Frustrated Parent Posts Ridiculous Common Core Math Question that Teaches to Solve 7x5 in Six Steps

Pundit Press ^ | 10/22/14 | Aurelius

[therightliveswithus]

A concerned parent posted a picture of their third grader's common core math homework yesterday. Frustrated, they called the homework "ridiculous."

Just how ridiculous? Third graders are now being taught how to multply single digit numbers using six steps.

Common Core is the over-complication of simple problems.

So, how do you solve 7 times 5? You don't just solve it quickly in your head. You don't count by seven five times.

Instead, you are supposed to break five into two smaller numbers. It doesn't explain why you don't break seven down, but students are supposed to instantly know that five needs breaking down.

Then, you decide how big the numbers you want to be from that 5. So let's say it's a 3. You then subtract 3 from 5 to get 2.

Then you write out 7 x (3 + 2), which I think looks much, much more complicated than 7 x 5. Then, you multiply 3 times 7 to get 21. After that, you multiply 2 times 7 to get 14. Finally, you add 14 plus 21, to get 35.

You can see the problem (and additional ones) below:

[petercooper]

Get the answer wrong, but get part of the calculation correct means you get partial credit. They are just making the stupid kids stupider.

[posterchild]

That’s nuts. Are students no longer able to multiply 7 by 10 and then divide by 2?

[DannyTN]

While it seems ridiculous to do this with a simple problem like 7x5, it’s teaching techniques that can be used on much bigger numbers.

This is teaching the “distributive” property of mathematics.

Hopefully they already know 7x5 = 35.

[Right Brother]

If you can’t determine 7 x 5 simply based on the times table, how can you know that the products of 21 and 14 are produced by 7 x 3 and 7 x 2?

[dfwgator]

So, they make you multiply 7 by 3, but you can’t just multiply 7 by 5?

That’s f’d up.

[Wiser now]

At dinner the other evening our 14 year old grandson expressed his frustration with his 9th grade math teacher. She couldn’t even solve the linear equation she was attempting to teach her class. “How can I learn anything if she doesn’t know what she is doing?”
Fortunately his grandfather is a math whiz, though I doubt the solution will resemble the common core solution.

[RJS1950]

Memorization and the use of the old domino cards seemed to work very well in the 50s-60s and before that time. Then again, teaching phonics and sentence diagramming in grade school also worked very well.

The lazy, lamebrain part of my generation who didn’t bother to learn the basics and are now administrators, education experts, and senior teachers made up these techniques because they did such a crap job with their students who are now teachers.

[Black Agnes]

“Hopefully they already know 7x5 = 35.”

Actually they no longer memorize the multiplication table up to 12.

If they don’t ‘get’ it using the SIX STEPS (as opposed to just remembering that 7X5 = 35) then they’re screwed.

[wita]

...and adults who think this is rigorous and smart stuff, don’t have a clue.

[FoxInSocks]

It’s a demonstration of the distributive property. It might be more useful with larger numbers after the students have memorized the times tables.

[Texas Eagle]

[MrB]

Does it occur to folks that the left is

INTENTIONALLY

trying to take the logic out of math and education in general?

Also, a side effect is that the parent absolutely CANNOT be involved in working with their kids on doing homework that involves these convoluted illogical processes.

ALSO INTENTIONAL.

[Rebel_Ace]

First, let me preface my comment by saying that I am a computer programmer by trade (for over 25 years) and that I use mathematics extensively on a daily basis.

On its face, this example looks silly and stupid.

However, if the intent was to introduce or reinforce the principles of Associative, Commutative or Distributive properties of Addition and Multiplication, the exercise has some merit. (these properties are among those that allow you to break up and re-write expressions in algebra, to help in solving for unknown values)

But, I would bet dollars to donuts that the "teacher" presenting this would return a blank, glassy-eyed stare if you were to ask them how this indeed illustrated any one of those properties, or to provide a practical example of their usage, reducing the value of the lesson significantly.

Back in my day (the Neolithic, as you young'uns refer to it) we first learned our multiplication tables to 10x10 by "brute force" memorization by the 3rd grade. That way, we did not have to "think" our way through basic calculations.

Later, once we could pop off the answer to 8x7 off the top of our head, more advanced mathematical concepts were introduced.

Just saying, that seemed to work then...

[MrB]

Memorization is the the “grammar” stage of the classical education.

Methinks they don’t want a lot of people growing up with the ability of the next two stages - logic and rhetoric.

It’s easier to bamboozle people who can’t think properly.

[wita]

The devil in the details. The easy way is not taught. In fact there is no time for stacking and memorization as the time is spent on the techniques beyond the age appropriate material.

[Scrambler Bob]

Partial credit, hmmmm...

I would recast the problem as:

(1+1+1+1+1+1+1) X (1+1+1+1+1) =

and this would result in

1X1 + 1X1 + etc.

and then because 1X1 = 1,

1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1, etc.

Then add up the 1s to get 35.

I should get about 200% when adding up all that partial credit.

[Rebel_Ace]

I see your shorter response beat my longer winded rant that basically said the same thing. Everyone says I blather on too much!

[Alex Murphy]

So, they make you multiply 7 by 3, but you can’t just multiply 7 by 5? That’s f’d up.

It's like Microsoft got ahold of math and released Math 2.0

[MrB]

You definitely need a strong foundation before learning the advanced concepts.

You can’t get algebra, fractions, geometry, etc

when you still have to stop and think and “work out” what 7X5 is.