1 and 16 are exactly the same according to Common Core
>>67868990
Congrats!
You've found theMILLIONTH reason why common core is retarded!
>CLICK HERE FOR PRIZE!
>>67868990
20 / 5 (2 x 2)
20 / 5 x 4
4 x 4 = 16
In no universe was it ever 1.
PEMDAS = "the old way"
>>67868990
"The Common Core is a set of high-quality academic standards in mathematics and English language arts/literacy (ELA). These learning goals outline what a student should know and be able to do at the end of each grade."
>high-quality
>>67869155
20/(5(2x2))
>>67868990
They are the same modulo 1,3,5 and 15
what the fuck :D
>>67869155
>20 / 5 (2 x 2)
>20 / 5 x 4
>20 / 20
>1
did you drop out of high school or something?
>>67869232
When you have multiplication and division next to each other you go left to right. This is why fractions are so much better.
They tried teaching this crap to kids in my city, the parents pitchforked and said they didnt want their kids learning something they didnt know how to teach so it was scrapped.
>>67868990
This is so dumb because the teachers wrote the math problem incorrectly. It's written as if the (2 x 2) is right next to the 5 under the 20. In that case it would indeed be 1. If the (2 x 2) were actually next to 20/5 instead of being with it then you would know to divide first and get 16.
>>67869155
/ means fraction. if it was a division symbol, you would be right.
>>67868990
Stop shitposting you dirty Aussie and stop falling for the bait you fucking newfags
I had to send an email to the Trump campaign explaining that he could have hit the debate question about common core out of the park minutes after it was asked. Using this image, he could have beautifully explained that not following pemdas just absolutely fucks you for higher math.
Oh.. looks dumb, but it makes sense... "/" is sometimes considered to have lower precedence than "*" and juxtapositions.
But now they have made it fully ambiguous. Thanks common core!
It can't be 1.
20/5 (2*2)
4(2*2)
4(4)
=16
>>67869155
This
I think the problem is that common core isn't shit tier in itself, but the way it is designed is really convoluted and hard to teach. I think it teaches good mental math tricks (like the tens trick) but the shit tier elementary school teachers make convoluted presentations and assignments based on the trick it's teaching, rather than the end product of the tricks.
Regarding this: PEMDAS was always left to right for +- and X/, plug that exact problem into a ti 84 and it will come out 16. It's just some states taught it that PEMDAS is in that exact order (which is wrong). Equally correct does not mean right.
>>67869155
Pemdas describes operand hierarchy. The answer is 1.
>>67869232
>20 / 5 x 4
> 4 x 4
> 16
there is no parenthesis around 5 x 4 so it's not
>20 / (5 x 4)
>20 / 20
>1
>>67869287 is right. Did you drop out of middle school or something?
>>67869217
Nice proxy
>>67869496
Well, it depends how you interpret it. You could also interpret it as being a fraction with 20 as the numerator and 5(2x2) as the denominator. It's a stupidly laid out problem.
>>67869343
>british math
a fraction slash is literally a division sign
>>67868990
its a shop you fucking retards
stop replying to australia posts, christ
>>67869217
Kim Jong Un is here! :DDDD
The problem here is that the problem is worded ambigously.
/ is a shitty operator. Write the problem properly, i.e. either
20
--- (2*2)
5
or
20
----------
5(2*2)
And the problem ceases to be ambigous.
Lesson learned: Be precise when using division. If you take any other lesson from this, you're the problem.
>>67868990
The answer is 16. I don't understand what they mean by old way or common core, but the answer of this is never 1. You always go from left to right and do the math in the brackets separately.
20/5*(2*2)
20/5*4
4*4
16
>>67869155
In any universe with a half decent education system it is 1. The slash means its a fraction, ie it can only be taken as 20 divided by 5(2x2). Not fucking complicated mate. The answer is and can only be 1.
>>67869232
Holy fuck it's bad that you're that retarded, it's worse that you're that retarded while trying to tell other people they're retarded
>>67869343
No. / means division. If you want it to imply a fraction you must do (b/a) or a|b
Sometimes I can't tell if these are troll threads. PEMDAS is literally fucking 3rd grade math.
>>67869624
but BEDMAS dictates that you divide first and then proceed with multiplication
>>67869155
>>67869213
>>67869232
>>67869287
>>67869496
>>67869562
>arguing over a third grade question
See this is exactly why Australia keeps shitposting here
>>67869624
PEMDAS, Tea nigger
Can't argue with google
>>67869521
Most kids learn this automatically.
For example, I don't actually use the way that they normally teach multiplications up to 12. Instead of remembering every single fucking thing, I switch around numbers and count up/down from the nearest multiplication fact I know.
>>67869843
that has nothing to do with my comment. I am saying the problem could be interpreted as:
20
--
5(2x2)
in which case the answer would be 1
>>67869624
This isn't gender studies, innit? Fuck off, m8
>>67869843
Pemdas is irrelevant if its a fucking fraction you redneck yokel. That still makes it fucking 20/20 = 1. Cunt
>>67870019
It's not a fraction though because it's not being taught in some 3rd world muslim island classroom
>>67869935
As you can see, google corrected it to (20/5). The original problem is unclear
ok but consider the following expression:
20 / 5x
if you agree that 20/5(2*2) = 16, then you should also agree that 20/5x = 4x, for the exact same reasons. but i think most people will read that expression as 4/x
it's a legitimate notational problem
>>67869935
Huh. Look at that.
In most programming languages, "*" and "/" have the same precedence and there are no juxtaposition multiplication. Google allows the juxtaposition and treats it with the same precedence as the others. This is really confusing. They probably shouldn't bother kids with ambiguous cases like that at all.
>>67868990
https://www.khanacademy.org/math/pre-algebra/order-of-operations/order_of_operations/v/order-of-operations
>>67869232
Found the dropout
Multiplication and division are with the same priority so you do the from left to right
>>67870092
No one fucking uses "/" to indicate division past 2nd grade.
>>67870092
This guy gets it. Its how you understand the wording of the problem. If you take the / to mean straight divide, then yeah, i agree that it is 16. If you understand it as a fraction, which the brits do in this instance, then its 1.
>>67870092
No.
It would be 4x^-1 or 4/x
It would only be 4x if it were set up like this
20/5(x)
>>67870270
Good thing there are no brits in US classrooms.
>>67870234
except literally every programmer on earth?
>>67870234
Actually.... lots of people do. That's how division is done on just about every single programming language.
>>67870309
Mate your education system is 2 years behind ours. its a good thing we arent in your classrooms, because youd get shit on.
>>67869681
This. The problem is a good example of why ambiguity is bad, nothing more.
>>67870234
Except every programming language more complex than assembly...
Even MATLAB uses / for division. It's not hard to figure out pemdas or that liberal usage of parentheses is a good idea.
>>67870377
>>67870345
Not in Lisp.
