- Forums
- Cross Site
- The Asylum
- the new math..continued....
the new math..continued....Follow
I hope that you are aware that estimating could be apart of the curriculum.
3 posts
I very, very vaguely agree with shadowrelm though, even if his spelling is atrocious. He's right because the teacher is trying to jam things into the students' heads that they don't need for years to come. It'll be much harder for them to learn equations if they just estimate answers... LIFE is estimation, but SCHOOL is not. You can't pass your classes if you estimate on all your work. Then again, shadowrelm is dead wrong, as well! I'm a student in Florida, and I'm not sure what kind of fancy new drug that math teacher is smoking, but it's not something I want within 100 feet of me. There is no estimation on the FCAT... I do more estimation in my Calculus class than any standardized test I've taken. In fact, all the standardized tests, like school classes, require exact answers.
Gooberp wrote:
I very, very vaguely agree with shadowrelm though, even if his spelling is atrocious. He's right because the teacher is trying to jam things into the students' heads that they don't need for years to come. It'll be much harder for them to learn equations if they just estimate answers... LIFE is estimation, but SCHOOL is not. You can't pass your classes if you estimate on all your work. Then again, shadowrelm is dead wrong, as well! I'm a student in Florida, and I'm not sure what kind of fancy new drug that math teacher is smoking, but it's not something I want within 100 feet of me. There is no estimation on the FCAT... I do more estimation in my Calculus class than any standardized test I've taken. In fact, all the standardized tests, like school classes, require exact answers.
Amazing how much more considerable a view becomes when it's written so much better.
Gooberp wrote:
I very, very vaguely agree with shadowrelm though, even if his spelling is atrocious. He's right because the teacher is trying to jam things into the students' heads that they don't need for years to come. It'll be much harder for them to learn equations if they just estimate answers...
Maybe you missed the last couple times when shadow complained about this same thing. At no point did anyone suggest that the school system in question is teaching estimation and *not* teaching how to arrive at the correct value. In fact, it's the exact opposite. The kids have already been taught how to do a particular math problem and in addition to that are being taught how to estimate values so as to more quickly arrive at an approximate answer. This is done specifically so they can both double check their work and so they can quickly eliminate some answers in multiple choice test situations.
What's amusing to me about this is that I remember being taught this exact same stuff back in grade school. I attended a private school. So, shadow's rants about this being some new thing that's being inflicted on the public school students and will rot their brains or something, is a technique that has been taught in private schools for at least a couple decades. It works. It has great value. It's a useful skill. You don't teach only estimating. You teach it along side normal math instruction.
Quote:
LIFE is estimation, but SCHOOL is not. You can't pass your classes if you estimate on all your work. Then again, shadowrelm is dead wrong, as well! I'm a student in Florida, and I'm not sure what kind of fancy new drug that math teacher is smoking, but it's not something I want within 100 feet of me. There is no estimation on the FCAT... I do more estimation in my Calculus class than any standardized test I've taken. In fact, all the standardized tests, like school classes, require exact answers.
Absolutely false. A good test taker can benefit greatly from estimation. Most standardized tests are multiple choice (in fact, I can't remember a math section in one that ever wasn't). If you are given a question asking "What is 18*20?", and the four choices are: A) 120 B) 500 C) 360 D) 100, you can quickly estimate the answer as 20x20 and arrive at 400 (but knowing it's a bit under that). You can very quickly realize that the only answer even close to 400 but not over is 360. And 360 is the correct answer.
More importantly, if you do that same math problem but make a mistake and end up with an answer like 180 (you forget to add the zero placeholder in the long multiplication), your estimation skills will quickly allow you to realize that this can't be the correct answer because it should be close to 400.
Estimation skills are incredibly useful on standardized tests.
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
Professor CrescentFresh wrote:
Get out your compass and draw a perfect circle. Measure the circumference and diameter of this circle. Divide circumference by diameter. What is the decimal value of your result? Don't post again until you have an exact CORRECT answer. Thanks.
This being said, it's late and I may have missed a key part of that equation...
