I have BACHELOR OF SCIENCE DEGREE in ELECTRONICS ENGINEERING which included EXTENSIVE STUDY in DIFFERENTIAL EQUATIONS...

>see number line
427 - 316
subtract 100 three times
subtract 10 only one time (this is the error)
subtract 1 six times (or 6 one time?)

It scares me that that guy studied at university and is too stupid to figure out that extremely simple scheme that closely follows what I assume everybody with half a brain does in their head when they subtract two numbers. But yeah, write your shitty paragraph on how scary new things are, fucking idiot.

This is just proof that engineers lack critical thinking skills

Future McD employees.

>american education

>Visualizing a number on the number line and going several times 10^n steps backwards
>what I assume everybody with half a brain does in their head when they subtract two numbers
Lol, what the fuck

>mfw I understood this but not the image

>brainlet

Yeah, I guess I'm stupid for just substracting digit by digit

>would result in termination if used
My esteemed self had been kekking hard at this image with which you have supplied us

its a very pretentious paragraph, but his point is still valid. Why are you trying to fix a system that isn't broken?

The job of an engineer is to improve on previous designs too. Don't fix what isn't broken is a retarded idea that would make sure we still use propeller planes for war.

Too many people who are even interested in some math heavy degree are absolutely bad at basic math manipulation and literally went through the schooling system based on memorization and very shallow understanding.

Being unable to do tricks like those with numbers is bad. Manipulating numbers and symbols is very important in actual math and if you don't get how to perform the basic mental math tricks, you are probably bad at it. Hell that engineer probably doesn't even have an understanding of why that subtraction method works.

This.

Like fuck, we have calculators now. You have one on your phone. Why teach arithmetic in the first place?
We do so because it is a way to introduce kids to abstract reasoning and symbolic manipulation, not because you will ever, in your entire life, need to add and subtract in your head. Unless you become a cashier.

>engineers literally believe engineering level ODEs is higher math

That's the real problem with this. I've tutored kids in this stuff, and the problem 99% of the time is that their parents didn't learn this method (and the parents who are smart enough to figure it out refuse to) and the kids didn't pay enough attention in class to memorize the method because the teachers have to rush through topics and most of this stuff isn't reused.

>HEY GUISE A ENGUNEER SAID HEE KNOWS MATHZZ
>LETS ALL LUAGH AT HIM WITH EPIC LE MAYMAYS xDDDDDDDD

inb4
>lul found the triggered enguneer

oh gee, that must be it. I guess you got me. Only an engineer wouldn't find this absolutely hilarious.

Cashiers dont subtract in their head, they mark your shit and then put how much you gave them into the machine and it calculates the amount they have to give you back

In some stores at least

Dude, you're supposed to push the buttons with pictures of food on them.

It is though. Just because there is higher level stuff than ODEs it doesn't mean they aren't high level.
It's like saying that 7 feet people aren't tall because there are 8 feet people.

if you can teach a high schooler how to solve something it cannot be classified as higher math

You can virtually teach a high schooler how to solve nearly anything in math, provided that they have the right motivation for it.

Holy shit do they teach kids math like this ?
No wonder kids can't do math.
This common core should be banned from being used.

Average differential equation classes cannot be considered as high level math for the simple reason that they are nothing more than plug-and-check.
However, this is not limited to engineers. Pretty much all undergraduate differential equation classes are taught this way. They teach methods to solve certain equations. But that is it. If you get away from that type of equation you are completely lost.
This is because solving differential equations requires serious knowledge of analysis (both real and complex, as well as Fourier series). PDEs are even more difficult.
This level of knowledge simply cannot be expected from undegrads (no matter their major). If you want to solve ODEs/PDEs:
> Learn to program and find numerical solutions
> Grad school

>teaches kid a method that will make them understand math so they don't all grow up retarded and confused, and will probably also make him do this shit in his head in 2 seconds when he grows up
>engineer stumped by basic number sense, brags about solving a 1st grade math problem in 5 seconds by probably googling it
>engineer probably uses calculator for double digit subtraction where you need to "borrow a digit".

the most failed math course is algebra. anything above calc 1 is higher math.

its' really hard to carry and borrow numbers in your head

what is a number bond and what is a hidden partner. why are squares being called cubes. what is that graph witht hree nodes supposed to represent

i remember in elementary school greater than/less than symbols were called alligator mouths or something like that. i rembmer thinking it was retarded even back then

This.

Explain this, immediately.

>subtract 10 only one time (this is the error)

user, I....

you just know that he's one of the retards who only got the degree thanks to grade inflation.

>what I assume everybody with half a brain does in their head when they subtract two numbers.

You assume everyone is profoundly retarded? Because I don't need my fingers or a "number line" to do simple subtraction, that's what I have a "brain" for.