>>67870309
I agree with him and I grew up in US and got a 5 in AP calculus. Shut the fuck up. This has nothing to do with British vs American. / can be taken as the actual division symbol or as a fraction.
>>67869735
No, the slash means it's division, and I say this as someone who got 2400 on the SAT and 800 on the math level 2 SAT in high school. The answer was always 16.
>>67870410
Half the people who take AP Calculus get a 5. Do you want a cookie or something?
Will you homeschool your child, /pol/?
>>67869155
20 / (5 (2 * 2)) = 1
20/5 * (2 *2) = 16
This shit is made intentionally confusing or something
All they need is a * between 5 and 2 to specify the order of operation.
>>67870101
This is correct unless you have it written as a fraction
20
--------
5(2*2)
Then the sign for division has the same role as brackets and the answer is 1.
This thread just made me respect common core more. Good job, guys.
>>67870234
That's wrong though. You use slashes and dots exclusively in higher math.
>>67870408
Found the NEET
>>67870285
google corrects 20/5x to 4x
lol, why all the arguing? "/" is SOMETIMES considered to have lower precedence than multiplications. that's why it shouldn't be used like that.
The weird thing is that they are bothering kids with ambiguous notations and telling them that there are multiple good answers instead of telling them that mathematical expressions are not supposed to be ambiguous.
>>67870451
Our german friend above explained it best. Slash can mean straight division or a fraction. In the UK, it typically means a fraction. if you want to talk about division, you use a fucking ÷ symbol.
>>67870476
saws on pic?
>>67869155
Lmao when will you guys ever learn not to reply to obvious trolls like this one.
>>67868990
Everyone is retarded. The one true and only answer to this question is that it is ambiguous; and doesn't deserve even an attempt of being solved because whoever wrote it is a god damn moron.
>>67870564
20/5x = (20*x)/5
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LPjC6MXSWi0
IT'S REAL
>>67870587
No. Division NEVER has lower precedence than multiplication.
>>67870713
It does in gender studies.
>>67868990
If you think common core is bad, you should see what they teach as an 'anti-bullying' course in australia
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vtvIO6jNKco
>>67868990
20 / 5 (2 * 2)
20 / 5 (4)
4 (4)
16
===
20 / 5 (2*2)
20 / 5 (4)
20 / 20
1
===
Brackets
Indices
Division
Multiplication
Addition
Subtraction
===
Top one is correct ^
"Old Way" is retarded. No wonder americans are seen as dumb as fuck.
>>67870607
Mask of Sorrow
>>67870755
Toppest kek
>>67868990
Wtf faggot??
I see references to 911 all around me (including irl)???
Is it habening?
follow in order
>>67869343
kek
>>67870713
Usually not, but sometimes...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Order_of_operations
"However, in some of the academic literature, multiplication denoted by juxtaposition is interpreted as having higher precedence than division, so that 1/2x equals 1/(2x), not (1/2)x."
>>67870907
DM and AS have the same precedence, google it
There is no right way to do calculations PEMDAS is as wrong/right as any other system you can come up with.
It's a tool used to reduce the brackets needed.
The important thing is that your system is coherent and exact.
>>67870234
Found the person who never did past pre-albebra in HS.
>>67870764
Well the only thing u did correct was to write the order of priorities.
So first you need to get rid of the bracket COMPLETELY, that u didnt do, thats ur first mistake.
In order to get rid of the bracket, you have to multiply the value inside the bracket with the value before the bracke, before doing anything else.
To simplify it one could write:
20 / ( 5 (2*2) )
20 / ( 5 (4) )
20/ (5*4)
20/20 = 1
U left one bracket and continued with the division, thats bullshit, cant do that.
Take a fucking calculator and write that in, not on this planet will that calculator show the value of 16 and not on any other planets.
>>67871005
That is what we are taught. That image doesn't show it though
>>67870965
>in some of the academic literature
exactly. ambiguities like these is why every academic paper uses LaTeX now. the notation isn't ambiguous but it creates a very severe reading problem prone to misreads and typos
>>67871035
Actually, math isn't like that. It isn't open to interpretation.
Order of operations must be done when solving mathematical equations or else it is wrong.
>>67868990
>opinions of these people are listened to
>>67871005
Only applies in C style languages and they have a left to right associativity.
>>67870907
I saw that as
>Brest = ()
>Expansion = ( )
at first for some reason.
This thread should be deleted! It can be used against 4chan as a whole.
>>67871240
Fuck you. I say we should let this ausfag dump common core pics
>>67871217
These don't have juxtaposition though.
2 + 2 = 5
This is how it starts
>>67871296
This isn't unusual for kids
>>67871296
wow. I don't think I can do this homework.
>>67871090
20/(5*(2*2)) isn't a valid simplification of 20/5*(2*2). the additional parenthesis increase the precedence of the multiplication operator in the original expression, changing the result
pic if you want to see a calculator
the entire ambiguity relies on a misunderstanding that the implicit multiply by juxtaposition has higher precedence, which is not true
>>67871296
There's actually nothing wrong with this, aside from being written to be idiot proof to the point of being insulting to the average person's intelligence.
The fastest way to do math in yur head is to do these sort of things in your head. It's easier for us to work with smaller numbers than large, taking away 7 from 50 is easier than adding 26 to 17.
>>67868990
PEMDAS says it's 16 bitch is a retard.
>>67870965
Isn't that more semantically though? I guess it is more of an argument of semantically, rather than order of operations.
Alright, I'm going to be a faggot and switch sides. Originally a die-hard 16 due to PEDMAS, but now arguing for 1 because implicit multiplication has a semantically higher precedence than the slash.
Thanks for changing my mind.
>>67871193
Negative. It's only valid if the person writing the expression follows the rules. You can't always assume this to be true.
>>67871193
Of course it isn't open to interpretation.
Order of operations are arbitrarily choosen but for the most part agreed upon.
If something isn't totally clear anyway you put brackets around it or use implied brackets.
>>67871401
REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE
This is fake, stop believing shitposts guys
2+2=5 HURRR FUNNY I MAKE A POST
>>67871430
Juxtaposition sometimes has higher precedence. (see >>67870965)
>>67871410
it just makes me fucking mad and so happy that i made it out of public school system before shit like this was forced onto kids
but i feel bad because i think the future kids might grow up to be completely retarded
i used to think hating on common core was a meme but when you see pics of actual questions it is real rage material
>>67871296
The way this is written makes it hard to follow and looks retarded.
However, I have been doing the mental math of that in my head since 3rd grade that was back in 2001.
Got esentially straight a's in math(could have been the autism tho)[im not actually autistic]
>>67870764
The powerpoint is wrong, the "Old Way" would also give 16. Just use wolfram alpha for fucks sake, that will only give you the right answer since the math is so basic.
>>67871466
n o
>>67871579
Don't worry go-, guy, we just want the best for children!
