Bah. Maths? Colour? Someone's just trying to cheat at Scrabble. Wasting an extra "u" on top of it, screwing the poor soul who gets the Q. Tsk tsk tsk.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5Parents - This for you. Hope it helps.
I am shocked that this type math - this "cognitive poison" is still taught, but I've seen it first hand, so I know it's true. Like the "New Math" that I was taught as a chiled (i.e., set theory and alternate number bases), this new math also relies on young children doing something for which they are not mentally prepared and won't be until well after puberty: highly-abstract conjecture and induction.
These techniques require children to recognize patterns and real-time induce an appropriate algorithmic solution in order to solve the problem and, unlike the old way, there is no standard against which a student can check thier work except with a calculator. [Imagine having to do such a feat of mental calesthenics every time you went to the grocery store and had to do something as simple as compare prices!] Now...this would be fine if the kids were 16+ and well ground in traditional methods, but children before and right after puberty just don't think this way as the norm. At a younger age, they are more comfortable with rote methods at this level of abstraction (i.e., math) and, quite frankly, aren't really prepared to handle anything more than that.
Now...this doesn't mean that children can't abstract and induce - the Montessori method of "Pattern Recognition" is a prime example of the fact that they can when dealing with concrete things - they just can't do so on such an abstract level. So, they can induce from the concrete to abstract, but not reliably further abstract given an abstraction (i.e., an abstraction like numbers).
More than anyone of us, the educators - and math teachers especially - should know that children are just incapable of learning math in such a way. In fact, they do...so I wouldn't trust any damn one of them that told you differently.
Now...what are you to do as a parent in oredr to make sure your chils's math abilities are not crippled before they even learn math?
1. Make sure your child knows basic addition/subtraction cold to 100. Use money as a "concrete refferent".
2. Make sure your child memorizes the multiplication table cold.
3. Teach your child addition and subtraction using the "old" method.
4. Teach your child long division and multiplication using the "old method"
This should get them started. - saikhan, on 10/12/2007, -4/+9someone failed spelling...
(you could mean mathematics, but math is pretty common) - robot1122, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5(to child): How does the calc. solve problems?
(child): I dunno.... - sulf, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5This is damn true. I had my 12 grades of school in Europe and 2 years of a college in the USA. And trust me, I have seen enough difference in the way math is being taught here and there. I don't want to say about division and multiplication, enough has been said in the video. I'll say about conversion between different systems - for instance, decimal to binary. I had three instructors that tried to explain different methods of conversion at different classes, and all of them were terribly wrong. All of them drew some obscure tables before beginning the actual conversion, and wasted too much time for simple tasks. The worst part is that all students tried to follow the instructors and did conversion the wrong way. Well, technically it's not wrong as long as you follow the algorithm, but it takes so much time that I managed to do 100% of the problems during a test while the rest of the students did at most 30%. And no, I'm not a ***** genius, it's just students who are being taught by incompetent instructors.
- cypher35, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5I agree... I was taught the traditional method that she explains, but in my head I usually do my own reasoning on par with the TERC method. I wasn't taught it, but it's a logical progression once you start to learn to do most of it mentally.
I still think kids should learn the traditional method first before going after this overly complicated method. - prps, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5I'm a student of computer science in my last year of studies and I've learned the traditional algorithm for multiplication as well as division. Despite this, in my last years of study I've started to adopt a cluster algorithm to solve problems. The TERC approach is a great one for solving problems mentally and when precision of the result is not a must. I completely agree with NtHammer.
- kingkilr, on 10/12/2007, -5/+10Wow apparently everday math has gone to ***** in a matter of several years, I'm a sophmore in high school and i used that course all the way through 8th grade, I turned out ok(currently taking AP Statistics, next year is AP Calc)
- user777, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5TERC method (mental calculation) is actually good. A friend of mine uses it and can do double digit multiplication/division in less than 3 seconds, up to 4+ decimal points. Of course not all can do that, but TERC would teach you a way to be very efficient in mental calculation.
