I think kids should know there multiplication by the end of 5th grade. I am a Geomertry Teacher in Texas. I used to teach Algebra, and i taught my students algorithms. I dont know why the teachers in washington dont like teaching algorithms. I think they r wasteing there money on those textbooks and workbooks.
I agree, I love teaching algorithms.....Why not? That's what math is about....all math is full of algorithms and symbols....Is like teaching a new language. Could anybody learn a new language without its grammar??!!! .I had the same experience in my life, went to get my graduate degree after 20 years and find my young classmates, amazing unprepared to learn, more math, trigonometry, calculus...
@CooCurrent She's trying to make the other method of doing 26 x 31 look long and inefficient. But that's how I would do it! (I'm doing A level maths at the moment). In reality there may be more steps to finding the answer; but each step goes extremely fast and so you end up with an answer faster (in my opinion).
I never knew the traditional algorithms for multiplication or division. But that's hasn't held me back at all. It's just really not an important skill, because we already have calculators that do that sort of Mathematics far more efficiently than humans ever could. What matters is to develop an understanding in order to keep moving into higher levels of mathematics, where there usually isn't a single algorithm to compute a particular type of problem (I'm currently a Maths undergraduate).
What a cumbersome way to learn basic math skills! Thanks to Ms McDermott for exposing the fallacies of this new approach to arithmetic.All children are capable of memorizing basic arithmetic while in grammar school.Set your expectations high for them. Taking advantage of this stage(the parroting or grammar stage) of their growth reaps great rewards later on.If they don't learn basic skills early in education, they will have a difficult time later on solving more complex problems.
This really angers me. Teaching algorithms should definitely not be the goal of maths education. The clustering method allows the student, in time, to understand the algorithms commonly used, but what's more, it teaches children about the distributive, associative and commutative properties of multiplication, without having to use such big words.
@conormmmm the (uneducated?) Russian peasants use a halving-doubling and adding algorithm. all algorithms are based on distributive, associate and commutative properties. they should also teach students to critically compare the Russian/Egyptian, standard right-to-left, left-to-right and their own crappy algorithms and learn what is good and bad. having crappy teachers is another issue -- not a good excuse to criticise curriculum based on this.
nice video, thank your sharing this, it help the mind of student to think unique and better ways. It is the way that education purpose is not only to full fill the minds of students with facts, but it also teach them how to think better. great! keep up the good work and leave a better life.
Math - for some, this might the most terrifying subject. But, if you look at it closely, perhaps, this as well could become the most entertaining one. think of it.
I am an eleven year old girl who LOVES math. I get full marks on every math test and I just love, love, love practicing! This video didn't even help because I already knew how to do EVERYTHING in this video! -3
Honestly if some college people couldn't do 6 x 4 then they must be quite uneducated because I could do that in my sleep, no
offense to people.
Anyway thanks for listening! Hope you tilled the video anyway :D
Math is not about multiplying shit, it's about REASONING :/ The second method (TURK or whatever) is the only one I can use to calculate bigger numbers without a pencil and paper.
At the end of the day this skill should be executed in the shortest possible time be it in real life or in exams. You have just made the process 4 times longer. Why not instead you invest in time instead for pupils to master their times tables?
Everything old is new again. "New Math," so called, raised it's ugly head in the 70's with the same nonsensical appeals to the supposed understanding of the cognitive and conceptual developmental use in approaching and learning math. The argument goes, that children are pictoral.. blah blah.
As far as actually being useful, or proven,or moving children along in their development, so they can understand symbols and logical systems, it does only harm.
Not only is she completely correct we should take it further and track how this TERC/Reasoning nonsense got into our classrooms. Wish she was in my 4th grade nephews school district because it's devastating to watch him and many of his friends struggle with fairly simple math problems due to this absurd method of education. They should track down and bring to account the main players in what's obviously some sort of educational scam on our children and taxpayers.
(It's good to come back every few months and look at this great video. The methods taught in Reform Math are so wonderfully diabolical. They are not math programs. They are anti-math programs.)
Being able to 'multiply' (repeated addition) by rote is a long reach from a complete understanding of the mathematics behind the operation.
If all that is accomplished is memorization of an algorithm, number sense will ultimately limit the depth of mathematics learned later. (i.e. read 'drop out')
A student should learn an algorithm, but with full comprehension
By the way, some of the basic mathematics demonstrated is severely flawed. (i.e. an '=' sign may not be abused)
I'm sorry, but everything she said is completely full of crap. Has she ever attended a college course that is specifically designed for HOW to teach math in a classroom? My guess: Probably not. We are learning that reasoning is ESSENTIAL for mastery of mathematics. And calling the U.S. Standard Algorithm the "universally known" algorithm, is complete crap too.
@coolpeople469 You can learn about reasoning and such all you want in a college course teaching HOW to teach math in a classroom... but guess what? The district dictates what you will teach and how by telling you here are the tools we need you to teach our students. If they hand you a book with 50 pages worth of a world tour in it and a bunch of crayola coloring book nonsense... THAT is what you have to work with... no matter WHAT you thought it would be or learned in your college course.
Can I just say that students in your calculus class in college learned math using standard algorithms... to the TERC/Reasoning method! Learn your material and your facts before speaking!!!!
The nice thing about TERC is that you can use these methods to do calculations mentally, without pencil and paper; you also gain a better understanding of numbers in general. The problem is that it's just too hard for a lot of students. The other methods are just crap. The "standard algorithms" are at least better in that respect, but by no means perfect. The saddest part of math education is that "story problems" are almost universally dreaded, and I know of no good way to remedy that.
@rexmcnish why did she say she gets confused then? the techniques are not inefficient if you understand the application of them. I can make any problem take 100 steps to complete if you write everything down and look far more difficutl then it really is....and in response to your question: I have not authored a book, but my engineering degree says I know a little about math and problem solving.
I never learned "advanced" math above the basics, even going into highschool and I still don't see where algebra or any of that other very confusing crap is so useful that you HAVE TO learn it in order to live in real world.
@LivinWorstNightmare It needs to be taught in order to ensure students have the knowledge to go into advanced mathematical and scientific studies. Few will but if "advanced" math, that is algebra and such as you put it is not taught how can any students be expected to go onto these advanced fields (calculus the sciences and such). In turn the country would fall far behind scientifically.
Also a basic level of math/scientific knowledge is needed so people can vote in an educated manner.
If they need it they can go into college and learn it, it shouldn't be taught in high school if most the kids are never going to use the crap. I am way past high school and never used this cluster fuck migraine math in my life.
@LivinWorstNightmare Basic understanding of algebra is important if you want to get into sciences and business. Like the lady said in the video, she needs calculus, trigonometry and algebra for meteorology. Even business majors need to understand a little bit of calculus. Also, being able to do algebra expands your mental skills and help you to work through problems logically. Logic problems in the real world are not always about math.
This is sad at how bad America is lacking in math. When I visited other countries, kids had their multiplication tables up to 9 memorized in 1rst grade at most and by 5th grade Algebra was being taught. America needs to stop slacking off and actually start teaching.
@misses165 I agree that American education is lacking, but you can't compare all education systems from other countries to ours. If you look at countries that start formal education at the same as as the US does we are comparable. Many Asian and various other countries that excel in education start formal education at age 3. The earlier education begins, the more educated we can become. Think about it, young brains are more actively involved in learning.
British IGs, and people there are moaning about calculus being pushed back off IGs and into ASs. I knew my 12 times tables fluently by grade 4 and could easily divide long numbers by grade 5. Seriously...
Goodness, I learned Everyday math in elementary school and HATED it. Sometimes I would just go home and cry over my homework, and my mom and dad couldn't help me because they had no idea how we were supposed to do the stuff. I learned lattice in fifth grade, and had my dad teach me the standard way. In high school, there are still people in my geo/trig class who do lattice. Also, i only know EM division, which take forever. In short, EM sucks.
the way the "everyday math" teaches it is the way i perform complex math in my head (by factoring to easier number). Yes i learned with the so called "algorithm" but in reality the way the two books teach it provide the student a better understanding of how math really works. This approach will make algebra easier for students. Just because this lady can not perform these simple techniques with out confusion is of no consequence to validity of the techniques.
@Joe2000King i guess you have never learned algebra. i never disagreed with her. all i said is that all methods should be taught to build more connections.
I grew up in India and everybody in my class had mastered 2-digit multiplication and division by end of 3rd std. We weren't even allowed near calculators at home. Calculators found on students in school would be confiscated. We memorized multiplication tables till 20.Sure it took time, but knowing the basics makes you really efficient in the long run.When we were allowed calculators in Pre-University College, we used it mostly for 4 digit fractions.Knowing the basics really helps in the long run
@Joe2000King I don't believe in perdition. I will die, certainly, but not at the hands of God or of you, and certainly not because of what I said in a YouTube comments box. You really should go and get an appointment with a psychiatrist. You are not well.
@Joe2000King If you look at what I originally wrote, you will see that I agree that children should be able to do sums correctly and efficiently, i.e. the way that the woman in the video explained. The phrase 'I think it's a bit harsh' was meant to be mildly humorous. In truth I think it's completely wrong to call her an idiot but I think it is much, much worse for you to wish me dead because you think I disagree with you. You should see a psychiatrist.