>>67869232
I used to do it that way but then I realized Technically it's P>E>M=D>A>S.
Wait is it P>E>M=D>A=S?
>>67868990
>not using BODMAS
This is problematic and very triggering to me
It's shopped to be intentionally vague.
It depends on how you interpret it.
Most people over 20 would say 1.
>>67871510
>if I write an equation without following PEMDAS the answer suddenly becomes different
No. Math isn't open to interpretation. If you write an equation without using order of operations to solve a problem, your equation is fucking wrong.
photoshopped picture here's the real one
>>67871676
>Math isn't open to interpretation
nuh uh
>>67871351
correct answer is C, no?
shit's not that hard, just different. and seemingly unneccessary
>>67871654
you know elite jews are just proud shills for the catholic church and jesuit communist armies, right?
c'mon now anon you need to do your homework
>>67871296
This is what everyone does in their heads, though.
>>67871578
M A S S A G E I N T H E G A R A G E
>>67871670
Most people are retarded then. It's 16.
>>67871782
>you need to do your homework
Not if its anything like this shit I've posted so far
>>67871736
>educated guesses are mathematical proofs
stop
This answer is 16.
PEMDAS
20 / 5 (2 * 2)
>Start with parenthesis.
20 / 5 (4)
>There are no exponents, so we move onto Multiplication/Division.
>They both have the same precedence and thus are done left to right.
4 (4)
>Last step is to multiply
16
This same logic is applied to programming. Multiplication and division have the same precedence, so when they're on the same line, they're executed left to right. The same is true with addition and subtraction; they both have the same precedence as well.
There is nothing correct about 1.
>>67871847
>>67871825
stop shitposting austrailia
>>67871825
just an fyi fella
it doesn't help fighting your enemy if you don't even know who they are
>>67871858
no
don't worry I'm nearly done though
>>67871902
This is your problem, not mine.
We've got our own fight over here with this "safe schools" rubbish.
>>67871736
>291 is rounded to 200
>354 is rounded to 300
this bothers me
>>67871792
This makes sense, too.
Most of this stuff is pretty fucking simple for kids just because you're retarded and can't understand what it's trying to teach (however obscure its explanation might be) doesn't mean it's wrong.
>>67871913
LOL that cant be real
>>67871955
you have already been successfully disarmed on a national level as far as i understand it
you need to get your shit together and stop complaining about reprogramming robot math
>>67868990
>two of our professors used these two ways each and they were lecturing the same subject
>>67868990
I don't even understand the equation, 20 divided by 5 (2 x 2)?
4 (+) 4 = 8.
Yes I'm autistic with mathematics.
>>67871676
Not true. Order of Operations is not naturally found. It was created for our algebraic system.
If I said: For this post, addition has higher precedence that multiplication.
Then said 2 * 5 + 10 = 30, I would be correct.
>>67871658
P>E>M=D>A=S
In all actuality, subtraction is the addition of the negation, and division is the multiplication of the inverse. The real Order of Operations is:
Parentheses
Exponent
Negation
Multiplication
Subtraction
where x / y = x * y ^ (-1)
and x - y = x + (-y)
>>67871430
Juxtaposition does have a higher priority, as can be seen in this post:
>>67871572
But you are wrong because, whats the priority first? Regardless of juxtaposition one should Get rid of brackets/paranthesis first.
This whole fucking calculation and where every single one is doing it wrong who supports the value of 16 is to NOT GET RID OF THE BRACKETS COMPLETELY.
Brackets have highest priority okay, so get rid of it?
Thats why this way is completely wrong:
20 / 5 (2 * 2)
20 / 5 (4)
4 (4)
16
Why is it wrong? Because not doing the brackets first!! You can not continue do the calculation until the brackets are COMPLETELY SOLVED.
--------------------------------------
Lets calculate doing the right way, solving brackets completely first:
20 / 5(2*2)
*MUST SOLVE BRACKETS BEFORE DOING ANYTHING ELSE, BRACKETS HAVE HIGHEST PRIORITY*
20 / 5(4)
I repeat it again; *MUST SOLVE BRACKETS BEFORE DOING ANYTHING ELSE, BRACKETS HAVE HIGHEST PRIORITY*
20 / 5*4= 20/20
Now you are allowed to do the division, since the brackets are solved. so do the division...
20/20=1
>>67871913
What is this? That can't be real...?
>>67871955
raged goddamn fucking fuckers stupid fucking retards
>>67872062
That's completely different. Order of operations is used as a standard globally. Mathematics is not naturally found. Nowhere do you see addition signs and division signs.
>>67872078
g8 b8 m8. I r8 8/8(8+8)
>>67871719
>>67868990
These are both photoshopped, the original had nothing to do with either.
Common core is a method of counting to help kids count in their heads, not a form of algebra.
>>67872122
I hope that's satire...
>>67872337
Its from a college text book if I remember correctly.
He's the actual image.
Also protip: Common Core doesn't change the answer.
You all just took the bait and you should be banned if you took it seriously
If your first knee-jerk reaction wasn't to consider it fake you should be banned.
>>67872243
u are one bad shiller, brackest go first, period, now go and have your sabbath
>>67872226
The symbols are not naturally found, but the operations are. A group of apples is a number. Putting two groups of apples together is addition. Removing a group of apples from a group is subtraction. Having x groups of a group of apples and putting them all together is multiplication. Splitting a group of apples into x groups is division. Repeating your multiplication process x times is exponentiation.
So algebra is natural. The symbols we use are not natural and representative of an action. The order of precedence that we treat those symbols are not natural either. We could redefine those symbols and precedences, at any time. As long as the rules are consistent, then it works fine
>>67872401
sheiiiit
The amount of misinformation in this thread really cements how uneducated a lot of you are on issues and how you've all deluded yourselves into believing some sort of false reality.
Common Core is a set of STANDARDS that students need to meet, not a curriculum. States and Individual school districts still determine how the standards are taught. Furthermore, the United States is one of the few countries in the world that tests EVERY student nationally. In most Asian countries if a student is not doing well they are taken out of school or are not included in the national average, so of course they out-compete American kids. If we dropped our lowest performers our scores would increase as well.
I think a lot of you people just need some fresh air.
Also OPs picture is fake.
>>67872226
Order of operations is arbitrarily choosen (except brackets first) but commonly used.
Any other system is just as god as PEMDAS.
ITT: morons if it anything but 1.
It is 1.
If you think I am wrong I seriously and honestly fell sorry for you since its not your fault that you are being taught rubbish.
I weep...
>>67868990
You could never ever get 16 as one have to solve the brackets first.
In order to get rid of the Brackets completely you have to do 5(4), that is multiplying 5*4, and that will give you 20 on the right side. So its impossible to get 16 as a final value.