Edited, Sat May 13 22:55:51 2006 by Pandorra
gbaji wrote:
Quote:
LIFE is estimation, but SCHOOL is not. You can't pass your classes if you estimate on all your work. Then again, shadowrelm is dead wrong, as well! I'm a student in Florida, and I'm not sure what kind of fancy new drug that math teacher is smoking, but it's not something I want within 100 feet of me. There is no estimation on the FCAT... I do more estimation in my Calculus class than any standardized test I've taken. In fact, all the standardized tests, like school classes, require exact answers.
Absolutely false. A good test taker can benefit greatly from estimation. Most standardized tests are multiple choice (in fact, I can't remember a math section in one that ever wasn't). If you are given a question asking "What is 18*20?", and the four choices are: A) 120 B) 500 C) 360 D) 100, you can quickly estimate the answer as 20x20 and arrive at 400 (but knowing it's a bit under that). You can very quickly realize that the only answer even close to 400 but not over is 360. And 360 is the correct answer.
More importantly, if you do that same math problem but make a mistake and end up with an answer like 180 (you forget to add the zero placeholder in the long multiplication), your estimation skills will quickly allow you to realize that this can't be the correct answer because it should be close to 400.
Estimation skills are incredibly useful on standardized tests.
gbaji makes a good point here. My last Physics final, there was a multipul choice question about time dialation (when traveling near the speed of light, time dialates noticably). For the answer to the question, it was a matter of figuring out how much time passed inside a space ship moving at about .94c (or .96c?) over a distance of 14.4cy. Two answers were greatly over 14.4y, which was impossible. One answer was 14.4y, which would be the estimate if there was no time dialation. The remaining answer had to be correct.
Same thing applies to SATs. They don't give you enough time to do all the problems out accurately, at least not back when I took it. They want you to estimate, find the reasonable answer, and move on. It's a chug-a-lug process on those things.
Gbaji's post made me remember something valuable that I've learned in architectural education, too, though it's only a bit tangent to the original topic.
Load bearing components in a building (such as stone, cement, or brick) have to be able to withstand a variety of forces, many of which cannot be accounted for in advance. When these pieces are cut to exacting specifications, they often crack or break to reveal where forces are acting upon them.
The interesting thing about it is that when they crack, they often actually become more stable, because the crack allows the forces to be transmitted through the piece more efficiently. It causes less stress concentrations. This can be avoided with proper treatment of the pieces, such as changing their sizes or using the right amount of mortar.
I just thought it was neat how a "broken" brick could end up being more structurally sound than a complete one. It also shows how estimating and giving room for error can give you the leeway to avoid fractures and the like.
It's something that I kinda find interesting as an architect, that most people probably think is boring as hell, hehe.
Load bearing components in a building (such as stone, cement, or brick) have to be able to withstand a variety of forces, many of which cannot be accounted for in advance. When these pieces are cut to exacting specifications, they often crack or break to reveal where forces are acting upon them.
The interesting thing about it is that when they crack, they often actually become more stable, because the crack allows the forces to be transmitted through the piece more efficiently. It causes less stress concentrations. This can be avoided with proper treatment of the pieces, such as changing their sizes or using the right amount of mortar.
I just thought it was neat how a "broken" brick could end up being more structurally sound than a complete one. It also shows how estimating and giving room for error can give you the leeway to avoid fractures and the like.
It's something that I kinda find interesting as an architect, that most people probably think is boring as hell, hehe.
Youshutup wrote:
My argument was "This is an innapropriate approach for children at that level, if this isn't just one isolated incident then things aren't going to be looking too great across the board". How ******* stupid do you have to be not to get it?
When you teach a kid to multiply and divide you should do exactly that; you should not let them skip the hard work because in a few years time you will expect them to stuff like that in a split second without hesitiation or error so they can eventually work on harder stuff. Does this make sense?
When you teach a kid to multiply and divide you should do exactly that; you should not let them skip the hard work because in a few years time you will expect them to stuff like that in a split second without hesitiation or error so they can eventually work on harder stuff. Does this make sense?
Don't you think that estimation trains a thought process which may be applicable to many different situations throughout early education, late education, and careers?