I work in a AIS dept that uses everyday math and the video says all that I fear is behind our dropping maths scores in this country. Ironically, the reason the dept I work in has been ramped up to include kindergarteners is because they have seen a 40 percent drop in our math scores in recent years. Go figure! Wonder if it has anthing to do with EDM and NCLB! Soon, Haiti will have better math scores than the United States.
@Joe2000King Obviously you do not understand the content of my comment. I'll add this: I actually like the way she presents the computational algorithms. Not that I agree with the criticism of Everyday Math. My comment is that she does not delve into 99% of what the program is about--stuff that any decent practitioner of mathematical sciences should recognize and understand.
The partial products method is actually pretty good, certainly as efficient as any standard multiplication algorithm. Why not teach an efficient algorithm and explain WHY it works. I don't care what is taught, as long as people understand why it works. That's clearly also an important thing. It's also fairly clearly the emphasis of these newer curricula. I don't see why a middle ground between rigid algorithms and deep understanding can't be found. But to stunt evolution in teaching methods...
Give your kids this simple test. $ value of a roll of 50 pennies? $ value of a roll of 40 nickels? $ value of a roll of 50 dimes? $ value of a roll of 40 quarters? Dollar value of mixed bag of 78 pennies, 133 nickels, 152 dimes & 39 quarters?. How many quarters back for the whole bag & what other change? This is 4th & 5th grade math that I saw grads unable to do.
I stick by my arguments that many HS grads have no grasp of the math basics. I was serious when I told about job applicants not being able to pass a simple 10 question test on values of rolls of coins or a bag of mixed coins. Math is thrown at them now in helter skelter fashion, with bits of higher math being taught before the 4 basics are learned. My 5th grader is also being taught rounding in ways that make no sense at all.
It's Comical how stupid the "new age" methods of teaching are. I had so much trouble going to middle school from elementary because the stupid teachers were teaching "mental math" and not REGULAR DIVISION/MULTIPLICATION
I know Everyday Math pretty well. There's a lot she's not telling you. For example, the authors believe that topics like data analysis, functions, probability, and theory of numbers actually are in the realm of early mathematics education. (Kids are smarter than just machines for grinding out 133/6.) Knowing that she has an advanced education in those areas, it surprises me she wouldn't recognize the approach to them found in Everyday Math. Want more atmospheric scientists? Do functions EARLY.
@dylanparker72 It sounds like you are talking about partial products, and I agree with you. Just as long as they understand why it works and how to use it, it is a great strategy, especially for mental math, like you said. I always go back to "accurate and efficient", and that might mean different strategies for different people. It seems the majority of people have the most efficiency with standard algorithm, but **understanding** is key! It sounds like we are on the same page, more or less!
@dylanparker72 I'm amazed you are NOT against that! I teach middle school math and our elementary schools use Everyday Math - the overwhelming issue that students have now is they have NO knowledge of why these methods work. Sure, they can draw pretty grids and put numbers in them (lattice) and it's more fun than standard algorithm, but there is no place value knowledge or understanding. Any method used must be BOTH *accurate* and *efficient*... after all, is that what math is all about???
Teachers who use everyday math teach the standard algorithm. The other methods are used to teach children to do math mentally. By just looking at the textbooks she does not realize what happens in the average classroom.
Plus, she says everyone should know that stuff by fifth grade. i say 3rd grade. ALGEBRA should be taught in fifth. This is not "advanced logic" they encourage them to choose the method that works best for them, but all methods are shown, so kids would understand how it works and the logic behind the problems. elementary school kids are smart enough to understand that. and another problem. If the kids peers were studying, they would want to study too, there wouldnt be this problem of no practice!
boy she is dumb. i agree, you should use the easiest method and stuff, but learning other methods gives you a twisted way of learning it, giving more "ah ha" moment later in algebra
Bottom line - this women out performed her classmates in math after being out of school for TWENTY years. Current math program - Not working.
What they teach in these textbooks is fine for getting the kids to understand how the algorithms works. However if all I learned was methods in Turk and Everyday Math I would think Math was this tedious, laborious process.
I completely understand her, but I guess it depends which way you feel comfortable with. It is not complicated at all, but I prefer to do it the way I learned in school Great Job though on the video!
I agree that the critics of this presentation are clueless. Probably dislike her vibe & assign negative attributes to her based on dislike of look-alikes. I'm an engineer, I know math. The current two-times chess champ is an Indian with an accountantcy degree, so no doubt he does math that standard old way. Pluck a Hindu math teacher from 2000 years ago and he'll do a better job than any of the advocates of the systems under critique (up to but not including calculus) Algebra came from Hindustan
If you haven’t seen it watch “The Obama Deception HQ Full Length Version” now on youtube and (if you like it) please RE-POST to every youtube video you can find the time to. :) We need real change and it starts with getting the truth out there. Bachmann, Perry and Romney would just be more of the same..
why don't they just teach the base method or vedic i don't really know the actual name for it but i found it to be so easy i could solve the problems without a calculator pencil or paper all the way up to multiplying 4 digits its easier than all three of the standard algorithm
why don't they just teach the base method or vedic i don't really know the actual name for it but i found it to be so easy i could solve the problems without a calculator all the way up to multiplying 4 digits its easier than all three of the standard algorithm
Shool newer realy tech math they have been teching counting and maybee som problemsolving. When we exit out of the industrial-, knowledge-, informationerea the use of it have gradualu declined.
THE US SYSTEM IS SO FAR BEHIND MATH I KNOW FROM EXPERIANCE ALL THE MATH TEACHERS HERE IN THE US aRE TERRIBLE OR THEY GIVE THE "GOOD" TEACHERS TO THE HONORS STUDENTS WHEN OTHER COUNTRIES TEACH MATH THEY DONT USE FANCY WORDS LIKE "NUMERATOR" OR "DENIMINATOR" THEY SAY BOTTOM NUMBER AND TOP NUMBER WE NEED TO TEACH MATH IN A WHY THAT KIDS CAN UNDERSTAND IT AND ALWAYS TEACH THE BASICS NOT RUSH THROUGH THE BOOK IN A WEEK AND EXPECT KIDS TO LEARN IT WE NEED REFORM NOW
Wow, the people criticizing her are clueless. I am a mathematician with an advanced degree in mathematical statistics. The primary reason we are so far behind other parts of the world are because the educationists in this country are idiots. They keep dumbing down the system and not teaching the basics required to be good at mathematics. The traditional ways work better than anything else if you take the time to explain the logic.
This woman is an idiot. Her degree is not even in math! What makes her feel qualified to judge math teaching?? I bet all the math she has ever seen is calculation based. And in a very arguable sense that's not really math. Success in math requires computational competence for sure, but it also requires the ability to reason through problems and (open ended) questions in a logical way. This is the point that seems lost upon her.
@EIgen100 I think it's a bit harsh to call her an idiot. What she is talking about here is really arithmetic, not maths (I'm English). Children should be taught the most efficient way to 'do sums'. Some of the other ways are OK for helping with mental arithmetic but are very slow and cumbersome when working with a pencil and paper. Teaching kids to rely on calculators and computers leaves them vulnerable to being ripped off in the real world.
@daqueen255 I have nothing against calculators. The problem is that children are brought up to rely on them. I have seen teenagers who could not add up three items of shopping, each less than a pound. They have no idea how much it costs and therefore no idea how much change they should get from a five pound note, say. Imagine them when they are a bit older and dealing with big sums of money. They will be ripe to be ripped off. Everyone should be able to do mental arithmetic.
@daqueen255 I'm a real mathematician and I don't have to use a calculator. You learn to do the problems without a calculator first, then you use a calculator later on. The whole point of learning is to get you to think, any idiot can use a calculator. Will the calculator set up the word problems for you? No! They just make the word problems ridiculously easier than they should be.
@MrVincent1897 I question why YT flagged your comment as SPAM. I guess you made too much sense. Your other comment that made it to my email was removed altogether.
@daqueen255 The so-called "standard US algorithm" is used all over the world, & is what all mathmaticians & engineers use. It is the most efficient method, requiring the fewest number of steps & pulls from memory. The other methods shown were mostly successive approximation techniques like those of some AtoD converters - dumb machines, yet they do a better job of it than the alternate systems under critique. The "new" systems are kludgy and an attempt to remove the metaphysics = no fun.
she is not an idiot. you clearly are on the other hand, since you completely missed the point.
by the way, the standard 'US' algorithm is just 'the algorithm'. the rest of methods are impossibly obtuse for a young mind, and they don't help in speed or comprehension.
While not all countires use the traditional method many do. So it's as much an international method as any other. Also, the mathematical statement you criticize was her providing an example of how TURK works, a method she does not like. And she explains the reasoning as she goes along. You are just taking things out of context in an effort to discredit her.
she is ridiculous - our education system is based on factory mentality and does this lady ever wonder why all of our higher math careers are going to kids educated in other countries? Current adults were educated in the way she is suggesting...practice practice practice of traditional algorithm. How about applying a little reasoning...let kids use reasoning to understand numbers and operations FIRST...then work toward mastery of the standard algorithm.