>>67869232
P - Parentheses
E - Exponents
M - Multiplication*
D - Division*
A - Adding**
S - Subtracting**
*Solve from left to right for these steps
** also solve left to right for these steps
>>67872472
Brackets are removed as soon as there are no operations found within it.
You fags will never solve this
>>67872604
>Brackets are removed as soon as there are no operations found within it.
You are wrong.
A more correct statment would be "Brackets are removed as soon there are no operations surrounding it"
As to get rid of a Bracket one need to solve it within itself ofcourse, and then multiply the value within a bracket with a value in front of it or behind it.
U are one bad shill, try again.
>>67871610
Is there something wrong with this? I mean a couple of the methods are kind of retarded, but I'm sure the extra effort involved in the more retarded variants would make them less desirable anyway.
>>67872605
That's because 1 of 3 pieces of information is false.
>>67872605
(16-12)/2 = 2
2*2 + 5*5 = 8*8
4 + 25 = 64
29 = 64
impossible shape
But the answer they want is 5*12 + 5*2 = 70
>>67871872
I was once told common core was designed to teach people the way people think and the thought processes that go into the calculation.
Honestly though, nothing is quicker than breaking it the equation down to simple problems which require 0 thought then adding up the results.
100 / 5 = 20
15 / 5 = 3
20 + 3 = 23.
All this other bullshit just makes the whole process convoluted which means it's much slower for people to do these questions.
>>67872605
A trapezoid with those dimensions is impossible, therefore there's no solution.
>>67868990
Well, kids who answer wrong on one of those questions can be wrong for one of two reasons. Either they're bad at the actually math involved, or they don't understand the math language.
Kids need to be taught the language of math, but it should be done very separatly from how they are taught the actually math. Because they are in no way the same thing.
>>67869624
I agree with you. I don't think this kind of room for misinterpretation would be allowed in europe
>>67872885
Exactly,
knowing one SIMPLE rule that "brackets first", gives automatically the correct answer, and it removes the possibility of getting the value of 16.
>>67871081
>pre-"albebra"
I took AP Statisitics my first year in high school and AP Calculus my second. What the fuck is this "pre-albebra" crap? I remember something vaguely similar to it in 5th grade.
>>67872765
>Note that different software will process this differently; even different models of Texas Instruments graphing calculators will process this differently. In cases of ambiguity, be very careful of your parentheses, and make your meaning clear. The general consensus among math people is that "multiplication by juxtaposition" (that is, multiplying by just putting things next to each other, rather than using the "×" sign) indicates that the juxtaposed values must be multiplied together before processing other operations. But not all software is programmed this way, and sometimes teachers view things differently. If in doubt, ask!
>(And please do not send me an e-mail either asking for or else proffering a definitive verdict on this issue. As far as I know, there is no such final verdict. And telling me to do this your way will not solve the issue!)
www.purplemath.com/modules/orderops2.htm
>>67868990
>ausposting
>>67872942
No, you dumb swede, it depends on the precedence of juxtaposition vs division, not the brackets. Quit being wrong right now!
>>67872401
>x files themes internally
>>67869681
Based Germany
>>67869496
>>67869624
You are both wrong. Its impossible to calcuate this wrong following basic fundamental mathematical rules. There are zero room for misintepretation knowing simple math rules.
What rules one might ask?
Well BRACKETS GOES FIRST, solving brackets completely first gives you the correct answer.
>>67869496 You are NOT solving Brackets completely first before continuing thats why you are wrong.
20 / 5(2*2) Remember COMPLETELY SOLVE BRACKETS FIRST!!
20 / 5(4) Remember COMPLETELY SOLVE BRACKETS FIRST, need to mutiply 5*4 to get rid of brackest!!
20 / 20 NOW first is the Brackets solved COMPLETELY, and now first you may continune with "the left side".
20/20 = 1
>>67872538
Your wrong. It is a set of curriculum that can be applied and adopted by all schools. That's the whole point of the program, to put teaching curriculum and strategies into the hands of districts with shitty teachers (I'm thinking rural Kentucky or Mississippi)
And you are right that we score our standardized testing way different than everywhere else, and generally is used to fool people into thinking our education system is inherently bad.
But your main assertion is a lie. Common core exists to provide a common method to teaching that all states can use, that the Feds approved of.
Which is why there is a concern about common core and testing, getting shit teachers to try and force a kid to learn a shit way of solving problems produces shitty results. Kids and people all learn differently, placing "common core requirements" on education reinforces that there's 1 right way to do things. Math is the perfect subject to argue common core
>>67868990
>20/5(2*2)
how about writing the equation like it should be and not like a fucking retard
>>67872577
Read left to right after doing parenthesis first...it's 16
>>67873120
Every heard of PEMDAS?
P - Parentheses
E - Exponents
M - Multiplication*
D - Division*
A - Adding**
S - Subtracting**
*Solve from left to right for these steps
** also solve left to right for these steps
The rule which stands above all else is PARENTHESIS (brackets) FIRST, and this makes all your arguments as much value as horse-shit.
Solve ALL Parenthesis/Brackests COMPLETELY first, before doing any other operation, period.
This cant be misunderstood, and there are zero room for misunderstanding or "a different way of interpretation"
>>67873162
so this is what "muh free education" has taught you?
disgraceful
>>67873022
sry didnt read, dont give a fucking shit, suck balls shill,
Paranthesis goes first period, end of discussion.
Ever heard of PEMDAS?
>>67873331
BTFO
>>67872854
All of your equations are extremely easy though.
For me there's no natural way of keeping 13*14 in my head. But calculating 10*14+3*14= 182 is piss easy.
>>67873331
This software is programmed wrong, as it doesnt follow simple rules of PEMDAS, where Paranthesis goes FIRST.
20/5(2*2) gives you 20 / 5(4).
20 / 5(4) GET RID OF PARENTHESIS/BRACKETS!!!
20/20=1
Software doesnt take PEMDAS-rules into account, these rules are set by human in order not to make 2 persons calculate something in a different way.
The answer is 16 you idiots, either way whether the "/" symbol means division or fraction, both end up with 16.
Use a calculator and try both ways if you're that retarded.
Holy shit I thought I was talking to a bunch of 18+ adults, not fucking 10 year old children.
>>67872078
When it becomes 20 / 5 * 4, the brackets ceased to exist, dumby. PEMDAS can also be written PEDMSA, because Multiplication and Division are equal in the eyes of maths.
Now, whats 5(4)? 5 * 4
But, in this equation, what comes before 5 * 4? 20 / 5
So -
20 / 5 = 4
4*4 = 16
>>67873349
"5(4)" is a juxtaposition. It may have the same precedence as the sibling division; it is ambiguous. If you wanted to remove the parentheses, you'd have "5 4" (which isn't recognizable notation), or "5 * 4" (but this would imply a specific precedence).
>>67868990
I think we can all agree, no matter what the fucking answer is, it is one of the most retarded things ever possible in a mathematics course to say "BOTH answers are EQUALLY CORRECT." Categorically false.