Additionally, children ARE being taught basic math skills. Estimation is a supplement to those abilities. But not only is it an additional tool for problem solving, it's also useful for the myriad of other situations that we've already mentioned two dozen times with each one of these dumb threads.
Quote:
My argument was "This is an innapropriate approach for children at that level, if this isn't just one isolated incident then things aren't going to be looking too great across the board". How ******* stupid do you have to be not to get it?
If by "incident" you mean shadowrelm's kid failing a test by not following explicit directions, then the only reason there will be a problem is because idiotic parents like him are force-feeding their ignorance to their children.
The reactionary attitude that you guys have about this just shows your own poor grasp of mathmatical theory.
And honestly:
You're arguing on the side of shadowrelm. That alone should be reason enough to re-evaluate your stance. C'mon now...
Edited, Sat May 13 08:21:12 2006 by Eske
Eske wrote:
And honestly:
You're arguing on the side of shadowrelm. That alone should be reason enough to re-evaluate your stance. C'mon now...
Edited, Sat May 13 08:21:12 2006 by Eske
QFT
There is no estimation on the FCAT...
------------------------------------------------------
nope. but what they are teaching kids is how to come up with a quick answer that is CLOSE to the actual answer to make it easyier to find the one of four correct answers on a multiple guess question without spending the time to solve the problem for the CORRECT answer.
and yes, it is now part of the teaching plan in dade county for 3rd and 4th graders, probably part of the teaching plan state wide.
--------------------------------------------------------
Absolutely false. A good test taker can benefit greatly from estimation.
----------------------------------------------------------
which, i might point out, defeats the purpose of the test top begine with. once you start teachubng the test, the test becomes invalid. once they learn how to do "estimation" to find a "close" answer much faster, the test no longer has any validity as it no longer reflects the students ability to solve problems, only his ability to take multiple guess questions.
---------------------------------------------------------------
More importantly, if you do that same math problem but make a mistake and end up with an answer like 180 (you forget to add the zero placeholder in the long multiplication), your estimation skills will quickly allow you to realize that this can't be the correct answer because it should be close to 400.
---------------------------------------------------------
which, like i said above, defeats the purpose of the test. if you make a MISTAKE, you have let the test do its job and find a particular weakness. if you make a mistake in the real world, and dont double check your answer by solving for the CORRECT answer, YOUR AN IDIOT.
if your wrong answer is close to the actual answer, the estimated answer you choose to check your work WILL TELL YOU NOTHING.
NO ONE usses estimation to double check math work. it is unreliable, and will only help you if your mistake is significantly differant from the actual answer.
the only place it has in grade school is to teach kids how to pass a multiple guess question. teach them the FCAT. which totally defeats the purpose of the test to begione with.
sooo, you have teachers training our kids to guess at math to pass a test that has been made invalid for that very reason. and at the end of the year what have they learned? that guessing is an appropriate means of solving a problem.
a downward spiral into STUPIDITY.
the gbaji majority working for you.....
------------------------------------------------------
nope. but what they are teaching kids is how to come up with a quick answer that is CLOSE to the actual answer to make it easyier to find the one of four correct answers on a multiple guess question without spending the time to solve the problem for the CORRECT answer.
and yes, it is now part of the teaching plan in dade county for 3rd and 4th graders, probably part of the teaching plan state wide.
--------------------------------------------------------
Absolutely false. A good test taker can benefit greatly from estimation.
----------------------------------------------------------
which, i might point out, defeats the purpose of the test top begine with. once you start teachubng the test, the test becomes invalid. once they learn how to do "estimation" to find a "close" answer much faster, the test no longer has any validity as it no longer reflects the students ability to solve problems, only his ability to take multiple guess questions.
---------------------------------------------------------------
More importantly, if you do that same math problem but make a mistake and end up with an answer like 180 (you forget to add the zero placeholder in the long multiplication), your estimation skills will quickly allow you to realize that this can't be the correct answer because it should be close to 400.
---------------------------------------------------------
which, like i said above, defeats the purpose of the test. if you make a MISTAKE, you have let the test do its job and find a particular weakness. if you make a mistake in the real world, and dont double check your answer by solving for the CORRECT answer, YOUR AN IDIOT.
if your wrong answer is close to the actual answer, the estimated answer you choose to check your work WILL TELL YOU NOTHING.