Another issue is to demystify Math for kids. I was a Math idiot when I got to College. I took beginning Algebra twice before things finally clicked. What helped is the undergrad Teaching Assistants who demystified things! I then passed Trigonometry in four weeks in Summer School with no problem! Later, my Calculus class was taught by a High School teacher who made it all straightforward! They all applied Math to real-world examples and made it FUN! But I still had to MEMORIZE things!
She's right! I took Applied Math (Computer Science), so I'm an expert in both Math and Logic. The first problem is that Math is taught like it's an art form, when in reality it's a toolbox with a bunch of different wrenches (algorithms). The KEY to Math is MEMORIZATION of the Standard Algorithms. The second problem is that kids today have deficit attention spans which prohibit memorization. Get them off those lousy reactive video games and watch their Math scores improve!
The question was asked: "this is all well and good if you want a bunch of kids who are really good and mindlessly performing algorithms, but what happens when they have to examine a complex problem whether that be in mathematics, science, or life and they have to devise their own algorithm?"
This will be a lot better if one has a thorough understanding of the basic tools used to make those "new algorithms". And one of the major tools is a knowledge of these alogrithms.
As a high school youth I had severe impediment to memorizing geometric algorithms; But I was able to reason through test, managing highest test scores. Advancing to higher levels of math, memorizing algorithms freed up time. Old school algorithms are a tool for independence for those who do not possess the mathematically prone mind. Teachers who have a solid understanding of math, then impart the tools and knowledge to students; Old School algorithm + Understanding = A mind with no limits!
As a high school youth I had severe impediment to memorizing geometric algorithms; But I was able to reason through test, managing highest test scores. Advancing to higher levels of math, memorizing algorithms freed up time. Old school algorithms are a tool for independence for those who do not possess the mathematically prone mind. Competent teaches have a deep understanding of math, then impart the tools and knowledge to students. Old School algorithm + Understanding = A mind with no limits!
this is all well and good if you want a bunch of kids who are really good and mindlessly performing algorithms, but what happens when they have to examine a complex problem whether that be in mathematics, science, or life and they have to devise their own algorithm?
That said, I believe there's merit in actually teaching the standard algorithm (if not the memorising that goes into effectively using it), especially to strike the contrast with division. I only understood long division proper when I was presented it in the setting of polynomials. Till then I had been using heuristic methods like the ones in the textbooks from the video (things a text needn't bother with making seem a puffed up protocol). But it would be useful to have a sense of the algorithm.
Armed with these 26 x 31, as per her example, is just (26 x 30) + 26 = (260 x 3) + 26 = 600 + 180 + 26 = 806.
Just as efficient as the standard method, but it requires you to be more aware of place value than simply knowing when to 'carry over'.
It seems the presenter simply has trouble understanding that all of these methods are about the same 'complexity', and that in an intuitive sense the new methods can be more approachable. Needlessly lengthening steps to argue against them is laughable.
She goes to a fair bit out of her way to make the 'clustered approach' seem clunky and inefficient. In the process she misuses an equality sign as well, but be that as it may.
As a child I never saw the point of memorising tables for multiplication in order to effectively use the standard algorithm she illustrates at the beginning. I only bothered with multiplication (and division) by 2 and multiplication by 3 and 10 (just adding a zero at the end)...
Wow. If she REALLY understood mathematics, she'd understand that the currently common algorithms she espouses are not universal. She should stick to weather prediction. Now that's something with enough variability to have a great discussion about.
how exactly are those algorithms not universal? if you're trying to act all knowing, rest assured somebody will make it very clear you have no clue what you're talking about.
Cluster problems??? More like cluster fuck.... This cluster method is good for doing fast mental math but is NOT an acceptable introductory teaching method.... The cluster method involves an understanding of algebra which is not known by kids doing learning addition... What kind of ass-raving idiot thinks this method is ok for the lil' ones???
You had better understand place value long before you get to multiplication. The failure to understand place value has been proven to be the number one deficiency among U.S. students- I would suggest that this is the case because most teachers do not understand place value either.
Also, not many of us can solve math problems using the traditional methods in our heads? However, by looking at how she taught partial products and partial quotients, I bet I could do those in my head pretty easily. Just sayin.
It’s interesting that McDermott blames these curriculums (EDM and Turk sp.) for her college classmate’s inefficiency in math. EDM is far less popular in schools than traditional math, so logic tells us that most of her peers were taught using one of the traditional curricula. right??? Not only that, but EDM has only been out in its current form for few years... So the elementary kids who have used the current EDM would still be in school right now, wouldn’t they?
when I have a kid and he or she wants to know the why of math they can take a "philosophy of math" class in college. And if they want to see how math is used they can take a physics class in HS.
But by the time they get to HS I want them to be able to DO math. I'm fine with teaching all the methods and letting the kid decide
But it is delusional to base an elementary class on conceptual understanding because human brain doesn't gain the ability to think abstractly till about the mid-teens.
@litnight Unfortunately you promote many myths in your post. Children start abstracting at an early age. They don't confuse the word "dog" with an actual dog. They recognize that the word is an abstraction of the animal called "dog." Furthermore, adults and children have a difficult time learning meaningless information. If you don't help children explain why, they will invent a reason why. Thus, many college students I work with think that 6/8 is double 3/4.
@litnight Note, too, that you are encouraging a lack of rigor with mathematics. You don't want children to learn to reason mathematically, just perform calculations. I fail to see how this differs from handing a child a calculator and having them use it.
So this woman's inability to comprehend unfamiliar algorithms makes the EM program a poor one? Go back to doing the weather...please don't be involved in student standards.
When he was asked whether he could multiply 7 digit numbers in his head, the famous physicist Richard Feynman said, "It's not even true that I can multiply two-digit numbers in my head. I can do one-digit numbers only."
The idea that people need to know the most efficient available algorithm for multiplying on *pieces of paper* is ridiculous. In 1911, they didn't have anything better. In 2011, we do have something better, so why don't we use it?
@cosmic101010 Yes, anything that would help students make sense of mathematics is "dumbing down." Unfortunately, most US adults have no idea what mathematical rigor is because they were never exposed to mathematical reasoning, just following a bunch of rules that they don't understand. This is the real dumbing down. It's been taking place for generations and now few US adults understand any of the mathematics they learned in school. They can repeat the rules, but can't solve problems.
Relying purely on formulas (algorithms) teaches how to solve a problem. But it does not open the mind to upcoming, increasingly complex problems. It's way better to motivate the pupils to 'think' about a problem, and what it is, instead of just making them memorize (which excludes active thinking) a simple formula.
Why are mathematics useful, asked a pupil, it's just a bunch of random formulas to apply as one see fit.
Response: ???
THIS is the issue today. Let them think about problems more!
I do the partial product method in my head, but I agree the standard algorithm is more efficient on paper.
What I think should be done is teaching the standard algorithm, but also teach mental math after mastery of the algorithm.
The TERC method I actually think is what we do, anyway. They take the guessing to the entire number rather than pieces. I think the standard algorithm is still better, but representing 133 = 6x22 + 1 is a powerful concept that I do think should be taught.
@MyOverflow The reason is that it gives another perspective to what the pieces of a division problem are:
a = bq + r, where a is the dividend, b is the divisor, q is the quotient and r is the remainder. This representation of a number comes up in college mathematics (number theory).
I do agree, though. The standard algorithms are better to teach and the other concepts that are learned from these alternative methods should be taught by themselves after mastery of the algorithms themselves.
@MyOverflow How can someone make sense of the traditional algorithm with using partial products? Perhaps you are suggesting that understanding why the algorithm works and just know how would be better? BTW you are misusing the work "concept" in your post. You are referring to procedures, not concepts. Procedure are not ideas but are often supported by ideas.
I like the way these new works teach. Why did she write so much extra for the newer methods, while condensing her own? She tried to make the others look bad.
I think it's unfair to assume these methods don't work. They're more intuitive.
@psychofish25 Well, I have kids who were taught by EM. They have no concept of math. They are smart girls, but both have trouble doing simple multiplication in their heads or on paper. The processes have been presented in a totally confusing manner, with a lot of jumping around. Having the basics down in your mind is very important for math. Everything else is built on them. I am trying to catch my daughters up at home this summer.
@usaruss They need to bring back corporal punishment. I've taught these college kids and had to kick them out of class for texting. They walk in and out and are disrespectful. Then their parents call up when they don't get A's. When the student turned into a customer we became doomed. I worked at a private college, initials BSC, in Boston and the college president who has an MBA, referred to the students as customers in his email instructions to staff and faculty.
This is the reason the clerk has no idea what your change should be when you give her a 5, 10 or twenty dollar bill. Also, they don't know how to use a calculator and calculate the tax...therefore, when the grid goes down. You are screwed, they can't perform with electricity to run the machines. I personally know many 7th graders who can not read a clock (analog), they've got to see the numbers digitally. Idiots
Teaching students to reason through problems is a good idea. Forcing them to use an inefficient, cumbersome method for a simple concept to fulfill the aforementioned idea is, as evidence shows, stupid.