Fuck Common Core.
>>67873483
Software doesnt take PEMDAS-rule into account.
PEMDAS-rules are not programmed within calculators or computers.
Such rules are made in order to not give the chance of 2 humans calculating something in a different order. So there are (well there should be) zero chance of miscalculation.
Following the simple order of PEMDAS, Paranthesis first you can only and only end up with one answer and that is,
20/20= 1
>>67873469
>Wolfram Alpha is programmed wrong
>IT DOESN'T FOLLOW MATHEMATICAL RULES
bwahaha hahaha
oy boy the butthurt is almost physically detectable from here
>>67869155
You said it yourself PEMDAS
Parentheses = 4
Multiply by 5 = 20
Divide by 20
=1
U fuckin kidding me?
>>67873607
Im not saying its programmed wrong.
It is not programmed wrong at all, its a beautiful mathematical tool.
But more correctly I should say: It is not programmed with PEMDA-rules, which makes it from a PEMDA-point of view give the incorrect answer.
>>67873551
Dumb gundam poster
Congrats /pol/ we're officially a like button away from being kikebook. The equation is ambiguous, stop being retards.
>>67873469
>Wolfram alpha
>programmed wrong
Ahahahahahahahaha go to college you stupid fuck
>>67873589
20 / 5 (2 * 2)
20 / 5 * 4
4 * 4
16
>>67873331
Wolfram has erroneously equated 20/5 with (20/5)
>>67869155
I've seen so many incarnations of this argument that I literally do not know what is right anymore, because both sides always brings up a plethora of evidence that both checks out and supports their cause.
>>67873638
THIS /Thread
Got damn, more shill in this thread than in Trump General :D.
Guess all shill gave in Trump Generel cuz no point to be there, so they went here ayy lmao
>>67873638
You are doing 20/(5*(2*2)), not the equation as written. Parenthesis takes precedence to solve within itself, not apply to others. See >>67873331
>>67873690
Fuck's sake Swede, go type it into a calculator that has parenthesis and take pictures. Jesus, man.
>>67873693
kek, the one image of thousands I randomly chose from my folder
>leaf
>>67873731
The answer is 16 you retard
People are going to link to this thread when they want to prove that /pol is retarded. :(
You are ALL missing the point entirely.
What is not coming through in the initial GIF, but will be implied by anyone familiar with the subject, is that neither 1 nor 16 is the actual end-answer in any valid system.
It goes something like this:
20/5(2*2)=0
Notice that =0 doesnt show up on this carefully chosen slide, but it absolutely essential to make any sense of the dispute.
It sounds totally senseless to say that 1 and 16 are equally correct, but it is not totally senseless to say that both 1=0 and 16=0 are equally correct, which is to say, in both cases the actual *final answer* is the same - WRONG.
>>67873690
>I'm not saying it's programmed wrong
getting mixed input here
also after you solve the parenthisis (2*2) the pareentises disappear since they are no longer needed (they weren't needed in the first place, since this whole thing could be solved left to right, but hey)
>>67873331
Wolfram Alpha has infested with common core shit for a while. They even have that number line nonsense on there now.
It can no longer be trusted to give you a correct answer.
>>67873768
>>67873743
GO BACK TO SCHOOL SWED
>>67873202
I teach English in Louisiana to 9th and 10th graders, my friend teaches at another school in another district and uses vastly different material and methods than I use, however we both meet the same standards. Its not a curriculum. A curriculum would be the State handing me a pile of books and saying use this and don't deviate from it. I have tremendous power in what I choose to use in the classroom. They tell me teach British Literature this 9 weeks, and I pick which authors we read and what types of essays to write. As long as children can use vocabulary and write effectively, the Feds could care less. In poorer more urban schools its true that they do have shitty teachers because people like me who are actually good at what we do wouldn't teach there because the conditions are terrible, perhaps these schools buy curriculum based off of the common core state standards in the way of textbooks complete with pre-planned lessons because the teachers are incapable of writing a lesson plan, but that's not the same thing that you're asserting.
In programming multiplication and division are at the same level of hierarchy. That is how I choose to do math.
>>67873748
No, that's the best way of parsing it. If the person wanted it to be 1, they should have written 20/(5*2*2).
>>67873851
OMG. Wolfram Alpha uses degenerate kike Math?
>>67873469
>wolfram alpha
>This software is programmed wrong
stay cucked, sweden
>>67873851
>implying CC gives wrong answers
it's a retarded way to learn basic maths, but it will give you the right answers in the end
>>67868990
HURR DURR
COMMON CORE SAYS THAT EITHER ORDER OF OPERATIONS IS VALID
THIS MEANS 1 = 16
HURR DURR
CHECKMATE ATHEISTS
Look, common core is fucking retarded, but it is not nearly as retarded as you are.
Isnt the answer 8
20/5 + 4
4 + 4
8
Why would it turn into a multiplication sign after taking the brackets off. You always add to the left of the brackets when taking them off.
>>67873690
snälla dra åt helvete, du skämmer ut hela vår ras din jävla lagerarbetare.
>>67871913
Mega retarded
So many retards here
This
>>67869213 is the correct notation
>>67874004
>You always add to the left of the brackets when taking them off.
No, you don't.
This was taught from room 101.
>>67874004
there never was a + sign in the whole equation, francois
>>67869735
Mate, it's division. If it was a fraction, it would look like a fraction.
>>67869760
DM and MS are on the same level in the hierarchy.
B
E
DM
AS
>>67874042
SHUT IT DOWN
H
U
T
I
T
D
O
W
N
>>67868990
The answer is 16.
If that pic isnt fake then whoever teaching is stupid and does not know maths.
>>67874004
No leaf, no.
Math threads are always my favourite threads.
The line between stupidity and trolling is so thin its glorious.
>>67874004
Dumb Haruhi poster
the compromise answer is 7.5
>>67874042
>>67873743
Learn to math burger, you're the retard here.
>>67871987
I want to skin that retarded teacher.
>>67868990
The very format of "20 / 5 (2*2)" is fucking incorrect because there is no way of discriminating numerator from denominator, thus using the Order of Operations, that EVERY WESTERN-EDUCATED INDIVIDUAL SHOULD FUCKING KNOW BY MIDDLE SCHOOL, we conclude that division supersedes multiplication in priority using the "Left to Right" rule.
So the equation can be rationalized as (20/5)(4) = (4)(4) = 16
Fucking there you go Math students of the modern age.
>>67874136
#numberfluid
20/5*(2x2) -> 20*(1/5)*(2x2) = 16
>>67874042
There is no correct notation. It's arbitrarily choosen and asking as it doesn't violate certain axioms you can choose what ever order of operations you want.
>>67874092
I don't know in what universe the answer could = 1.
Apparently common core just means "correct math" .
What the fuck where they teaching yanks before this?