When we learned those we drew them like dinosaur mouths that ate the bigger number.

no, it's not. calc 1 is a course you can take in high school, and ODEs you can take in your freshman year in college.

just because college has been pushed so hard that even the legally retarded are enrolling that doesn't mean that low level math becomes higher math due to their retardation.

you fucking moron

>electronics engineering
>electronics

That's just Engineering magic. You give any two engineers the same problem and one of them will come back to you with an elegant solution, and the other will come back to you with a fucking mess.

At the end of the day they're all still gay.

t. Common core shill.

OK My wife is a primary school teacher so I've asked her to explain it.

>Holy shit do they teach kids math like this ?

She tells me that's a bad example but apparently it does follow the process they use.

>what is a number bond and what is a hidden partner. why are squares being called cubes. what is that graph witht hree nodes supposed to represent

So apparently a square is hard for primary school kids to spell so they call it a cube. The nodes represent the number of cubes that they colored in.

Each color has a partner and you show your fingers to an adult.

The tree with three nodes is apparently where this is a poor example, but it reflects that you can color a cube in green or red or not color it in at all and those different colors are all partners in a tree of fingers.

>Explain this, immediately.

I have no idea what the fuck I said above but my wife says it makes perfect sense.

ok, now I get it. I didnt get that he hidden partners you show to an adult was connected to the different colors of the tree of fingers

I get it, all you faggots are jelly of engineers because they actually make money for services rendered? Novel fucking concept.

i think this is just about partitions

300k starting any job

>electronics engineering
>extensive study in differential equations
>higher math applications

Not everyone is profoundly retarded, but you sure are.
You may not need methods like this for simple subtraction. But it is best taught with simple subtraction. If you immediately go to more complex subtraction (like 3428053 - 48954) it will be much harder to actually teach the method.

And nobody is actually imagining a number line or hands when doing this. But you do use the basic idea. In a more complicated form of 6+7 in your head you would break it up into 6+4+3. And this is what is being taught here.

>6+7 in your head you would break it up into 6+4+3
This is the most asinine shit ive heard in my life, if you actually use this method you are legitimately retarded, no mater if you are only 8 years old. IF a kid did this they should be put on the short buss immediately since there is obviously no hope for her. you break it up into 3 + 3 + 7 for gods sake, 7 is larger than 6.

Soon white people will be chanting we wuz kangs when com.on core takes over.

You are severely lacking reading comprehension.

woosh

I'm really glad you posted this, user

>square is hard for primary school kids to spell so they call it a cube.
Really? I expected them to hand out physical cubes like the algebra tiles I never really understood until after I actually knew algebra.

>yfw a square is really just a 2-cube
>yfw primary school kids start learning abstraction before we did

a highschooler is not gonna understand what a hodge theater is

It's the CC shills who should start explaining why their method is superior. We're getting tired of just calling it shitty all the time.

>I don't know any higher math

When i become a math teacher I'm gonna teach my kids to do subtraction in their head via writing equalities because it doesn't require you to mentally store all the numbers, borrow, redistribute etc... It's all too complicated to do in your head. By creating equalities you ONLY need to mentally store the current expression, and then you can forget about it after you create your equality and come up with your equivalent expression.

For example:

427 - 369 = 127 - 69 = 67 - 9 = 58

In order:

427 - 369

Then you say EQUALS (and you can forget about the original expression since this new one is equivalent)

127 - 69

EQUALS

67 - 9

EQUALS

58

do you understand what a hodge theater is, and if not, how do you know a high schooler couldn't?

[math]baka[/math]

>Unless you become a cashier.
>Cashiers dont subtract in their head
Actually, cashiers add instead of subtracting
For example, if buy something for 4.85€ and pay with a 5€ bill, they will add 5 cents to get to 4.90 and then 10 cents to get to 5€, and with that, have calculated that the return is 15 cents

Subtraction is just a special case of addition

>not realizing they're all multiplication.

Isn't this the common core method?
I agree it's more intuitive than digit by digit subtraction.
316+4=320
320+7=327
327+100=427
4+7+100=111

427-316 = 400+20+7-300-10-6 = 400-300+20-10+7-6 = 100+10+1 = 111

The more you write, the more mistakes

>327 - 369 = 27 - 69 = ?
What now?

7 - 49 = -(49 - 7) = -42

You don't do ODEs at high school in your country?

No, I am an engineer myself and I understand the usefulness of common core for teaching the "intuition" behind a lot of mathematical concepts. What's the point of teaching stupid little algorithms to kids that computers can do better if the students do not gain some greater insight about why the operations work and ultimately yield the correct result?

Common core is an attempt to rectify this discrepancy between having an actual "sense" for the numbers, which is essential to higher problem solving, and mindlessly applying algorithms.

The guy doesn't understand the concept of a number line and is indignant about it and is rightfully being called a faggot for it.