NO ONE usses estimation to double check math work. it is unreliable, and will only help you if your mistake is significantly differant from the actual answer.
the only place it has in grade school is to teach kids how to pass a multiple guess question. teach them the FCAT. which totally defeats the purpose of the test to begione with.
sooo, you have teachers training our kids to guess at math to pass a test that has been made invalid for that very reason. and at the end of the year what have they learned? that guessing is an appropriate means of solving a problem.
a downward spiral into STUPIDITY.
the gbaji majority working for you.....
shadowrelm wrote:
the gbaji majority working for you.....
Only thing shadowrelm's ever said that made me laugh.
Quote:
which, i might point out, defeats the purpose of the test top begine with. once you start teachubng the test, the test becomes invalid. once they learn how to do "estimation" to find a "close" answer much faster, the test no longer has any validity as it no longer reflects the students ability to solve problems, only his ability to take multiple guess questions.
Multiple choice tests have never reflected the students ability to solve problems. Math tests designed to reflect a students ability to solve problems will be written ones not ones that have you fill in a bubble. Estimation is a fact of life and many jobs use it. As long as your child is being taught how to solve the problem along with the estimation way I dont see a problem.
It also certainly appears that your english teacher taught you to estimate how to spell words. "begine" "teachubng"
Multiple choice tests have never reflected the students ability to solve problems.
--------------------------------------------------
agree. but that is the system the government usses to asses math skills so it can be loaded into a computer to score without hiring 1000 test graders at the governments expense.
so, while finding out what are kids are being taught seems important, especially at election time, actually spending money to get it done is not.
the problem is not the testing itself. testing is a good idea. the problem is attaching school funding to those results. that is the devil in the details. as long as any individual school is threatened by withholding funds, there is a HUGE incintive for the school to teach standardized tests first, math second.
and in the end, schools in wealthier neibhorhoods will still fair better as they usually have 2 parents to help with homework, and schools in impovershed neibhorhoods will still fair worse.
the only thing that will change is the flow of money AWAY from the place it is really needed, and TO the place it is needed less. the republican agenda. mo fo da rich, the hell with the rest.
estimation is a result of politics, not a result of enhanced education.
the solution is simple. keep the test, eliminate the funding threat attached to it adn let schools focus on teaching instead of protecting funding.
but that is not the republican plan. hopefully the plan will get its **** kicked out the door with the outgoing addministraition in two years. in the meantime, ill hire a tutor because i can afford it, and the hell with the rest of you.
ill do my part to help at election time, but half of you idiots voted for this, so my conscience is clean.
--------------------------------------------------
agree. but that is the system the government usses to asses math skills so it can be loaded into a computer to score without hiring 1000 test graders at the governments expense.
so, while finding out what are kids are being taught seems important, especially at election time, actually spending money to get it done is not.
the problem is not the testing itself. testing is a good idea. the problem is attaching school funding to those results. that is the devil in the details. as long as any individual school is threatened by withholding funds, there is a HUGE incintive for the school to teach standardized tests first, math second.
and in the end, schools in wealthier neibhorhoods will still fair better as they usually have 2 parents to help with homework, and schools in impovershed neibhorhoods will still fair worse.
the only thing that will change is the flow of money AWAY from the place it is really needed, and TO the place it is needed less. the republican agenda. mo fo da rich, the hell with the rest.
estimation is a result of politics, not a result of enhanced education.
the solution is simple. keep the test, eliminate the funding threat attached to it adn let schools focus on teaching instead of protecting funding.
but that is not the republican plan. hopefully the plan will get its **** kicked out the door with the outgoing addministraition in two years. in the meantime, ill hire a tutor because i can afford it, and the hell with the rest of you.
ill do my part to help at election time, but half of you idiots voted for this, so my conscience is clean.
Now we see your true gripe come out. You hate the republicans.
Please by all means prove it.
Quote:
estimation is a result of politics, not a result of enhanced education.
Please by all means prove it.
Dear Shadowrealm,
Please learn to construct grammatically correct sentences with correct spelling.
Please learn to use the quote feature properly.
