Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

8 + 1

First, you make a ten...

FFFFFUUUUUUUU-

 trexmeyer wrote:
Why is it so hard to just do 26 + 17 = 26 + 10 + 7 = 36 + 7 = 43?

Why is it so hard to just do 26 + 17 = 43?

Nevelon is the first person I've seen explain how this works out and that includes math teachers I know who actually have to teach this to kids. It doesn't help when many teachers are learning this method at the same time they're teaching it.

 trexmeyer wrote:
Why is it so hard to just do 26 + 17 = 26 + 10 + 7 = 36 + 7 = 43? Then again I'm borderline Rain Man status when it comes to simple arithmetic so I don't understand at all how people have difficulty with it.

Because my way is faster and not dreamed up by an insane clown? Plus I can use it for larger numbers.

6+7=13

That 1 +2+1 = 4

43

 trexmeyer wrote:
Why is it so hard to just do 26 + 17 = 26 + 10 + 7 = 36 + 7 = 43? Then again I'm borderline Rain Man status when it comes to simple arithmetic so I don't understand at all how people have difficulty with it.

Pretty much the same thing I do. 1s, 10s, and so on. Has yet to fail me.

The method outlined in the OP is way too much work for something so simple.

All what it is is saying to create "10s" wherever possible to make math easier, I do it all the time (in my head), but I definitely didn't learn it at school, although in this case it would be easier (IMO) to just do as trexmeyer said.

Of course the real answer is:
type 17+26 into the calculator and hit EQUAL.

 Frazzled wrote:
Of course the real answer is:
type 17+26 into the calculator and hit EQUAL.

5318008

 Frazzled wrote:
Of course the real answer is:
type 17+26 into the calculator and hit EQUAL.

All throughout high school, I had the same math teacher. And every time we tried to do basic stuff with our calculators, he'd point to an Uncle Sam poster on his wall (or just say it directly), emblazoned with the words "I want YOU to be smarter than your calculator."

My mind is full of feth just after reading the first sentence.

 Avatar 720 wrote:
8 + 1

First, you make a ten...

FFFFFUUUUUUUU-

I got a good laugh out of that.

 Fafnir wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:
Of course the real answer is:
type 17+26 into the calculator and hit EQUAL.

All throughout high school, I had the same math teacher. And every time we tried to do basic stuff with our calculators, he'd point to an Uncle Sam poster on his wall (or just say it directly), emblazoned with the words "I want YOU to be smarter than your calculator."

Of course my Boy is now doing math that literally can't be done without computers and advanced math programs....

I on the other hand managed to count to 21 once, but it required all fingers, toes, and my tongue. I had to sleep for a week after that mental exercise.

 Frazzled wrote:

 Fafnir wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:
Of course the real answer is:
type 17+26 into the calculator and hit EQUAL.

All throughout high school, I had the same math teacher. And every time we tried to do basic stuff with our calculators, he'd point to an Uncle Sam poster on his wall (or just say it directly), emblazoned with the words "I want YOU to be smarter than your calculator."

Of course my Boy is now doing math that literally can be done without computers and advanced math programs....

I on the other hand managed to count to 21 once, but it required all fingers, toes, and my tongue. I had to sleep for a week after that mental exercise.

See, the nice thing about calculus is that you stop using numbers over 10 (honestly, you tend to stop using numbers in general). Saved my ass, really.

You all cracking me up

Welcome to Intro of Common Core Math

 Fafnir wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:

 Fafnir wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:
Of course the real answer is:
type 17+26 into the calculator and hit EQUAL.

All throughout high school, I had the same math teacher. And every time we tried to do basic stuff with our calculators, he'd point to an Uncle Sam poster on his wall (or just say it directly), emblazoned with the words "I want YOU to be smarter than your calculator."

Of course my Boy is now doing math that literally can be done without computers and advanced math programs....

I on the other hand managed to count to 21 once, but it required all fingers, toes, and my tongue. I had to sleep for a week after that mental exercise.

See, the nice thing about calculus is that you stop using numbers over 10 (honestly, you tend to stop using numbers in general). Saved my ass, really.

"Calc 4 is for chumps who can't hack it in math."
-The Boy.

 Frazzled wrote:

 Fafnir wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:

 Fafnir wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:
Of course the real answer is:
type 17+26 into the calculator and hit EQUAL.

All throughout high school, I had the same math teacher. And every time we tried to do basic stuff with our calculators, he'd point to an Uncle Sam poster on his wall (or just say it directly), emblazoned with the words "I want YOU to be smarter than your calculator."

Of course my Boy is now doing math that literally can be done without computers and advanced math programs....

I on the other hand managed to count to 21 once, but it required all fingers, toes, and my tongue. I had to sleep for a week after that mental exercise.

See, the nice thing about calculus is that you stop using numbers over 10 (honestly, you tend to stop using numbers in general). Saved my ass, really.

"Calc 4 is for chumps who can't hack it in math."
-The Boy.

Hey!

I always did better in Calculus and Statistics versus Geometry and Trig...

Making 10s is how I add up my dice scores for magic spells in WHFB (when throwing 6+ dice at something).

It's the method I showed some of my less math-skilled clubmates and it works.

But I don't use it for arithmetic in general. I was taught to determine the result doing the "working" in my head. Then they brought in "show working on paper" which I never learned.

 chromedog wrote:
Making 10s is how I add up my dice scores for magic spells in WHFB (when throwing 6+ dice at something).

It's the method I showed some of my less math-skilled clubmates and it works.