@pyVlad You make an excellent point. Why do we continue to teach the US traditional subtraction algorithm when other algorithms exist that are more efficient and less error prone? Of course we know the answer, because most adults wouldn't understand these algorithms. Most adults don't know why the traditional subtraction algorithm works anyway. My solution: have everyone use a calculator. They're not learning why the rules work anyway.
The cluster reasoning is a joke b/c what if you have problem like 34543553 x 976346? But the partial product method can actually be used to explain the standard method but the standard is by far the most efficient and simple to use.
@bananian Good point. I can't recall every multiplying a 6 digit and an 8 digit number together, but we need to be doing this by hand because so much learning takes place when we do so. Try having today's adults multiply 3465 x 7835 together and see how many answers you get. Of course, the good old days were just wonderful when everyone learned everything! Also, note that the traditional algorithm is not always the most efficient procedure. I can multiply 39 x 41 without using it much faster.
it's just the standard method can be used without using mental math or calculator so if say you are stuck in the woods and you need to figure out food rationing or w/e, you can use the standard method without needing to be extremely smart.
@bananian I'm not sure what you're talking about. Who takes paper and pencil into the woods? My suggestion is to bring your phone (and thus a calculator). So we don't want students to use mental math? Why because it's more efficient? Because most adults who learned traditional algorithms can't use mental math? Because we don't know any other way?
@bananian said "What are the odds of your cell phone lasting the period where rationing is required?" The odds are about the same as you needing the traditional algorithm for the purpose you describe. So we should base our teaching on the 1 in 10^6 chance that you might need to use it when lost in the woods? I'd like to be a little more forward thinking than this.
@sleeper2345 The problem is, too many people cannot multiply 12 x 12, much less a 3465 x 7835. My daughters are terribly behind in math. We work with them at home to try & bring them up to speed. Everyday math & other materials are so scattered & illogical, kids would do better counting on their fingers. Kids are exposed to bits & pieces of math at all levels, but before they master the simple basics. I had employees in the 1980's who could not add up a $100 cashbox or jar of change.
@usaruss My suggestion is to use partial products to multiply 12 x 12 and to use 2465 x 7835 to use a calculator. Who do you know that is uses the traditional algorithm? The "basics" do not involve mindlessly memorizing algorithms that we don't understand (though this is the tradition in the US). If students don't understand why an algorithm works, I fail to see how this differs from using a calculator. However, you do an excellent job pointing to the failures of traditional US teaching.
@sleeper2345 I don't say calculators should not be used anywhere. I use one often to save time and do very tedious calculations. I am saying kids should be able to do a lot of that without a calculator. Most kids should be able to memorize x tables up to 12 x 12. It is not that hard. A lot of math is done every day, "on the fly", where we need quick answers. And why teach a method that takes longer? Time is in ever shorter supply these days, with everyone being pushed to the max.
@usaruss Agreed. So we should be efficient with learning. Teaching students mindless algorithms that they don't understand and can't apply correctly is a waste of time. Thus, most mathematics teaching in the US is a waste of time. About 3% of US students in algebra can actually use it to solve a problem. Similarly, we waste an inordinate amount of time teaching students algorithms that they don't understand and will never use. Time to enter the 21st century.
Respond to this video...I see a lot of criticism of learning math well. I suspect some of these folks are similar to my employees who could not count up a bag of change from a customer.
@privatepile762 You mean constructionist? The former is a theory of knowledge, while the latter is an actual theory of learning. Besides, the basic principle that physical experience can help learning is completely valid, but like any general rule, it can be misapplied.
"Teaching standard algorhithms is inherently stupid and nonsensical. It doesn't teach children to think and understand, it teaches you how to do standard algorithms." Most children easily understand basic math without this cumbersome nonsense. This is the problem with TERC. It is aimed at lower-IQ children and shortchanges anyone normal and above normal. TERC does not teach decimals and barely teaches fractions (!).
"This is not by accident, it is by design. This is part of the Dumbing down of masses."
Considering that you apparently view yourself as a serf, they've already succeeded with you. For the rest of you: these are your taxes and your school district. If you gave a damn about your children's education, we wouldn't have this mess today. Demand Singapore Math, Saxon Math or a similar math program from your elected representatives.
Mathematics IS understanding. Silly woman.
tomaufc 3 days ago
I think kids should know there multiplication by the end of 5th grade. I am a Geomertry Teacher in Texas. I used to teach Algebra, and i taught my students algorithms. I dont know why the teachers in washington dont like teaching algorithms. I think they r wasteing there money on those textbooks and workbooks.
MrMraggies1996 1 week ago
@MrMraggies1996 ''wasteing'' - and you were a teacher!?
tomaufc 3 days ago
@tomaufc yes i was a teacher for 45 years
MrMraggies1996 3 days ago
I agree, I love teaching algorithms.....Why not? That's what math is about....all math is full of algorithms and symbols....Is like teaching a new language. Could anybody learn a new language without its grammar??!!! .I had the same experience in my life, went to get my graduate degree after 20 years and find my young classmates, amazing unprepared to learn, more math, trigonometry, calculus...
PecaniAnna 1 week ago
Children are taught how to reason instead of blindly memorizing algorithms? This is bad...how?
Deeptunester 2 weeks ago in playlist education crisis 7
@Deeptunester I agree completely!
CooCurrent 2 weeks ago
@CooCurrent She's trying to make the other method of doing 26 x 31 look long and inefficient. But that's how I would do it! (I'm doing A level maths at the moment). In reality there may be more steps to finding the answer; but each step goes extremely fast and so you end up with an answer faster (in my opinion).
CooCurrent 2 weeks ago
@CooCurrent And, if you do it that way, you can solve it mentally, which is really difficult with the standard algorithm..
WTLB8 1 week ago
Love it!!
youstinkhaha 3 weeks ago
I never knew the traditional algorithms for multiplication or division. But that's hasn't held me back at all. It's just really not an important skill, because we already have calculators that do that sort of Mathematics far more efficiently than humans ever could. What matters is to develop an understanding in order to keep moving into higher levels of mathematics, where there usually isn't a single algorithm to compute a particular type of problem (I'm currently a Maths undergraduate).
Icameron259 3 weeks ago 2
What a cumbersome way to learn basic math skills! Thanks to Ms McDermott for exposing the fallacies of this new approach to arithmetic.All children are capable of memorizing basic arithmetic while in grammar school.Set your expectations high for them. Taking advantage of this stage(the parroting or grammar stage) of their growth reaps great rewards later on.If they don't learn basic skills early in education, they will have a difficult time later on solving more complex problems.
achieveyourbest 3 weeks ago
This really angers me. Teaching algorithms should definitely not be the goal of maths education. The clustering method allows the student, in time, to understand the algorithms commonly used, but what's more, it teaches children about the distributive, associative and commutative properties of multiplication, without having to use such big words.
conormmmm 3 weeks ago 6
@conormmmm the (uneducated?) Russian peasants use a halving-doubling and adding algorithm. all algorithms are based on distributive, associate and commutative properties. they should also teach students to critically compare the Russian/Egyptian, standard right-to-left, left-to-right and their own crappy algorithms and learn what is good and bad. having crappy teachers is another issue -- not a good excuse to criticise curriculum based on this.
Heissenburger 2 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
nice video, thank your sharing this, it help the mind of student to think unique and better ways. It is the way that education purpose is not only to full fill the minds of students with facts, but it also teach them how to think better. great! keep up the good work and leave a better life.
thegreatsky2011 1 month ago in playlist Education
If you'd really like your kids to learn their multiplication tables you might try Reflex Math
TheZoolfilms 1 month ago
I'm not totally sure what the point of this video is...
DKM101 1 month ago
we live in an age where we think we can always improve and reform things..somethings are best left alone people!
cardcollector6794 1 month ago
Math - for some, this might the most terrifying subject. But, if you look at it closely, perhaps, this as well could become the most entertaining one. think of it.
rhomaremmy 2 months ago
I am an eleven year old girl who LOVES math. I get full marks on every math test and I just love, love, love practicing! This video didn't even help because I already knew how to do EVERYTHING in this video! -3
Honestly if some college people couldn't do 6 x 4 then they must be quite uneducated because I could do that in my sleep, no
offense to people.
Anyway thanks for listening! Hope you tilled the video anyway :D
Darzo99 2 months ago
Math is not about multiplying shit, it's about REASONING :/ The second method (TURK or whatever) is the only one I can use to calculate bigger numbers without a pencil and paper.
adaseth 2 months ago in playlist Education
At the end of the day this skill should be executed in the shortest possible time be it in real life or in exams. You have just made the process 4 times longer. Why not instead you invest in time instead for pupils to master their times tables?
It is more of an AD to sell the book.
mirlovachki 2 months ago
APPALLING, IMBECILIC! What is going on in the schools? Glad that I never had children.
soapbxprod 2 months ago
Everything old is new again. "New Math," so called, raised it's ugly head in the 70's with the same nonsensical appeals to the supposed understanding of the cognitive and conceptual developmental use in approaching and learning math. The argument goes, that children are pictoral.. blah blah.
As far as actually being useful, or proven,or moving children along in their development, so they can understand symbols and logical systems, it does only harm.
