Schools are making kids retarded

[Ksandra]

So my mom was showing me how her school has to teach multiplication to their kids. Lattice multiplication.

To understand the stupidity get to pages 3 and 4 of this link.

http://www.coolmath4kids.com/times-t...ication-1.html


Imagine when you're 30 and have to multiply 30 X 15 and drawing a whole bunch of boxes just to get the answer.


Note, this is not a suppliment they're teaching, this will be THE ONLY WAY these kids learn how to do multiplying...

This is also becoming scarily popular...

[Eaglestrike]

This is why I don't have any interest in creating offspring. Life would suck so much to have to go through school like this.

[Cyn]

Considering that most people can't do long multiplication without a calculator, I fail to see how devising a way to make it more fun and accessible leads to retardation.

Anyone who makes it to more advanced math (even something as simple as algebra) will be required to learn more traditional methods anyways.

[aurik]

Math is a tool of the devil.

[Ksandra]

Considering that most people can't do long multiplication without a calculator, I fail to see how devising a way to make it more fun and accessible leads to retardation.

because that requires more steps and as I said takes longer, added to that as boring as memorization is it's the best way to learn something. If it ain't broke don't fix it.

Anyone who makes it to more advanced math (even something as simple as algebra) will be required to learn more traditional methods anyways.

Ahh but there's the problem. Imagine being in HS about to take honors algebra, and can't do the multiplying it requires, having to be already so far behind because you have to relearn something the correct way because the other way was "more fun".

[aurik]

If you can't do multiplying, get the fuck out of honors algebra.

[Ksandra]

If you can't do multiplying, get the fuck out of honors algebra.

dun be an instigator!

[guartz]

This is why I don't have any interest in creating offspring. Life would suck so much to have to go through school like this.

montessori if you can afford it.

[Charla]

Here's the thing though, the "traditional method" for learning multiplication (as far as I know) looks like:

59
X 41
----
9
+ 50
+ 360
+2000
-----
2419

In terms of the steps, it seems to be the same thing: multiply the individual digits, then add down the columns. This is essentially the same thing as multiplying the individual digits and adding down diagonals, it simply looks more like a normal equation and less like a learning device. It seems to me that the ability to do the whole thing mentally (which presumably is the eventual goal) would be acquired naturally after using either method long enough. Is there some reason that adding down a diagonal makes it harder to memorize than adding down a column?

[pohibaba]

After becoming a teacher I learned how fucking stupid public education truly is. I don't care if I have to work three jobs and live in a trailer home, my kids are going to a private school.

[Kaylia]

There is no correct way to learn how to do basic arithmetics. No matter how you look at it, you're learning a mnemonic trick to deal with basic operation in a base 10 system. It's not a deep understanding of mathematics like some people seem to think.

Which method is going to be the best to do 4569 x 8275? The classic one we learned that consist of placing the the number on top of each other? Or this box method?

Of course, I'm used to the old one.
4569
x 8275
_____
22845
+319830
+913800
+36552000 = 37808475

I'm going to admit it is really to make a mistake with number you carry over, especially when the number get larger. In the end, your paper is going to be a huge mess, and the chance you fuck up somewhere is relatively high with this method, even if you know how to use it.

The box method on the other hand is pretty clean (need a lot of white space to avoid making a huge clusterfuck tho). Every digit is multiplied with another digit individually, and the addition is done at the very end. It's a pretty clean and quick method imo, especially since it was the first time I used it.


Pro: Clean, less chance of screwing up with bad multiplication or number carried over
Con: A kid might not be able see what happen as easily as they could with the old method, since the number aren't aligned vertically. Most adult wont have any problem understanding the method (which is more or less the same), but I can't say every kid will see the "weigth" of every digit.

because that requires more steps and as I said takes longer, added to that as boring as memorization is it's the best way to learn something. If it ain't broke don't fix it.

This trick is to help you calculate large number. Anything under 9x9 has to be memorized no matter what. No point memorizing multiplication after this, unless you're american and still use weird system for distance (will need to learn up to 12).

[Kaylia]

Here's the thing though, the "traditional method" for learning multiplication (as far as I know) looks like:

59
X 41
----
9
+ 50
+360
+200
-----
619

In terms of the steps, it seems to be the same thing: multiply the individual digits, then add down the columns. This is essentially the same thing as multiplying the individual digits and adding down diagonals, it simply looks more like a normal equation and less like a learning device. It seems to me that the ability to do the whole thing mentally (which presumably is the eventual goal) would be acquired naturally after using either method long enough. Is there some reason that adding down a diagonal makes it harder to memorize than adding down a column?