I came from Asia, Overthere, we did not need to "show all steps" and that is how we became really quick just thinking about the problem. It's the "show all steps" in American education that slows down kids in math. It teaches them algorithm, which requires little skill, and in so doing hinders their ability to develop efficient math skill.
My advice is for the geniuses in math, throw out all traditional methods. If they know the answer, just write it out, disregard all steps. For the rest non-geniuses, focus on the steps. If you can't solve the problem and work your way up the mental calculation challenge. - DigiRaven, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5How in the hell did schools from the 1980s to the 2000s ended up stupid? We were not allowed to use calculators until I was in college. The 4th and 5th grade books she showed who the hell allowed that to be passed by the school board? Is laziness part of the curriculum?
- tribble222, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4I was taught the traditional method but I use the terc method whenever I can. I never even knew it had a name, I just figured it out for myself and it works great. I don't have any problem with them teaching kids the terc method, but they should teach the standard algorithm along with it, AFTER they teach the terc method. (otherwise kids won't care about learning the terc method)
- groceryheist, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5I was homeschooled through middle school and I rock at math, even though im really lazy and barely study. It's probably because I was never confused by all these silly games they try to teach kids to play with numbers.
- T3hl33tg33k, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4That would be awesome!
- chownrus, on 10/12/2007, -3/+7http://how-to-spell-ridiculous.com/
- kickarse, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Basic math (multiplication, addition, subtraction, division) and common sense will yield far greater results then a slew of different ways to find the answer to a mathematics problem.
I'm happy there are teachers like the one above. - DigiRaven, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3no that is the correct way. A lot of geometry in algebra 2. Geometry not necessary in algebra 1.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3"We've all learned how to do large number multiplication in our heads by splitting the numbers into manageable pieces like 200 x 10 is 2000 and 16 x 5 is 80, combine the two pieces into each other and you have 216 x 15"
No you don't - ArchibaldTuttle, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3I got through engineering school with that inefficient algorithm, this is BS
- Cglass, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Maybe you could send some to the people over at Verizon .002 anyone?
- ellimist, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4The terc thing... she was making it much harder than it is. 20x31... 600+20. in your head. Not ***** hard.
- punkrockscks, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3no kidding. I'm a computer science student and just got out of my discrete math class and its amazing how many people can't do basic math problems without a calculator. the other two methods might be nice for the pure novelty and some mental math situations, but kids really should know the standard way of doing problems, it is the best, most reliable, and in general, the fastest.
- DesignerDave, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4Dugg down for inaccuracy... Really poor title. This is not the "Standard" book in the US for early Math Education. I never learned the "Cluster" method, but I feel sorry for anyone who had to put up with this algorithm.
- Paperthin, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2lol, her only reason for not liking that is b/c she get's confused sometimes...that just means you're what some people like to call "retarded."
- newyawker, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3I learned TERC in elementary school and my mom taught it. IT SUCKS BALLS.
- rohanch, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Yes. The TERC multiplication method is actually something people should know how to do, even if you don't use it for every problem.
Traditional multiplication isn't much use... If you're going to get out a pen and paper to work out a *multiplication* then why not just use a calculator anyway. In the end, you're going to end up doing things either in your head (TERC) or with a calculator. The only time when the long way is actually useful is if you need to do a complex multiplication and don't have a calculator available, which doesn't happen much in real life. Learning how to work out multiplication quickly in your head (with a terc-like method) is actually much much more useful later on.
Yes, you should know the long way, but you should be able to do it in your head too. At least from my experience in school, I can only think of 1 time in the last 3 years where I wished I could do long multiplication properly, and no times out of school at all.
Also, what happened to "short division"? I didn't even see it mentioned in the video. I can't think of a time where you'd use long division over short division. - jeromey11, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2blah blah blah! the ***** wrong!!! learn some american!
/end joke - redfox2600, on 10/12/2007, -3/+5Now you know the reason why Asians are so good at math.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 164 discussions
Digg is coming to a city (and computer) near you! Check out all the details on our 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is