WHITEMANDINGO 2 months ago
Not only is she completely correct we should take it further and track how this TERC/Reasoning nonsense got into our classrooms. Wish she was in my 4th grade nephews school district because it's devastating to watch him and many of his friends struggle with fairly simple math problems due to this absurd method of education. They should track down and bring to account the main players in what's obviously some sort of educational scam on our children and taxpayers.
SofaKingSubtle 2 months ago
@SofaKingSubtle I tend to agree with you.
(It's good to come back every few months and look at this great video. The methods taught in Reform Math are so wonderfully diabolical. They are not math programs. They are anti-math programs.)
BruceDeitrickPrice 2 months ago
Being able to 'multiply' (repeated addition) by rote is a long reach from a complete understanding of the mathematics behind the operation.
If all that is accomplished is memorization of an algorithm, number sense will ultimately limit the depth of mathematics learned later. (i.e. read 'drop out')
A student should learn an algorithm, but with full comprehension
By the way, some of the basic mathematics demonstrated is severely flawed. (i.e. an '=' sign may not be abused)
dawatson3 2 months ago
These curricula are educating a generation of fools.
peterindistantland 2 months ago
I'm sorry, but everything she said is completely full of crap. Has she ever attended a college course that is specifically designed for HOW to teach math in a classroom? My guess: Probably not. We are learning that reasoning is ESSENTIAL for mastery of mathematics. And calling the U.S. Standard Algorithm the "universally known" algorithm, is complete crap too.
coolpeople469 2 months ago
@coolpeople469 You can learn about reasoning and such all you want in a college course teaching HOW to teach math in a classroom... but guess what? The district dictates what you will teach and how by telling you here are the tools we need you to teach our students. If they hand you a book with 50 pages worth of a world tour in it and a bunch of crayola coloring book nonsense... THAT is what you have to work with... no matter WHAT you thought it would be or learned in your college course.
ldmak90 2 months ago
Can I just say that students in your calculus class in college learned math using standard algorithms... to the TERC/Reasoning method! Learn your material and your facts before speaking!!!!
kingbrittany3 2 months ago
Sorry couldn't concentrate cuz of the ass to the right..
MKxxMK 2 months ago
Interesting video about a subject not often explored.
studysync 2 months ago
The nice thing about TERC is that you can use these methods to do calculations mentally, without pencil and paper; you also gain a better understanding of numbers in general. The problem is that it's just too hard for a lot of students. The other methods are just crap. The "standard algorithms" are at least better in that respect, but by no means perfect. The saddest part of math education is that "story problems" are almost universally dreaded, and I know of no good way to remedy that.
pseudorandomly 2 months ago
@rexmcnish why did she say she gets confused then? the techniques are not inefficient if you understand the application of them. I can make any problem take 100 steps to complete if you write everything down and look far more difficutl then it really is....and in response to your question: I have not authored a book, but my engineering degree says I know a little about math and problem solving.
isthismyfault 2 months ago
48÷2(9+3) =
trollface :7
xxph4nt0mxx 2 months ago
I never learned "advanced" math above the basics, even going into highschool and I still don't see where algebra or any of that other very confusing crap is so useful that you HAVE TO learn it in order to live in real world.
LivinWorstNightmare 2 months ago
@LivinWorstNightmare It needs to be taught in order to ensure students have the knowledge to go into advanced mathematical and scientific studies. Few will but if "advanced" math, that is algebra and such as you put it is not taught how can any students be expected to go onto these advanced fields (calculus the sciences and such). In turn the country would fall far behind scientifically.
Also a basic level of math/scientific knowledge is needed so people can vote in an educated manner.
archmagi14794 2 months ago
@archmagi14794
If they need it they can go into college and learn it, it shouldn't be taught in high school if most the kids are never going to use the crap. I am way past high school and never used this cluster fuck migraine math in my life.
LivinWorstNightmare 2 months ago
@LivinWorstNightmare Basic understanding of algebra is important if you want to get into sciences and business. Like the lady said in the video, she needs calculus, trigonometry and algebra for meteorology. Even business majors need to understand a little bit of calculus. Also, being able to do algebra expands your mental skills and help you to work through problems logically. Logic problems in the real world are not always about math.
warfjm 2 months ago
This is sad at how bad America is lacking in math. When I visited other countries, kids had their multiplication tables up to 9 memorized in 1rst grade at most and by 5th grade Algebra was being taught. America needs to stop slacking off and actually start teaching.
misses165 2 months ago
@misses165 I agree that American education is lacking, but you can't compare all education systems from other countries to ours. If you look at countries that start formal education at the same as as the US does we are comparable. Many Asian and various other countries that excel in education start formal education at age 3. The earlier education begins, the more educated we can become. Think about it, young brains are more actively involved in learning.
angelamae16 2 months ago
Comment removed
Slundgren22 2 months ago
British IGs, and people there are moaning about calculus being pushed back off IGs and into ASs. I knew my 12 times tables fluently by grade 4 and could easily divide long numbers by grade 5. Seriously...
OHHYESSAHH 3 months ago
Goodness, I learned Everyday math in elementary school and HATED it. Sometimes I would just go home and cry over my homework, and my mom and dad couldn't help me because they had no idea how we were supposed to do the stuff. I learned lattice in fifth grade, and had my dad teach me the standard way. In high school, there are still people in my geo/trig class who do lattice. Also, i only know EM division, which take forever. In short, EM sucks.
SmartBlondie1314 3 months ago
the way the "everyday math" teaches it is the way i perform complex math in my head (by factoring to easier number). Yes i learned with the so called "algorithm" but in reality the way the two books teach it provide the student a better understanding of how math really works. This approach will make algebra easier for students. Just because this lady can not perform these simple techniques with out confusion is of no consequence to validity of the techniques.
isthismyfault 3 months ago
@isthismyfault
She had a very clear understanding of the techniques and even demonstrated just how grossly inefficient they were.
You an author of the crappy version of the algorithm or something?
rexmcnish 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Joe2000King first go learn algebra
can you read my last comment? or are you illiterate?
star4galaxy 3 months ago
@Joe2000King i guess you have never learned algebra. i never disagreed with her. all i said is that all methods should be taught to build more connections.
star4galaxy 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Ho, ho, ho!
What is the need of math. Give the a good sex education!
Thanks to your jew professors, in one generation the americans will be niggers to the chinese.
proteusx 3 months ago
Comment removed
proteusx 3 months ago
I grew up in India and everybody in my class had mastered 2-digit multiplication and division by end of 3rd std. We weren't even allowed near calculators at home. Calculators found on students in school would be confiscated. We memorized multiplication tables till 20.Sure it took time, but knowing the basics makes you really efficient in the long run.When we were allowed calculators in Pre-University College, we used it mostly for 4 digit fractions.Knowing the basics really helps in the long run
milind006 3 months ago
@Joe2000King You are very funny.
Pwecko 3 months ago
@Joe2000King I don't believe in perdition. I will die, certainly, but not at the hands of God or of you, and certainly not because of what I said in a YouTube comments box. You really should go and get an appointment with a psychiatrist. You are not well.
Pwecko 3 months ago
@Joe2000King If you look at what I originally wrote, you will see that I agree that children should be able to do sums correctly and efficiently, i.e. the way that the woman in the video explained. The phrase 'I think it's a bit harsh' was meant to be mildly humorous. In truth I think it's completely wrong to call her an idiot but I think it is much, much worse for you to wish me dead because you think I disagree with you. You should see a psychiatrist.
Pwecko 3 months ago
I work in a AIS dept that uses everyday math and the video says all that I fear is behind our dropping maths scores in this country. Ironically, the reason the dept I work in has been ramped up to include kindergarteners is because they have seen a 40 percent drop in our math scores in recent years. Go figure! Wonder if it has anthing to do with EDM and NCLB! Soon, Haiti will have better math scores than the United States.
1458merry 3 months ago
@1458merry That's "an AIS dept..." before the grammar police nail me (:
1458merry 3 months ago
@Joe2000King What? When and where did I say that? I think you must have me mixed up with someone else. Either that or you are crazy.
Pwecko 3 months ago
@Joe2000King I should be killed for something I said? You must be joking (Joe King, geddit????!!??? Oh, I'm so funny).
Pwecko 3 months ago
@Joe2000King Obviously you do not understand the content of my comment. I'll add this: I actually like the way she presents the computational algorithms. Not that I agree with the criticism of Everyday Math. My comment is that she does not delve into 99% of what the program is about--stuff that any decent practitioner of mathematical sciences should recognize and understand.
MaineOwlVideo 3 months ago
On the contrary, I think every student should have mastered partial differential equations by the end of 5th grade..
utra1337 3 months ago
The partial products method is actually pretty good, certainly as efficient as any standard multiplication algorithm. Why not teach an efficient algorithm and explain WHY it works. I don't care what is taught, as long as people understand why it works. That's clearly also an important thing. It's also fairly clearly the emphasis of these newer curricula. I don't see why a middle ground between rigid algorithms and deep understanding can't be found. But to stunt evolution in teaching methods...