But I don't use it for arithmetic in general. I was taught to determine the result doing the "working" in my head. Then they brought in "show working on paper" which I never learned.

I lost sooooo many marks because of that.

 Frazzled wrote:

Could you have done that without already knowing the answer? Thats a serious question.

Yes. As I said, it's more or less how I do math in my head. If I was doing math on paper, I would never use a system as convoluted at this one though.

I'm not a normal person. I was going to be a math/comp. sci double major, until the math side got to the point where there was -NO- practical application and it was hurting my brain. At one point I could do n-dimensional vector field calculous (good for plotting hyperspace trips, not much else) and write out proofs for why 1 + 1 = 2. Thankfully, I've forgoten most of it. But I've been exposed to more logic and math theory then is healthy, and It's done funny things to my head.

The love of parenthesis and line comments come from the computer science side of my education.

 Fafnir wrote:

 chromedog wrote:
Making 10s is how I add up my dice scores for magic spells in WHFB (when throwing 6+ dice at something).

It's the method I showed some of my less math-skilled clubmates and it works.

But I don't use it for arithmetic in general. I was taught to determine the result doing the "working" in my head. Then they brought in "show working on paper" which I never learned.

I lost sooooo many marks because of that.

I always hated showing my work. I understand why they make you do it, I just don't like doing it.

You know, this reminds me very much of a class I took called Math for Liberal Arts Majors. Are those of you baffled by it engineers and scientists?

For a twisty English major, once I read it I could see the idea. It strikes me like the odd ability of hardcore DnD players to calculate THAC0 and bonuses of swords based on their hit probability.

That being said, I am incredibly surprised to see that as a mainstream technique.

chaos0xomega wrote:
All what it is is saying to create "10s" wherever possible to make math easier, I do it all the time (in my head), but I definitely didn't learn it at school, although in this case it would be easier (IMO) to just do as trexmeyer said.

This right here. I'm honestly kind of flabbergasted by this thread because the method in OP makes complete sense to me and among other ways I'd totally use this method to make addition simpler for myself. I did not learn this method in school.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Gitzbitah wrote:
You know, this reminds me very much of a class I took called Math for Liberal Arts Majors. Are those of you baffled by it engineers and scientists?

For a twisty English major, once I read it I could see the idea. It strikes me like the odd ability of hardcore DnD players to calculate THAC0 and bonuses of swords based on their hit probability.

That being said, I am incredibly surprised to see that as a mainstream technique.

Makes perfect sense to me and I'm and engineer so I don't really know what to say.

OR could simply just add 18 + 27 = 45
20 + 10 = 30
7 + 8 = 15 + 30 = 45

 Gitzbitah wrote:
You know, this reminds me very much of a class I took called Math for Liberal Arts Majors. Are those of you baffled by it engineers and scientists?

I was a Liberal Arts major (shocking, I know) but we didn't get special math classes.

 Ahtman wrote:

 Gitzbitah wrote:
You know, this reminds me very much of a class I took called Math for Liberal Arts Majors. Are those of you baffled by it engineers and scientists?

I was a Liberal Arts major (shocking, I know) but we didn't get special math classes.

How many years of pure math did you have to have? Other than a good number of statistics classes and college algebra I had to take business caulcus. Hated IT! Never ever have used it. Finance classes used a lot of math but I wouldn't call them math classes per se.

Also while we are on the subject, grad level micro economics can suck my old man balls.

Someone has to teach this gak?

 Frazzled wrote:

 Ahtman wrote:

 Gitzbitah wrote:
You know, this reminds me very much of a class I took called Math for Liberal Arts Majors. Are those of you baffled by it engineers and scientists?

I was a Liberal Arts major (shocking, I know) but we didn't get special math classes.

How many years of pure math did you have to have? Other than a good number of statistics classes and college algebra I had to take business caulcus. Hated IT! Never ever have used it. Finance classes used a lot of math but I wouldn't call them math classes per se.

Also while we are on the subject, grad level micro economics can suck my old man balls.

College Algebra I and II, Statistics, and Finite Mathematics. I had to do Trig and Calc on my own, just because I wanted to know them. Of course now I remember almost nothing about them.

 Bangbangboom wrote:
Someone has to teach this gak?

That's a good point. I could probably eventually explain this to some kids but I don't know if I could sell it at a parent-teacher conference. (To be clear, I am not a teacher by profession.)

I am amazed, and know not what to say. If it isn't a question of nature it must be a product of our training.

BTW, I just realized that the diction I used in my earlier post may have been unintentionally insulting- I was simply curious, and did not mean to deride engineers or mathematically inclined people. I have the greatest respect for what you do.

Common Core is a set of standards- this may be one of the teaching curriculums aligned with Common Core. Common Core is nothing new, just good teaching with different labels. The aligned curriculums though have a strong tendency to embrace... disastrous techniques. Essay scores plummeted across the county when we switched to Springboard, a scripted teaching curriculum aligned with the Common Core.

I've watched enough "Are you smarter than a 5th grader" to not judge common core just because adults are having a hard time with it...

GW getting into the math game I see.

 d-usa wrote:
I've watched enough "Are you smarter than a 5th grader" to not judge common core just because adults are having a hard time with it...

I've watched it enough to know that when all you do is go to school and learn lots of survey class type information you do well on a game show based around memory of survey class info.

I'm not having a hard time with it, I'm just not sure what the value in teaching this system is, as it seems to take something fairly simple and needlessly add steps to it. I'm not saying we shouldn't do it, but I have yet to get a really compelling argument as to why we are. Is this what is taught in other countries?