>>67873505
>the brackets ceased to exis
"THE BRACKETS CEASE TO EXIST"
haaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahahahahahahahahahaahahahahahahahahahahaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahahahahaahahahahahahahaahahahahahahahaha
Nothing "cease" to exist you fucking satanist loving kike shilling NWO sabbath-performing fucking big nose retard
WE LOVE JESUS CHRIST AND WE HATE COMMON CORE, DEAL WITH IT
All of you who think "16" aren't really whites are you? That much precedence mixing is degenerate.
>>67874042
This is why Americans mostly aspire to be rappers, actors, and businessmen, because they can't do basic fucking arithmetic and go STEM.
>>67873505
>the brackets ceased to exist
toooooooooooooooooooooooopkeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeekkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkk
>>67873940
If they wanted the answer to be 16 the best way to format it would be (20/5)(2x2). The way that the whiteboard shows is ambiguous because "/" signifies a fraction with the left side being the numerator and right side as the denominator rather than a division symbol.
>>67873505
The only thing that ceased to exist is a dick in your ass
>>67873891
Dude, no, you aren't getting it. It is EXACTLY like that with math. That is why everyone, from us, to Reddit, to the Republican party and pretty much anyone who has seen it is going "What the everloving fuck?" at common core math. They are fundamentally trying to change the way they do arithmetic in a very roundabout way. There may be a couple book options or shit, but they all teach the same new retarded way.
There's been encroachment on English as I've seen, just you wait. Wait until they tell you the kids all have to read something, federally, or that you can't make them read 1984. It's already been shown they've put some real fast and loose shit about the Constitution in the lower history classes and social studies books.
There's a reason a huge amount of the general populace is freaking the fuck out about common core, and it's not because we're all completely wrong about the whole thing. People didn't start freaking out until the started seeing the textbooks and worksheets.
>>67874386
The issue being that it is ambiguous whether the denominator is 5 or 5(2x2)
>>67874290
If you use BOMDAS in the incorrect fashion, you can get 1. By prioritising multiplication of division, you'll get 1.
>>67874261
BEDMAS is almost universally given a "Left-to-Right" rule regarding Multiplication/Division and Addition/Subtraction respectively. Using this rule, the only logical answer is 16.
>>67873891
>You) #
Maybe I explained my thoughts improperly. While you may have me at a bit of a disadvantage with you being a teacher (my mother was a teacher, but I am not), my understanding was that common core was a 1 size fits all method for a variety of subjects that is offered to all states and can be required by some (depending state to state)
It isn't the Feds that are on peoples ass if testing goes flat or down. It's the state that gets screwed on funding, and the state that gets on districts.
You're right, common core doesn't take away your right (as supervised by your employers) to set your curriculum. But in places with no math teacher (ie an English major teaching 8th grade math) common core is the curriculum. And if common core doesn't work, you'll have plenty of people with a scapegoat to blame (common core). If rather see more PTOs taking action with educating kids, but not everyone has that luxury unfortunately
20 / 5 (2*2) =>
20 / 5 * 4 =>
4 * 4 =
16
Obamamath is correct.
>>67869232
>remove from gene pool
>>67868990
wow how retarded. just wanted to chip in because all the 1 answers are retarded.
BOMDAS
>20/5(2*2)
Brackets
>20/5(4)
other: there are no other symbols
simplify
>20/5*4
simplify again
>4*4
>16
at no point is the equation not clear.
when using fractional notation, anything under the line is considered to be in brackets. in order to get one, the equation would need to be expressed as:
>20/(5(2*2))
the reason that multiplication and division have the same priority is because division can be expressed as multiplying by a fraction.
>>67874501
THIS
>>67874161
I wouldn't say that the format is incorrect
>>67874448
that's why writing it like a fraction is better
>>67874501
then it would be 20 / (5 * (2*2))
>>67869080
Oh, I see you hit report post to get your prize.
>>67874443
I'm sorry I'm not putting on the tinfoil hat with you my friend. Common Core might be annoying at a teacher level because it means that we still rely on standardized testing as our sole form of assessment, but these things that you are asserting are baseless. They are STANDARDS, not curriculum. Students are getting smarter as time goes on, not the other way around. The low achievers and achievement gap will always exist and they will always drag down our national average, but that is in no way the norm. And you know what? If you don't like common core, just wait a little while because I'm sure they'll replace it with something new next election cycle. The one universal truth in education is that standards and assessment methods never stay the same for long.
>>67874501
S H U T IT D O WN
H
U
T
I
T
D
O
W
N
>>67874501
The question is the top one
20 / 5 (2 * 2)
The bottom one is 20 / (5 * 2 * 2)
There's gotta be at least 20 people that explained the ambiguity correctly.
But which interpretation is the most aryan one?
>>67869155
Its 16
>>67868990
PEMDAS
"please excuse my dear aunt sally"
P: parenthesis
E:exponents
M:multiplication
D:division
A:addition
S:subtraction
At least thats how i was taught.
SO BASICALLY IN A KIKE RULED WORLD THIS MEANS THAT
1=16
S H U T IT D O WN
KEEP IT ROLLING
The trolling level in this Thread is over 9000
>>67874290
Doh?!?!
20/5(2*2)=20/5*4=20/20=1
1!=0 however which was the point to the slide sequence that one was chopped out of the middle from.
>>67874386
Or just remove the brackets altogether and solve left to right.
Teacher should have not been lazy and written the expression in something other than Word.
>>67874501
X( is shorthand for saying X x (
If it was all meant to be the denominator It would be written as (X(
16 is correct.
>>67869232
>20 / 5 (2 x 2)
>20 / 10 x 10
>20 / 100
>.2
Wouldn't it be like this?
>>67874771
holy shit you dumb burger
GTFO AND GET AN EDUCATION
>>67874696
>>67873743
>>67869155
Parenthesis
Exponents
>Multiplication
>Division
Addition
Subtraction
>>67868990
20 / 5 ( 2 * 2 )
20 {/} 5 {where is the symbol?} ( 2 {*} 2 )
This is not even math.
>There is NOTHING between the 5 and the opening bracket of the 2*2
>You can't have 2 * 2 and 5 (...) in the SAME EXPRESSION and assume they both mean multiplication, it's plain wrong.
To all the programming anons in this thread:
Adding the * between 5 and the bracket could be done in two ways
(20/5)*(2*2)
20/(5*(2*2))
So don't do it. In such cases I ask whoever came up with the problem to be more specific or kindly go fuck themselves.
>>67869232
this is what 'muricans consider "math"
>>67869343
Fraction written x/y means x divided by y, it is mathematically equivalent to the result of the division
It seems to me the germanic flags tend to interpret it as yielding "1" mostly. I'm wondering if picking "16" isn't a sign of degeneracy.
1=16 /THREAD
The answer is 1.
See this, it implies that multiplication is prior to division.