TheJobidaker 3 months ago
Give your kids this simple test. $ value of a roll of 50 pennies? $ value of a roll of 40 nickels? $ value of a roll of 50 dimes? $ value of a roll of 40 quarters? Dollar value of mixed bag of 78 pennies, 133 nickels, 152 dimes & 39 quarters?. How many quarters back for the whole bag & what other change? This is 4th & 5th grade math that I saw grads unable to do.
usaruss 3 months ago
I stick by my arguments that many HS grads have no grasp of the math basics. I was serious when I told about job applicants not being able to pass a simple 10 question test on values of rolls of coins or a bag of mixed coins. Math is thrown at them now in helter skelter fashion, with bits of higher math being taught before the 4 basics are learned. My 5th grader is also being taught rounding in ways that make no sense at all.
usaruss 3 months ago
It's Comical how stupid the "new age" methods of teaching are. I had so much trouble going to middle school from elementary because the stupid teachers were teaching "mental math" and not REGULAR DIVISION/MULTIPLICATION
M1sterHamilton 4 months ago
The only way to improve learning for kids is get all Charter schools or private schools and dump the unions that support bad teachers.
2manyputts 4 months ago
this is such an inconveniet way to do written math.
Jessicalien10 4 months ago
I know Everyday Math pretty well. There's a lot she's not telling you. For example, the authors believe that topics like data analysis, functions, probability, and theory of numbers actually are in the realm of early mathematics education. (Kids are smarter than just machines for grinding out 133/6.) Knowing that she has an advanced education in those areas, it surprises me she wouldn't recognize the approach to them found in Everyday Math. Want more atmospheric scientists? Do functions EARLY.
MaineOwlVideo 4 months ago
@dylanparker72 It sounds like you are talking about partial products, and I agree with you. Just as long as they understand why it works and how to use it, it is a great strategy, especially for mental math, like you said. I always go back to "accurate and efficient", and that might mean different strategies for different people. It seems the majority of people have the most efficiency with standard algorithm, but **understanding** is key! It sounds like we are on the same page, more or less!
shortandsweet3 4 months ago
@dylanparker72 I'm amazed you are NOT against that! I teach middle school math and our elementary schools use Everyday Math - the overwhelming issue that students have now is they have NO knowledge of why these methods work. Sure, they can draw pretty grids and put numbers in them (lattice) and it's more fun than standard algorithm, but there is no place value knowledge or understanding. Any method used must be BOTH *accurate* and *efficient*... after all, is that what math is all about???
shortandsweet3 4 months ago
Teachers who use everyday math teach the standard algorithm. The other methods are used to teach children to do math mentally. By just looking at the textbooks she does not realize what happens in the average classroom.
lisaareed1788 4 months ago 2
The Commies took out and shot all the teachers.........
PALINSMITH 4 months ago
Plus, she says everyone should know that stuff by fifth grade. i say 3rd grade. ALGEBRA should be taught in fifth. This is not "advanced logic" they encourage them to choose the method that works best for them, but all methods are shown, so kids would understand how it works and the logic behind the problems. elementary school kids are smart enough to understand that. and another problem. If the kids peers were studying, they would want to study too, there wouldnt be this problem of no practice!
star4galaxy 4 months ago
boy she is dumb. i agree, you should use the easiest method and stuff, but learning other methods gives you a twisted way of learning it, giving more "ah ha" moment later in algebra
star4galaxy 4 months ago
Bottom line - this women out performed her classmates in math after being out of school for TWENTY years. Current math program - Not working.
What they teach in these textbooks is fine for getting the kids to understand how the algorithms works. However if all I learned was methods in Turk and Everyday Math I would think Math was this tedious, laborious process.
jildasn 4 months ago
Great Video. I have a daughter who has to buy "Everyday Math" for a college course, and I"m going to send her the link to this!
writerjmd 4 months ago
She has a point. Deductive thought is important but it is pointless without developing the confidence to tackle problems in children first.
bleeds4u 4 months ago
This cluster methods thing is useful for algebra but kids shouldn't be taught that logic in primary school
helmutuhlmann 4 months ago
These poor children, taught to think so stupidly!
helmutuhlmann 4 months ago
Wow, no wonder we have a financial crisis in America.
wrightlawnv 4 months ago
cluster problems = clusterf**k!
Tamran73 4 months ago
Sad. Very sad. How to screw up young children's minds.
t00lkit 4 months ago
I am agreeing to her not because of her points but because she also disagrees
SpicyHam 4 months ago
I completely understand her, but I guess it depends which way you feel comfortable with. It is not complicated at all, but I prefer to do it the way I learned in school Great Job though on the video!
NYS1010 4 months ago
I agree that the critics of this presentation are clueless. Probably dislike her vibe & assign negative attributes to her based on dislike of look-alikes. I'm an engineer, I know math. The current two-times chess champ is an Indian with an accountantcy degree, so no doubt he does math that standard old way. Pluck a Hindu math teacher from 2000 years ago and he'll do a better job than any of the advocates of the systems under critique (up to but not including calculus) Algebra came from Hindustan
rh001YT 4 months ago
26*10*3 + 26.
Mandragara 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
If you haven’t seen it watch “The Obama Deception HQ Full Length Version” now on youtube and (if you like it) please RE-POST to every youtube video you can find the time to. :) We need real change and it starts with getting the truth out there. Bachmann, Perry and Romney would just be more of the same..
R.P. 2012
stopcorporatemedia 5 months ago
why don't they just teach the base method or vedic i don't really know the actual name for it but i found it to be so easy i could solve the problems without a calculator pencil or paper all the way up to multiplying 4 digits its easier than all three of the standard algorithm
tmj0431 5 months ago
why don't they just teach the base method or vedic i don't really know the actual name for it but i found it to be so easy i could solve the problems without a calculator all the way up to multiplying 4 digits its easier than all three of the standard algorithm
tmj0431 5 months ago
How much math do she use after here exam. Isent the wether forcast made by very powerfull computers these days.
Myrslokstok 5 months ago
Comment removed
MrVincent1897 4 months ago
@Myrslokstok don't use ebonics, it's 'how much math does she use', not 'how much math do she use'
MrVincent1897 4 months ago
Shool newer realy tech math they have been teching counting and maybee som problemsolving. When we exit out of the industrial-, knowledge-, informationerea the use of it have gradualu declined.
Myrslokstok 5 months ago
THE US SYSTEM IS SO FAR BEHIND MATH I KNOW FROM EXPERIANCE ALL THE MATH TEACHERS HERE IN THE US aRE TERRIBLE OR THEY GIVE THE "GOOD" TEACHERS TO THE HONORS STUDENTS WHEN OTHER COUNTRIES TEACH MATH THEY DONT USE FANCY WORDS LIKE "NUMERATOR" OR "DENIMINATOR" THEY SAY BOTTOM NUMBER AND TOP NUMBER WE NEED TO TEACH MATH IN A WHY THAT KIDS CAN UNDERSTAND IT AND ALWAYS TEACH THE BASICS NOT RUSH THROUGH THE BOOK IN A WEEK AND EXPECT KIDS TO LEARN IT WE NEED REFORM NOW
SapphireDiamond19 5 months ago
Wow, the people criticizing her are clueless. I am a mathematician with an advanced degree in mathematical statistics. The primary reason we are so far behind other parts of the world are because the educationists in this country are idiots. They keep dumbing down the system and not teaching the basics required to be good at mathematics. The traditional ways work better than anything else if you take the time to explain the logic.
Eirana9 5 months ago 14
This woman is an idiot. Her degree is not even in math! What makes her feel qualified to judge math teaching?? I bet all the math she has ever seen is calculation based. And in a very arguable sense that's not really math. Success in math requires computational competence for sure, but it also requires the ability to reason through problems and (open ended) questions in a logical way. This is the point that seems lost upon her.
EIgen100 5 months ago
@EIgen100 I think it's a bit harsh to call her an idiot. What she is talking about here is really arithmetic, not maths (I'm English). Children should be taught the most efficient way to 'do sums'. Some of the other ways are OK for helping with mental arithmetic but are very slow and cumbersome when working with a pencil and paper. Teaching kids to rely on calculators and computers leaves them vulnerable to being ripped off in the real world.
Pwecko 5 months ago 4
Comment removed
daqueen255 5 months ago
@daqueen255 I have nothing against calculators. The problem is that children are brought up to rely on them. I have seen teenagers who could not add up three items of shopping, each less than a pound. They have no idea how much it costs and therefore no idea how much change they should get from a five pound note, say. Imagine them when they are a bit older and dealing with big sums of money. They will be ripe to be ripped off. Everyone should be able to do mental arithmetic.
Pwecko 5 months ago
@daqueen255
it is obvious you are not a mathematician and patently evident you don't know a single thing about mathematics
AssMcTurd 4 months ago
Comment removed
MrVincent1897 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@daqueen255 I'm a real mathematician and I don't have to use a calculator. You learn to do the problems without a calculator first, then you use a calculator later on. The whole point of learning is to get you to think, any idiot can use a calculator. Will the calculator set up the word problems for you? No! They just make the word problems ridiculously easier than they should be.