Only then can you complain that education is leading to stupidity.
For the record: On a multiple choice test the questions in math are built so that you HAVE TO ESTIMATE. That is the whole point of multiple choice. If they wanted someone to work it out they would make it a long answer. It specifically tests the students knowledge of the process. Since the student is NOT required to do the entire formula/equation then estimations should be done.
You are the reason that your child is becoming stupid. You refuse to understand why something is being taught just because you never had it done to you and don't have the experience in the subject to make a sound decision where the material is applicable and usefull.
You're the parent that you seem to complain about: Always blaming someone else for problems that you create.
Stop breeding.
Please learn to construct grammatically correct sentences with correct spelling.
Please learn to use the quote feature properly.
Only then can you complain that education is leading to stupidity.
For the record: On a multiple choice test the questions in math are built so that you HAVE TO ESTIMATE. That is the whole point of multiple choice. If they wanted someone to work it out they would make it a long answer. It specifically tests the students knowledge of the process. Since the student is NOT required to do the entire formula/equation then estimations should be done.
You are the reason that your child is becoming stupid. You refuse to understand why something is being taught just because you never had it done to you and don't have the experience in the subject to make a sound decision where the material is applicable and usefull.
You're the parent that you seem to complain about: Always blaming someone else for problems that you create.
Stop breeding.
Quote:
Can I assume you have a degree in maths or a related discipline to talk with such confidence?
Can we assume that any credentials provided online have about zero chances of being recognized or undoubted?
This really depends on where/how the ciriculum is being taught.
Is this a first step or a second? Is this supplimentary or primary way for solving specific formula's? Have they been taught the long way? Are they going to be taught the long way?
Basically, it's FOURTH GRADE FFS. The next time you see a chemist "guesstimating" at the approximate molarity of an acidic solution that is the day natural selection is hard at work.
If this has any impact on a FOURTH GRADERS life in any way, I would be surprised.
If it does, then they aren't doing a job that is going to require fsking calculus equations. Could someone PLEASE tell me where. specifically. knowing the long way of doing something and the accurate estimation of something is GOING TO THREATEN/EFFECT A FSKING 10 YEAR OLD.
Unless your child is doing specific non-linear equations I'd suggest you dig the sand out of your ****** and make sure that someday they DO know the right way.
God, you people are stupid.
Added: That, then, and two commas
Edited, Sun May 14 16:27:09 2006 by Diveos
Youshutup the Vile wrote:
Eske wrote:
The reactionary attitude that you guys have about this just shows your own poor grasp of mathmatical theory.
This isn't about mathematical theory. I'm sure everyone (well, most) here can multiply and divide.. it's about whether this approach is half-assed and counterproductive to teaching kids the basics. Based on what shadow has said, I would say it is. But then I have a long-standing grudge against a target based approach to education in general, and tests like the ones described in particular.
Can I assume you have a degree in maths or a related discipline to talk with such confidence?
Edited, Sun May 14 12:58:56 2006 by Youshutup
I hope you realize that I can throw that attack right back at you?
Do you have a degree in math or a related discipline to talk with such confidence?
No?
Then save it. That argument isn't going to fly in this discussion.
My assumption that children are being taught "basic math" such as multiplication and division is based on the fact that shadowrelm stated that his child solved the problems correctly, counter to the direction to estimate. If she did that, then wouldn't that imply that she was already taught those basic skills?
I mean honestly, are you trying to suggest that there's some agenda to remove exact multiplication from the curriculum? Or replace it all with estimation? That's laughable.
Edited, Sun May 14 15:59:23 2006 by Eske
The arguments have become long and cumbersome, so I'm going to just input this without attaching a predefined context.
On many exams and on much work in many of my Engineering courses, my answers vary slightly from those of the professors and other students. This is because I use numbers that, while not exact, are far more precise than the others. Such as, they may only use (c * pi) to three decimal places in their calculations, yet I'd use all 12 digits my calculator provides. Added up, they do show variance.. everyone else uses estimation much more readily than I do. While I value my precision, I can easily see how my own mathematical arguments can become encumbered unnessicarily by my lust for a better answer.