>>67874771
Why are you prioritizing the multiplication over the division? You work through formulas logically i.e left to right after you have accounted for order of operations.
>>67874680
You know, it's interesting I have literally never heard this in defense of Common Core before. Not once. Not a single time. Ever. From a single teacher, from a single politician, anywhere, in the multiple years it has been criticized. Presidential candidates have come out to decry it, and not once have I ever heard these arguments.
Also interesting how you claim to be an English teacher with such poor formatting, but that's probably just my prejudice popping up. Still. I wonder.
>>67874849
Factorizing only works for addition and subtraction.
>>67874877
x/y can be (x/y) or (x)/(y)
if you say x/y * z it can be interpreted as (x/y) * z or x / (y*z), which is why this is a troll problem
>>67875000
Because he isn't a mongrel that's why. So much precedence mixing is degenerate.
>>67874996
/THREAD
this is how a calculator programmed with PEMDA-rules reacts, thank you
>>67874877
Multiplier is omitted, therefore the right answer should be 1
>>67874776
Dude, read the rest of the post.
>>67875073
LIBERTY WINS
>>67869080
I keep clicking but no prize , what a shill
>>67874776
*Facepalm*
>>67868990
Well if we take the three and go like this
3+(3^3333)-69*420=-0
So then we take the -0 and bring it down here
3+(3^3333)-69*420
--------------------------
-0
And divide the whole side of the equation by the right side we end up with
0<x<0
So therefore we can conclude that x represents the dank memes as x can only be an imaginary number just like how the dank memes can only be imaginary because they don't actually exist because the chemistry says that
Na49+I5+Au9999->memes
However the element required to make the memes dank only exists for a few seconds and cannot be oxidized with the memes to form dank memes
Uuo69420+O63->dank (theoretical equation)
This is because the law of gravity simply doesn't apply to things with a mass of negative infinity. Neither do any of the laws of physics other than newtons law of every male action has a female overreaction.
And this then brings us to the strategic bombing of Germany. The allies could dump several thousand tons of bbs on Germany a day, so why we're they even able to keep the war going for as long as they did.
This brings me to my second thesis statement of why the Spanish verb Ir is retarded. it just is
The Punit squares state that op somehow has both recessive genes of faggots (f) and autism (a) and therefore conclude that it is impossible to calculate the immeasurable amount of dicks he is currently sucking at this very moment
>>67875005
There's no defense for it because the attacks against it are completely baseless. Its like if you argue that a pen is blue when its clearly red; there's no other defense other than to re-assert that its red and wonder why the person cannot see the color. Common core is not a curriculum, it is a set of standards. I don't know how else to say it.
Also, its not like people don't write differently depending on what forum they're in. That would be crazy man, just crazy.
>>67874680
actually longitudinal student performance studies says this is wrong. less students are in the absolute bottom. so are less students excelling. no forrest gumps at the price of the oppenheimers and nobels. just a world of john smiths and sally-mays. THIS IS THE FUTURE.
>>67875073
watch him change the side to the 16 camp
>>67874877
you can omit the multiplication sign you're just over thinking it
>>67875047
Which is why brackets were invented.
x / y * z follows simple left to right.
If it was meant to be interpreted as x / (y * z) it would be written as such.
>>67875022
I'll remember that, thanks
>>67874996
>>67875068
No it's the calculator rewriting the expression you dumb shits. Not what's written on the screen at OP.
>>67875202
which is why fractional notation was invented
who uses division signs or slashes to imply division? fucking no one
>>67875191
20
________
5 (2X2)
Is it much more easier now
>>67875212
I meant expanding but my statement works both ways.
>>67875215
What's written on the screen is ambiguous
>>67874386
>>67874447
Really? Some of you guys wouldn't do the juxtaposed multiplication first? ABSOLUTELY DEGENERATE.
>>67874680
Sorry friend, but this comment
>kids are getting smarter
Disqualifies you. Such arrogance is something a 14 year old kid spouts off.
Thanks for responding to my post (you didn't) i was hoping for an actual conversation about CC, but it seems your actually a plant.
CC replaces curriculum in broke, overpopulated, and underfunded school districts. This is done out of necessity. While it's merits have pros and cons, simply saying other arguments are essentially without merit (appears to be your method of argument) is soft as fuck
>>67875176
Nah, I'm giving you shit, same with the Jew thing. But no, that is invalid. If it was clearly just standards and not a set curriculum, that's really, really easy to shoot down. Maybe you work at a Charter school or somewhere well funded or something, but it has been made pretty abundantly clear it's a curriculum. There is literally worksheets branded with common core and such for that purpose. That's the way it is. Maybe it's just the inner city or something, don't know, but I seriously doubt the criticism, ESPECIALLY of the math portion, would be this pervasive if the answer is literally "Just a standard lol."
>>67875366
I think you exposed him man
He won't be back
Oh, I guess all those operators can just have the same equal precedences to yOU MARXISTS.
>>67875325
No it isn't, I have the same fucking modal of calculator, it's rewriting the expression.
>>67875436
We should be very happy than in Canada education is not the responsibility of the federal government.
>>67875479
I meant on OP's image's screen.
>>67869155
Jesus you guys are retarded.
Parentheses should always go first.
20 / 5 (2 x 2)
20 / 5 (4)
20 / 5 will not before 5 x 4 because, there is no 5 x 4.
It is 5 (4).
5 (4) does not automatically turn into 5 x 4, that is just how you calculate it. Parentheses always go first.
20 / 20
= 1
How can you trust them? Kikeculators I call them.
>>67875299
>who uses division signs or slashes to imply division? fucking no one
I'll refer you to >>67870234 and it's replies.
>>67873987
are you a retard? because you type like one.
>>67871429
Ha ha ha
>>67875319
it doesn't mean that because the multiplication sign is omitted that it's divided by everything, otherwise it would be in a bracket because arithmetic operators binds two numbers not an expresion
>>67875530
go home scandinavian you people were never good at math
>>67874443
>That is why everyone, from us, to Reddit, to the Republican party and pretty much anyone who has seen it is going "What the everloving fuck?" at common core math. They are fundamentally trying to change the way they do arithmetic in a very roundabout way.
The only time anyone ever talks about Common Core is when they have some out of context snippet that they think looks retarded because they have no idea what the point is or why something so simple is being done so complicated or whatever. And also there's some really stupid written questions, but I promise you those were there long before Common Core. Let me preface this by saying I have problems with common core, but you (and nearly everyone else) are basically just flailing at silly images you saw on 4chan and your opinions are worthless. So here's what's actually happening with Common Core, and why it should bug you:
Common core is designed to teach things in a way that exposes the underlying concepts. Let's do 233 - 147. As a child, you were probably taught to do that like this: 3 isn't big enough to subtract 7, so subtract 1 from the next digit and carry 10. 13 - 7 = 6, so now we're at 226 - 140. 2 isnt' big enough to subtract 4, so subtract 1 from the next digit and carry 10. 12 - 4 = 8, so now we're at 186 - 100. That's 86. It's quicky and it's easy, but for whatever reason some students do not understand why it works (because each space is worth 10 of the space to its right). You'd think that'd be an easy thing to teach, and it usually is.