MrVincent1897 4 months ago
@MrVincent1897 I question why YT flagged your comment as SPAM. I guess you made too much sense. Your other comment that made it to my email was removed altogether.
usaruss 3 months ago
Comment removed
daqueen255 5 months ago
@daqueen255 The so-called "standard US algorithm" is used all over the world, & is what all mathmaticians & engineers use. It is the most efficient method, requiring the fewest number of steps & pulls from memory. The other methods shown were mostly successive approximation techniques like those of some AtoD converters - dumb machines, yet they do a better job of it than the alternate systems under critique. The "new" systems are kludgy and an attempt to remove the metaphysics = no fun.
rh001YT 4 months ago
@daqueen255
she is not an idiot. you clearly are on the other hand, since you completely missed the point.
by the way, the standard 'US' algorithm is just 'the algorithm'. the rest of methods are impossibly obtuse for a young mind, and they don't help in speed or comprehension.
AssMcTurd 4 months ago
@daqueen255
While not all countires use the traditional method many do. So it's as much an international method as any other. Also, the mathematical statement you criticize was her providing an example of how TURK works, a method she does not like. And she explains the reasoning as she goes along. You are just taking things out of context in an effort to discredit her.
Eirana9 4 months ago
@Pwecko Education (new world order) The deliberate dumbing-down of America.
We must get education out of the hands of Federal government
/watch?v=m-LTTExVC1w
987654321
vechorik 3 months ago
she is ridiculous - our education system is based on factory mentality and does this lady ever wonder why all of our higher math careers are going to kids educated in other countries? Current adults were educated in the way she is suggesting...practice practice practice of traditional algorithm. How about applying a little reasoning...let kids use reasoning to understand numbers and operations FIRST...then work toward mastery of the standard algorithm.
lcteaches1 5 months ago
Another issue is to demystify Math for kids. I was a Math idiot when I got to College. I took beginning Algebra twice before things finally clicked. What helped is the undergrad Teaching Assistants who demystified things! I then passed Trigonometry in four weeks in Summer School with no problem! Later, my Calculus class was taught by a High School teacher who made it all straightforward! They all applied Math to real-world examples and made it FUN! But I still had to MEMORIZE things!
n0tyham 6 months ago
She's right! I took Applied Math (Computer Science), so I'm an expert in both Math and Logic. The first problem is that Math is taught like it's an art form, when in reality it's a toolbox with a bunch of different wrenches (algorithms). The KEY to Math is MEMORIZATION of the Standard Algorithms. The second problem is that kids today have deficit attention spans which prohibit memorization. Get them off those lousy reactive video games and watch their Math scores improve!
n0tyham 6 months ago
America can take it's mathematics and shove them right back up it's ass
math is an arbitrary construct , I can say 1 + 1 = 2 all I want to but it won't make it true or untrue untill God says so.
that's what americans can't seem to grasp , you can not trust the human brain.
azkeyz 6 months ago
It's sad that americans feel that math is the holy grail of existance.
Americans are told the greeks invented math , then they find out that's a big fat lie.
Math comes from God , and without him humans wouldn't know a cubit from a cucumber.
once that's understood , the math student can advance , and not a second before.
math is used to wage war and kill americans off , why should it be respect when it's tought by humans.
azkeyz 6 months ago
The question was asked: "this is all well and good if you want a bunch of kids who are really good and mindlessly performing algorithms, but what happens when they have to examine a complex problem whether that be in mathematics, science, or life and they have to devise their own algorithm?"
This will be a lot better if one has a thorough understanding of the basic tools used to make those "new algorithms". And one of the major tools is a knowledge of these alogrithms.
dburkhead 6 months ago
This person is an idiot. She doesn't understand what she is even talking about.
Epic5236 6 months ago
As a high school youth I had severe impediment to memorizing geometric algorithms; But I was able to reason through test, managing highest test scores. Advancing to higher levels of math, memorizing algorithms freed up time. Old school algorithms are a tool for independence for those who do not possess the mathematically prone mind. Teachers who have a solid understanding of math, then impart the tools and knowledge to students; Old School algorithm + Understanding = A mind with no limits!
theretrofitter 6 months ago
As a high school youth I had severe impediment to memorizing geometric algorithms; But I was able to reason through test, managing highest test scores. Advancing to higher levels of math, memorizing algorithms freed up time. Old school algorithms are a tool for independence for those who do not possess the mathematically prone mind. Competent teaches have a deep understanding of math, then impart the tools and knowledge to students. Old School algorithm + Understanding = A mind with no limits!
theretrofitter 6 months ago
An Inconvenient Truth ... Al Gore rithm lol
virgogreg 6 months ago
this is all well and good if you want a bunch of kids who are really good and mindlessly performing algorithms, but what happens when they have to examine a complex problem whether that be in mathematics, science, or life and they have to devise their own algorithm?
smeltzerdj1 6 months ago
You can't reinvent the wheel people.
kauboibiboppu 6 months ago
That said, I believe there's merit in actually teaching the standard algorithm (if not the memorising that goes into effectively using it), especially to strike the contrast with division. I only understood long division proper when I was presented it in the setting of polynomials. Till then I had been using heuristic methods like the ones in the textbooks from the video (things a text needn't bother with making seem a puffed up protocol). But it would be useful to have a sense of the algorithm.
yasiru89 6 months ago
Armed with these 26 x 31, as per her example, is just (26 x 30) + 26 = (260 x 3) + 26 = 600 + 180 + 26 = 806.
Just as efficient as the standard method, but it requires you to be more aware of place value than simply knowing when to 'carry over'.
It seems the presenter simply has trouble understanding that all of these methods are about the same 'complexity', and that in an intuitive sense the new methods can be more approachable. Needlessly lengthening steps to argue against them is laughable.
yasiru89 6 months ago
She goes to a fair bit out of her way to make the 'clustered approach' seem clunky and inefficient. In the process she misuses an equality sign as well, but be that as it may.
As a child I never saw the point of memorising tables for multiplication in order to effectively use the standard algorithm she illustrates at the beginning. I only bothered with multiplication (and division) by 2 and multiplication by 3 and 10 (just adding a zero at the end)...
yasiru89 6 months ago 2
Wow. If she REALLY understood mathematics, she'd understand that the currently common algorithms she espouses are not universal. She should stick to weather prediction. Now that's something with enough variability to have a great discussion about.
WhenPigsFlyInKOP 6 months ago
@WhenPigsFlyInKOP
how exactly are those algorithms not universal? if you're trying to act all knowing, rest assured somebody will make it very clear you have no clue what you're talking about.
AssMcTurd 4 months ago
Cluster problems??? More like cluster fuck.... This cluster method is good for doing fast mental math but is NOT an acceptable introductory teaching method.... The cluster method involves an understanding of algebra which is not known by kids doing learning addition... What kind of ass-raving idiot thinks this method is ok for the lil' ones???
gvsfgdf 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
MATH VIDEOS ? > sourmath.com
Thumbs up so everyone can see
BaBBas09 6 months ago
Let me get this straight: by using the same math that called for reform, we'll have an even brighter future than today?
RealLifeRotti 7 months ago
You had better understand place value long before you get to multiplication. The failure to understand place value has been proven to be the number one deficiency among U.S. students- I would suggest that this is the case because most teachers do not understand place value either.
kfrb1 7 months ago
See the lattice method is so much faster than the regular algorithm, and the proof has been given for why it works, so the accusation is outdated.
wolfwomanenvsci 7 months ago
Also, not many of us can solve math problems using the traditional methods in our heads? However, by looking at how she taught partial products and partial quotients, I bet I could do those in my head pretty easily. Just sayin.
dclausing 7 months ago
It’s interesting that McDermott blames these curriculums (EDM and Turk sp.) for her college classmate’s inefficiency in math. EDM is far less popular in schools than traditional math, so logic tells us that most of her peers were taught using one of the traditional curricula. right??? Not only that, but EDM has only been out in its current form for few years... So the elementary kids who have used the current EDM would still be in school right now, wouldn’t they?
dclausing 7 months ago
when I have a kid and he or she wants to know the why of math they can take a "philosophy of math" class in college. And if they want to see how math is used they can take a physics class in HS.
But by the time they get to HS I want them to be able to DO math. I'm fine with teaching all the methods and letting the kid decide
But it is delusional to base an elementary class on conceptual understanding because human brain doesn't gain the ability to think abstractly till about the mid-teens.
litnight 7 months ago
@litnight Unfortunately you promote many myths in your post. Children start abstracting at an early age. They don't confuse the word "dog" with an actual dog. They recognize that the word is an abstraction of the animal called "dog." Furthermore, adults and children have a difficult time learning meaningless information. If you don't help children explain why, they will invent a reason why. Thus, many college students I work with think that 6/8 is double 3/4.
sleeper2345 7 months ago
@litnight Note, too, that you are encouraging a lack of rigor with mathematics. You don't want children to learn to reason mathematically, just perform calculations. I fail to see how this differs from handing a child a calculator and having them use it.
sleeper2345 7 months ago
I love her sarcasm, so subtle and yet so effective.
psycosquirrel789 7 months ago
this derserves to be on facebook fuck this educational system which stupify kids .....
6x7x10 7 months ago
Parents Against Everyday Mathematics is a page on facebook.
besheba 7 months ago
@6x7x10 you need to go back to school and learn better language
dclausing 7 months ago
Comment removed
MrVincent1897 4 months ago
So this woman's inability to comprehend unfamiliar algorithms makes the EM program a poor one? Go back to doing the weather...please don't be involved in student standards.