I don't think you can memorize one better than the other. With both method, you're going to end with the same amount of number to add up. 9,50,360, 200 or 9,5, 36, 20 is pretty much the same. It might be easier, but I doubt it

Anyway, the only good method to do it mentally is rounding down the number, and taking care of the single number after. I can't do 420 * 521 with any of those methods. 420* 500 + 420*21 only




I believe the other method is done to avoid mistake when you do it on paper. Because of the diagonals and the way you write number, it's pretty hard to forget a number (you will have a blank square), or fuck up with the number carried over.

[Correction]

new method requires a lot of setting up the 'lattice.'

Or having special (and likely expensive) graph paper to get it done for you.

old method requires ordinary blank sheets of paper and as much space as your smallest legible penmanship can require.

It may be fun and new but it also requires people who help them with their math outside of school retrain how to do basic arithmetic, which probably isn't good for the kids who actually get the benefit of off-campus tutoring from parents or elsewhere.

Old method wins.

[SephYuyX]

As said, anything past 12x12 is pointless. Calculators need to be used more in schools, instead of being frowned upon.

There should be no situation that you need to use math and not have a calc available, everything under the sun has a calc built in.

And the rare chance you need to use multiplication without a calc, everyone can do the gimp method of: 12x12 = 12+12=24+12=36+12=48+12=60+12=72+12=84+12=96+12=10 8+12=120+12=132+12=144

It may take longer, but if youre in a situation that you dont have a calc, chances are it isnt that important, and if youre stranded on an island, you have time.

[Daveys]

Here's the thing though, the "traditional method" for learning multiplication (as far as I know) looks like:

59
X 41
----
9
+ 50
+360
+2000
-----
2419

In terms of the steps, it seems to be the same thing: multiply the individual digits, then add down the columns. This is essentially the same thing as multiplying the individual digits and adding down diagonals, it simply looks more like a normal equation and less like a learning device. It seems to me that the ability to do the whole thing mentally (which presumably is the eventual goal) would be acquired naturally after using either method long enough. Is there some reason that adding down a diagonal makes it harder to memorize than adding down a column?

Fixed. You forgot to add a zero place.

[Rockstaru]

Did he just self-own, or prove his point?

[Kaylia]

new method requires a lot of setting up the 'lattice.'

Or having special (and likely expensive) graph paper to get it done for you.

old method requires ordinary blank sheets of paper and as much space as your smallest legible penmanship can require.

It may be fun and new but it also requires people who help them with their math outside of school retrain how to do basic arithmetic, which probably isn't good for the kids who actually get the benefit of off-campus tutoring from parents or elsewhere.

Old method wins.

Eh? I just did it with a relatively large number with a normal pen on a normal sheet of paper. It does take up more space, but like I said, it reduce the risk of fucking up.


And retrain how to do basic arithmetics? Come on...it took me 10min to read the method, understand it and use it on a 4digit*4digit multiplication. Anyone who use it will understand it's the same freakin method, with a minor twist to it (the use of diagonal instead of having to add 0),

[Correction]

I admit I suck at drawing straight lines. The lattice method just seems more error prone UNLESS you have a ruler. And I don't always have a ruler on me when I need to do some figures on a desk.

Also, kids can't even keep a crayon within the lines of a large, thick-bordered polygon. I don't envy the parents who check their grade school-age kid's math homework and seeing a spiderweb of agony barely containing the one-digit numbers flowing like a luge across the page.

[Therin]

I'd just like to say that I'm a fucking Physics major and I don't even understand the OP.

I'd punch whoever tried to teach my kids that.

[Kaylia]

Did he just self-own, or prove his point?

He wasnt making a point toward any, but this kind of mistake is exactly why there is a new method

As said, anything past 12x12 is pointless. Calculators need to be used more in schools, instead of being frowned upon.

There should be no situation that you need to use math and not have a calc available, everything under the sun has a calc built in.

And the rare chance you need to use multiplication without a calc, everyone can do the gimp method of: 12x12 = 12+12=24+12=36+12=48+12=60+12=72+12=84+12=96+12=10 8+12=120+12=132+12=144

It may take longer, but if youre in a situation that you dont have a calc, chances are it isnt that important, and if youre stranded on an island, you have time.

One part of me want to agree, but saying this is dangerous. I agree it's useless to solve this kind of equation, but I wouldnt encourage people, especially kid, to use calculator

You need to see it as a training for your brain. Being able to solve it quickly is going to facilate the learning of more complex algebra eventually, to express a problem mathematically..etc