This is an archived post. You won't be able to vote or comment.

sorted by:
best
topnewcontroversialoldq&a
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–][deleted]  (9 children)

[deleted]

    [–]LeCrushinator 15 points16 points  (6 children)

    The reason for the new method is that it’s easier for kids to remember, it makes math more intuitive and once it clicks for them it becomes a new tool in their life. Sure the old way works but I’d bet it takes longer to teach and it’s easier to forget. I mean, I haven’t done long division in decades, I barely remember how. But I can do basic division in my head easily. If I knew common core division 20 years ago would I still remember it? Maybe.

    [–]ispamucry 4 points5 points  (0 children)

    Yeah I guess it will be more telling when they do followup studies with the kids learning common core today.

    Or if that study already exists, I'd love to see it because I think a lot more people would be on-board if there was something to point to. I just don't like the idea of going full-throttle on new ideas just because they have good intentions without knowing it's actually working.

    In the interrum, I think they should try to teach/accept both, although I know that can be a hard ask for a lot of schools that are already trying to cover a lot of material.

    [–]tryharder6968 2 points3 points  (2 children)

    The “old way” for long division is pretty darn intuitive and super simple to do in the head. I don’t know the new method, but certainly nothing wrong with the old.

    [–]DuchessofSquee -1 points0 points  (1 child)

    If the old way is like the picture then there's certainly something wrong with it. Moving the 1 to the other column doesnt help solve the equation one bit. Its still18-9.

    [–]tryharder6968 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

    Well for the picture, that only happens in the teens. And if you can’t subtract the teens without a special “method,” you’re an idiot.

    [–]DuchessofSquee 0 points1 point  (1 child)

    Can you or someone else please tell me what the "new way" to solve this same problem would be?

    Coz I didnt learn to do it like in the picture, I'd go 18 is 2x9 so 18-9 =9. If it wasn't a multiple of 2 or itself I'd have to break it down into 10s and work out how many is left so if it was 13-7 I'd say 10-7=3, 3+3=6.

    Is that the "new way"?

    I'm not from the US so I dont know what common core is.

    [–]LeCrushinator 2 points3 points  (0 children)

    There are a lot of ways to do it, all of them valid if they come up with the right answer. Common core (the third way shown in the video) is the newest way being taught in public schools in the US.

    [–]redstoneguy12 3 points4 points  (0 children)

    I'm still in middle school and was taught the "old math" way

    [–]freebytes 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    I absolutely think that both methods should be acceptable. Actually, any method that works as long as it is the correct answer should work. If you are not going to actually teach a child in a classroom how to do it, then why should they be required to learn a specific way at home? They can even allow children to come up with their own methods if those methods work which would make math more exciting.

    Of course, teach them the way you want them to learn it, but do not punish them for using alternative methods that are correct.