Yeah, CC seems to be all about exposure to a variety of intuitive problem-solving schemes, which is more useful and intellectually stimulating training than endless drills of one particular algorithm you can only really use on paper concerned only with getting the correct answer as an end in itself.

I mean, come on, I can't be the only one who remembers being bored to tears in elementary school math, and as a result convinced I hated the subject until I found out what a proof was. Most people dissatisfied with the current setup are parents of underachievers who can't be arsed to learn anything and think that the obsolete skill of correctly using "the classic method" for the four basic operations is all their precious kids should need to do in order to pass with flying colors.

School has always been a joke based around obedience and mindless busy work. We can make it less so, and have kids do actual thinking. It's better for smarter kids and top achievers, who are invited earlier to critically think about the world, and better for stupid kids and low-achievers, in that they will be forced to where they otherwise wouldn't.

When in your life have you ever had to do some math and not had access to a calculator, whether you used it or not? Your brain is obsolete anyway nerds, relax.

durr why would anyone use karatsuba

shouldn't the classical method be enough for multiplication?

derpderpderpderpderp /pol/ told me common core is bad!!! libruls!

>/pol/ told me common core is bad
Pretty much the reason people hate it. It's incredibly stupid that we've allowed education to be ruled over by politics, but here we are. The left won't admit to the real issues with it, the right just wants to circlejerk over cherry picked parts of it, while somehow the whole thing started life as a much less partisan thing.

the idea that there should be a common core at all is totalitarian bullshit. Let schools have different curricula, then we can see which ones actually yield the best results, don't force this new-age methods down people's throat.

>democrats are "left"
shiggy diggy doo

>any federal-level educational standardization puts us on the road to serfdom, best that education is standardized on the state or local level, because a system which empowers "local" authorities to make broad decisions affecting others who have little to no recourse in the matter is inherently better than one which empowers central authorities to make the same decisions, because it's """more accountable"""
Why not just give each individual teacher absolute discretion in every matter of what to teach, and hold them accountable to nobody? That's the most "local" form of control you can get. Ah, the sweet taste of freedom.

>>democrats are "left"
Correct. People in the United States (the only people who have opinions that matter) refer to them as the "left".

>America has a left wing
Fucking lol. The US has a right wing and a really right wing.

>argumentum ad populum

>argumentum ad retardabitur

>commodification of labor and private ownership of the means of production are the hills we will literally die on
>a fundamentally exploitative system is morally justified so long as black and white proles are exploited in the same way and so long as we have proportional demographic representation among the exploiting class
>moderate social democrats like Sanders and those even a hair left of neoliberalism like Ellison have no place in our order
Sure smells like Karl Marx's unwashed beard in here, better crack a window

said the stalinist dick-sucker
the only way to know which method is best is to allow for competition and freedom, if the common core is actually good and effective it will stand out and be adopted in the future. right now no one knows.

you might just be autistic

right, that's why he's saying each individual teacher should have absolute authority and no accountability. that way we have more competition

>stalinist
Wrong
>allow for competition and freedom
The point is what you propose as an example of "freedom" is in no genuine sense freer than the alternative you criticize
>if the common core is actually good and effective it will stand out and be adopted in the future
How do you know? Why do you assume that local authorities are inherently objective, rational seekers of the optimal educational methods, and that central ones cannot be? What is your basis for believing a mass experiment between various arbitrary methods will inform and influence these authorities to where they come to all choose the correct ones, why hasn't this already happened in the long-standing absence of this level of educational standardization, and what data do you plan to collect to optimally judge these methods as either "more" or "less effective" than their alternatives?
>right now no one knows.
Sure, because as we all know, a priori reasoning is never appropriate to a system you can conceivably design an experiment on, just forget everything you ever heard about "predictive capability."

who said no accountability? schools who can't perform lose funding, teachers who can't teach get fired.

>teachers who can't teach get fired.
Statism

>I HAVE NOTHING TO COUNTER THIS SO IM JUST GONNA CALL HIM AUTISTIC HAHA! UPBOAT ME REDDIT :DDDDD

I do not really get what the smaller jumps with the initial jump of 20 then 10 10 10 (from 127 to 57) signify, though

It was supposed to be one medium jump of 10 (from 300 to 310)
and then 6 small jumps (from 310 to 316), yes?

Is this the error you are supposed to explain?

But who would make that error of jumping 20 and then 10 10 10 10 in the first place? It feels so random that I feel like my own understanding is wrong too

ignore what was written with the pen, those are six jumps of 1, it was 306 subtracted from 427, instead of 316.

The point is that the math shown is wrong. It's six jumps of 1, he forgot the 10 jump. The dad is retarded and assumed the small jumps were supposed to be 10s.

oh right it makes a whole lot more sense then