I'm not sure if the others are taking the correct approach, or if I am. There are many arguments on both sides of the coin. For now, though, everyone's just doing what we are.
(Note that this was about extreme precision versus acceptable precision as opposed to being about precision vs estimation, since precision doesn't actually exist in most cases.)
On many exams and on much work in many of my Engineering courses, my answers vary slightly from those of the professors and other students. This is because I use numbers that, while not exact, are far more precise than the others. Such as, they may only use (c * pi) to three decimal places in their calculations, yet I'd use all 12 digits my calculator provides. Added up, they do show variance.. everyone else uses estimation much more readily than I do. While I value my precision, I can easily see how my own mathematical arguments can become encumbered unnessicarily by my lust for a better answer.
I'm not sure if the others are taking the correct approach, or if I am. There are many arguments on both sides of the coin. For now, though, everyone's just doing what we are.
(Note that this was about extreme precision versus acceptable precision as opposed to being about precision vs estimation, since precision doesn't actually exist in most cases.)
Right. Now you're just shooting any which way. Whatever keeps your argument afloat, eh?
First off, I'll address this one:
Either you were late to the discussion, or your reading comprehension sucks. I never said that the kid had poor grasp of mathmatical theory. I said she couldn't, or wouldn't follow directions. With the mathematical theory comment, I was referring to you and shadowrelm, and your inability to comprehend the aformention merits of estimation.
If you want to debunk what I (and almost everyone else) have said, then I'd recommend that you oughta volunteer whatever credentials you have which magically make you right and everyone else wrong.
That argument stands only if you disregard the merits of estimation, which we've been over two thousand times now.
That's not going to fly. If you want to assume that the kid learned basic math from somewhere other than the classroom just because it's convenient for your argument, then thats your prerogative. But today's kids aren't being taught estimation at the expense of other basic skills, no matter what you'd like to believe.
Now I'm not trying to say that education here in the states is top-notch. I'm just saying that kids are taught basic math, and that estimation is a valuable tool for all levels of mathematics.
You're trying to construct an entire argument around shadowrelm's "the sky is falling" rant. You're using HIM as ONE example to decry the entire education system. You think that's legitimate?
Give me a break. And you want to tell me that I have a thick head? Hypocrite.
Edited, Sun May 14 20:54:19 2006 by Eske
First off, I'll address this one:
Quote:
I'll take that as a "no". I just assumed that if you were to attack this young undergraduate's grasp of "mathematical theory" (whatever you want that to mean) you would do so with some.. credentials.
Either you were late to the discussion, or your reading comprehension sucks. I never said that the kid had poor grasp of mathmatical theory. I said she couldn't, or wouldn't follow directions. With the mathematical theory comment, I was referring to you and shadowrelm, and your inability to comprehend the aformention merits of estimation.
If you want to debunk what I (and almost everyone else) have said, then I'd recommend that you oughta volunteer whatever credentials you have which magically make you right and everyone else wrong.
Quote:
Why the hell would a teacher ask a child who could competantly perform those operations to do something that was beneath them? The idea behind education is that you progress...
That argument stands only if you disregard the merits of estimation, which we've been over two thousand times now.
Quote:
Shadow's kid apparently has concerned adults looking out for her (lucky squirt) so I would guess they ensure she gets taught what needs to be taught even if it can't be in the classroom. Like by a private tutor..
That's not going to fly. If you want to assume that the kid learned basic math from somewhere other than the classroom just because it's convenient for your argument, then thats your prerogative. But today's kids aren't being taught estimation at the expense of other basic skills, no matter what you'd like to believe.
Now I'm not trying to say that education here in the states is top-notch. I'm just saying that kids are taught basic math, and that estimation is a valuable tool for all levels of mathematics.
You're trying to construct an entire argument around shadowrelm's "the sky is falling" rant. You're using HIM as ONE example to decry the entire education system. You think that's legitimate?
Give me a break. And you want to tell me that I have a thick head? Hypocrite.
Edited, Sun May 14 20:54:19 2006 by Eske
Recent Visitors: 340
All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (340)
- Forums
- Cross Site
- The Asylum
- the new math..continued....
© 2024 Fanbyte LLC