Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:the answer is all that matters.
Anybody who tells you differently is selling you something.
Not true in STEM, but maybe that's not where you're aiming?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:the answer is all that matters.
Anybody who tells you differently is selling you something.
Does it? I can teach a parrot to say multiplication tables correctly, does that mean the parrot understands multiplication?
Anonymous wrote:the answer is all that matters.
Anybody who tells you differently is selling you something.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:If the kid really understands the math they should be able to do it both ways no problem.
The problem is when kid is good at math but slow terrible at writing, should they get bad math grades / lose all that time to writing?
They don't get extra points in English class for their math prowess.
Anonymous wrote:the answer is all that matters.
Anybody who tells you differently is selling you something.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:If the kid really understands the math they should be able to do it both ways no problem.
The problem is when kid is good at math but slow terrible at writing, should they get bad math grades / lose all that time to writing?
They don't get extra points in English class for their math prowess.
Anonymous wrote:The way I explained it to my kid was that
(1) the teacher didn't actually need to know the answer to the problem. They need to know whether the kid understands the math. If you do it in your head and make a mistake, the teacher doesn't know whether you understand or whether you just made a careless mistake. They can't see where you went wrong.
(2) At some point, you won't be able to do the math in your head. The numbers will be too big or there will be too many steps. Best to get in the habit of showing your work.
(3) You can get partial credit if you show your work.
Anonymous wrote:Fluency has nothing to do with speed, and things like minute drills have been shown to not be helpful. It’s much more important for a child to be flexible and have a deep understanding of the relationship between numbers.
Anonymous wrote:If the kid really understands the math they should be able to do it both ways no problem.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:The way I explained it to my kid was that
(1) the teacher didn't actually need to know the answer to the problem. They need to know whether the kid understands the math. If you do it in your head and make a mistake, the teacher doesn't know whether you understand or whether you just made a careless mistake. They can't see where you went wrong.
(2) At some point, you won't be able to do the math in your head. The numbers will be too big or there will be too many steps. Best to get in the habit of showing your work.
(3) You can get partial credit if you show your work.
1) and 3) don't explain why correct answers lose points for not having shown work.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:The way I explained it to my kid was that
(1) the teacher didn't actually need to know the answer to the problem. They need to know whether the kid understands the math. If you do it in your head and make a mistake, the teacher doesn't know whether you understand or whether you just made a careless mistake. They can't see where you went wrong.
(2) At some point, you won't be able to do the math in your head. The numbers will be too big or there will be too many steps. Best to get in the habit of showing your work.
(3) You can get partial credit if you show your work.
1) and 3) don't explain why correct answers lose points for not having shown work.
Because the work is considered part of a correct answer. Do you understand what a proof is? Many times a correct answer is not one number, it is all of the steps written in the correct way leading logically to a single number. Do you also think English teachers should only assess spelling and ignore grammar and syntax?
This is fine if the student is actually asked to solve a challenging problem, but being asked to write "proofs" for, say, 2 digit multiplication which are just two numbers which happen to add up to the answer doesn't teach any more than any other form of busy work. The "proof" is contingent upon the reader already understanding the algorithm, which negates the need for a proof in the first place. If you know the algorithm well enough to interpret the shown work, you know it well enough to verify and answer without any shown work.
Proofs only make sense for problems that require some shred or semblance of critical thinking (which is what the proof is meant to communicate), which most kids sadly won't see until highschool or even college
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:The way I explained it to my kid was that
(1) the teacher didn't actually need to know the answer to the problem. They need to know whether the kid understands the math. If you do it in your head and make a mistake, the teacher doesn't know whether you understand or whether you just made a careless mistake. They can't see where you went wrong.
(2) At some point, you won't be able to do the math in your head. The numbers will be too big or there will be too many steps. Best to get in the habit of showing your work.
(3) You can get partial credit if you show your work.
1) and 3) don't explain why correct answers lose points for not having shown work.
Because the work is considered part of a correct answer. Do you understand what a proof is? Many times a correct answer is not one number, it is all of the steps written in the correct way leading logically to a single number. Do you also think English teachers should only assess spelling and ignore grammar and syntax?