JagerMikesterX 7 months ago 2
When he was asked whether he could multiply 7 digit numbers in his head, the famous physicist Richard Feynman said, "It's not even true that I can multiply two-digit numbers in my head. I can do one-digit numbers only."
The idea that people need to know the most efficient available algorithm for multiplying on *pieces of paper* is ridiculous. In 1911, they didn't have anything better. In 2011, we do have something better, so why don't we use it?
ancalagonyt 7 months ago
@cosmic101010 Yes, anything that would help students make sense of mathematics is "dumbing down." Unfortunately, most US adults have no idea what mathematical rigor is because they were never exposed to mathematical reasoning, just following a bunch of rules that they don't understand. This is the real dumbing down. It's been taking place for generations and now few US adults understand any of the mathematics they learned in school. They can repeat the rules, but can't solve problems.
sleeper2345 7 months ago 2
Relying purely on formulas (algorithms) teaches how to solve a problem. But it does not open the mind to upcoming, increasingly complex problems. It's way better to motivate the pupils to 'think' about a problem, and what it is, instead of just making them memorize (which excludes active thinking) a simple formula.
Why are mathematics useful, asked a pupil, it's just a bunch of random formulas to apply as one see fit.
Response: ???
THIS is the issue today. Let them think about problems more!
theral056 7 months ago
I do the partial product method in my head, but I agree the standard algorithm is more efficient on paper.
What I think should be done is teaching the standard algorithm, but also teach mental math after mastery of the algorithm.
The TERC method I actually think is what we do, anyway. They take the guessing to the entire number rather than pieces. I think the standard algorithm is still better, but representing 133 = 6x22 + 1 is a powerful concept that I do think should be taught.
MyOverflow 7 months ago
@MyOverflow The reason is that it gives another perspective to what the pieces of a division problem are:
a = bq + r, where a is the dividend, b is the divisor, q is the quotient and r is the remainder. This representation of a number comes up in college mathematics (number theory).
I do agree, though. The standard algorithms are better to teach and the other concepts that are learned from these alternative methods should be taught by themselves after mastery of the algorithms themselves.
MyOverflow 7 months ago
@MyOverflow How can someone make sense of the traditional algorithm with using partial products? Perhaps you are suggesting that understanding why the algorithm works and just know how would be better? BTW you are misusing the work "concept" in your post. You are referring to procedures, not concepts. Procedure are not ideas but are often supported by ideas.
sleeper2345 7 months ago
But...but.. i like partial products. That's how I do high digit mental math!
Embrigh 8 months ago
I like the way these new works teach. Why did she write so much extra for the newer methods, while condensing her own? She tried to make the others look bad.
I think it's unfair to assume these methods don't work. They're more intuitive.
Let's meet in the middle.
psychofish25 8 months ago
@psychofish25 Well, I have kids who were taught by EM. They have no concept of math. They are smart girls, but both have trouble doing simple multiplication in their heads or on paper. The processes have been presented in a totally confusing manner, with a lot of jumping around. Having the basics down in your mind is very important for math. Everything else is built on them. I am trying to catch my daughters up at home this summer.
usaruss 7 months ago
@usaruss They need to bring back corporal punishment. I've taught these college kids and had to kick them out of class for texting. They walk in and out and are disrespectful. Then their parents call up when they don't get A's. When the student turned into a customer we became doomed. I worked at a private college, initials BSC, in Boston and the college president who has an MBA, referred to the students as customers in his email instructions to staff and faculty.
MrVincent1897 4 months ago
cluster math= clusterf*ck
pdub673 8 months ago
This is the reason the clerk has no idea what your change should be when you give her a 5, 10 or twenty dollar bill. Also, they don't know how to use a calculator and calculate the tax...therefore, when the grid goes down. You are screwed, they can't perform with electricity to run the machines. I personally know many 7th graders who can not read a clock (analog), they've got to see the numbers digitally. Idiots
TheDolfingurl 8 months ago
Teaching students to reason through problems is a good idea. Forcing them to use an inefficient, cumbersome method for a simple concept to fulfill the aforementioned idea is, as evidence shows, stupid.
pyVlad 8 months ago
@pyVlad You make an excellent point. Why do we continue to teach the US traditional subtraction algorithm when other algorithms exist that are more efficient and less error prone? Of course we know the answer, because most adults wouldn't understand these algorithms. Most adults don't know why the traditional subtraction algorithm works anyway. My solution: have everyone use a calculator. They're not learning why the rules work anyway.
sleeper2345 8 months ago
The cluster reasoning is a joke b/c what if you have problem like 34543553 x 976346? But the partial product method can actually be used to explain the standard method but the standard is by far the most efficient and simple to use.
bananian 8 months ago
@bananian Good point. I can't recall every multiplying a 6 digit and an 8 digit number together, but we need to be doing this by hand because so much learning takes place when we do so. Try having today's adults multiply 3465 x 7835 together and see how many answers you get. Of course, the good old days were just wonderful when everyone learned everything! Also, note that the traditional algorithm is not always the most efficient procedure. I can multiply 39 x 41 without using it much faster.
sleeper2345 8 months ago
@sleeper2345
it's just the standard method can be used without using mental math or calculator so if say you are stuck in the woods and you need to figure out food rationing or w/e, you can use the standard method without needing to be extremely smart.
bananian 8 months ago
@bananian I'm not sure what you're talking about. Who takes paper and pencil into the woods? My suggestion is to bring your phone (and thus a calculator). So we don't want students to use mental math? Why because it's more efficient? Because most adults who learned traditional algorithms can't use mental math? Because we don't know any other way?
sleeper2345 7 months ago
@sleeper2345
you dont need pencil and paper. Stick and soil and there you go. What are the odds of your cell phone lasting the period where rationing is required?
bananian 7 months ago
@bananian said "What are the odds of your cell phone lasting the period where rationing is required?" The odds are about the same as you needing the traditional algorithm for the purpose you describe. So we should base our teaching on the 1 in 10^6 chance that you might need to use it when lost in the woods? I'd like to be a little more forward thinking than this.
sleeper2345 7 months ago
@sleeper2345 The problem is, too many people cannot multiply 12 x 12, much less a 3465 x 7835. My daughters are terribly behind in math. We work with them at home to try & bring them up to speed. Everyday math & other materials are so scattered & illogical, kids would do better counting on their fingers. Kids are exposed to bits & pieces of math at all levels, but before they master the simple basics. I had employees in the 1980's who could not add up a $100 cashbox or jar of change.
usaruss 8 months ago
@usaruss My suggestion is to use partial products to multiply 12 x 12 and to use 2465 x 7835 to use a calculator. Who do you know that is uses the traditional algorithm? The "basics" do not involve mindlessly memorizing algorithms that we don't understand (though this is the tradition in the US). If students don't understand why an algorithm works, I fail to see how this differs from using a calculator. However, you do an excellent job pointing to the failures of traditional US teaching.
sleeper2345 7 months ago
@sleeper2345 I don't say calculators should not be used anywhere. I use one often to save time and do very tedious calculations. I am saying kids should be able to do a lot of that without a calculator. Most kids should be able to memorize x tables up to 12 x 12. It is not that hard. A lot of math is done every day, "on the fly", where we need quick answers. And why teach a method that takes longer? Time is in ever shorter supply these days, with everyone being pushed to the max.
usaruss 7 months ago
@usaruss Agreed. So we should be efficient with learning. Teaching students mindless algorithms that they don't understand and can't apply correctly is a waste of time. Thus, most mathematics teaching in the US is a waste of time. About 3% of US students in algebra can actually use it to solve a problem. Similarly, we waste an inordinate amount of time teaching students algorithms that they don't understand and will never use. Time to enter the 21st century.
sleeper2345 7 months ago
Respond to this video...I see a lot of criticism of learning math well. I suspect some of these folks are similar to my employees who could not count up a bag of change from a customer.
usaruss 7 months ago
458 people are constructivist fools. Will we ever get away from the non-science of constructivist teaching?!
privatepile762 8 months ago
@privatepile762 You mean constructionist? The former is a theory of knowledge, while the latter is an actual theory of learning. Besides, the basic principle that physical experience can help learning is completely valid, but like any general rule, it can be misapplied.
pyVlad 8 months ago
458 people are constructivist fools. Will we ever get away from the non-science of constructivist teaching!
privatepile762 8 months ago
"Teaching standard algorhithms is inherently stupid and nonsensical. It doesn't teach children to think and understand, it teaches you how to do standard algorithms." Most children easily understand basic math without this cumbersome nonsense. This is the problem with TERC. It is aimed at lower-IQ children and shortchanges anyone normal and above normal. TERC does not teach decimals and barely teaches fractions (!).
MrLopsider 8 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
"This is not by accident, it is by design. This is part of the Dumbing down of masses."
Considering that you apparently view yourself as a serf, they've already succeeded with you. For the rest of you: these are your taxes and your school district. If you gave a damn about your children's education, we wouldn't have this mess today. Demand Singapore Math, Saxon Math or a similar math program from your elected representatives.