>Continued.
>>67871466
Juanita doesn't have any friends
>>67875366
There's a difference between a National Curriculum handed down to each school in the nation and the policy of a school district or state. I can promise you that if you went into several different math classrooms teaching the same standard across the country you would not see the same materials being used to teach the concept. There are also different instruction methods ranging from direct instruction to constructivism that different teachers tend to lead toward depending on what meets the needs of their children more.
>>67875358
The skills that our Fathers learned are vastly different than the skills needed in the information age. Learning today is about learning how to think on your feet and use the wealth of technological resources in front of us. Children are utilizing these resources and are making gains in critical thinking that previous generations maybe never reached in public education. The average IQ is increasing in children as time goes on because the focus of education is not teaching children what to know, but how to think. I'm sorry if reality doesn't agree with this grand conspiracy theory you guys have going on here.
http://www.apa.org/monitor/2013/03/smarter.aspx
This article goes over some of the concepts I've brought up, of course you'll probably throw it out because it was published by the APA who is also part of the conspiracy. Peer review doesn't seem to mean much here.
>>67871490
I used to calculate like this in grade school and my teachers could never figure out what I meant with it.
>>67872538
Edfag here. While you're correct that Common Core is standards, not curriculum, the standards, and more importantly the assessments dictate what the curriculum is, because the performance of the administrators will be based on how well the students perform on those assessments.
One additional datapoint is that if it were simply a change in standards, they wouldn't need to revise all the books and materials so dramatically.
This is much more visible on the math side where things are such that trained engineers are looking at the deliverables and have no fucking clue what they're trying to say or teach.
>>67875556
>>67870234
Depending on whether one interprets the expression as (48/2)(9+3) or as 48/(2(9+3)) one gets 288 or 2. There is no standard convention as to which of these two ways the expression should be interpreted, so, in fact, 48/2(9+3) is ambiguous. To render it unambiguous, one should write it either as (48/2)(9+3) or 48/(2(9+3)). This applies, in general, to any expression of the form a/bc : one needs to insert parentheses to show whether one means (a/b)c or a/(bc).
Many schools today, students are taught a mnemonic "PEMDAS" for order of operations: Parentheses, Exponents, Multiplication, Division, Addition, Subtraction. If this is taken to mean, say, that addition should be done before subtraction, it will lead to the wrong answer for a−b+c. Presumably, teachers explain that it means "Parentheses — then Exponents — then Multiplication and Division — then Addition and Subtraction", with the proviso that in the "Addition and Subtraction" step, and likewise in the "Multiplication and Division" step, one calculates from left to right. This fits the standard convention for addition and subtraction, and would provide an unambiguous interpretation for a/bc, namely, (a/b)c. But so far as I know, it is a creation of some educator, who has taken conventions in real use, and extended them to cover cases where there is no accepted convention. So it misleads students; and moreover, if students are taught PEMDAS by rote without the proviso mentioned above, they will not even get the standard interpretation of a−b+c.
>>67868990
>It's a /pol/ argues about maths episode
>>67875566
>Continuing.
So what's one way common core teaches subtraction? With number lines. You're supposed to measure out the space between 147 and 233. Now, I'm too lazy to make an image, but basically you do it like this:
1. 150 is the next roundish number after 147. It takes +3 to get to 150.
2. 200 is the next roundish number after 150. It takes +50 to get to 200.
3. 230 is the next roundish number after 200. It takes +30 to get to 230.
4. 233 is the final number. it takes +3 to get to 233.
5. 3+50+30+3 = 86
And you would draw this out on a number line, marking 147, 150, 200, 230, and 233. Basically you're marking out "distances" on a number line using nice even hops and then adding them together. And the point of this is to try to teach students what's happening behind the scenes and WHY arithmetic works the way it does by giving it a visual representation.
And here's the problem with this: it belongs in fucking remedial classes. A lot of students will just get it when you teach them the shortcuts, and now instead of progressing those students along onto further lessons (or making them practice until what they're learned is carved into their tiny little heads), you've got them jumping through hoops and boring them out of their minds and frustrating them. It's very much a method for raising the lowest common denominator up. Little Billy's hate to hear that their child is in the bottom third of the class and needs a little bit of extra work to catch up, but it'd be fucking better for everyone if that's what we did instead of slowing down the whole curriculum.
>>67875530
20 / 5 (2 * 2)
20 / 5 * (4)
Same as 20 / 5 * 4
What's inside the parentheses goes first, not the actual parentheses.
Left to right
20 / 5 * 4
4 * 4
16
>>67875830
>Little Billy's hate
>Little Billy's parents hate*
Should there be a standard convention for the relative order of multiplication and division in expressions where division is expressed using a slant? My feeling is that rather than burdening our memories with a mass of conventions, and setting things up for misinterpretations by people who have not learned them all, we should learn how to be unambiguous, i.e., we should use parentheses except where firmly established conventions exist. If expressions involving long sequences of multiplications and divisions should in the future become common, then there may be a movement to introduce a standard convention on this point. (A first stage would involve individual authors writing that "in this work", expressions of a certain form will have a certain meaning.) But students should not be told that there is a convention when there isn't.
Incidentally, it is worth noting that in certain cases, no convention is needed. The meaning of a+b+c is unambiguous even without the "left-to-right" convention, by the associativity of addition, and similarly abc by associativity of multiplication. By further properties of the operations, the values of a+b−c and ab/c come out the same whichever order one uses. In contrast, a−b+c and a−b−c require the "left-to-right" rule, while in the absence of a corresponding rule for multiplication and division, a/bc (as discussed above), and likewise a/b/c, are ambiguous.
>>67869521
What the fuck method do you think computers and the ti calculators use? They follow what we ca;; BODMAS (BOMDAS). With the correct operator binding properties the sum will be evaluated as:
>20 / 5 (2 * 2)
>20 / 5 (4)
Then what?
A computer will assume that the two operators are separate (as that's the pattern it will recognise first). A human could make the reasonable assumption that the 4 is part of the denominator (based on the fact that the multiplication is implicit in 5(2 * 2) which would imply it's one expression, not two) so:
> 20 / 5 (4) = 20 / 20 = 1
Two ways to phrase this question which removes all ambiguity?
>(2*2) 20 / 5
>(20 / 5) * (2 * 2)
Is definitely 16, and
>20 / (5 (2*2))
is definitely 1.
Implicit multiplication is the key. If we had 5 * (2*2) then it'd be more obvious that they're separate expressions.
>>67875853
If you're not doing the juxtaposition first, the jews got you brainwashed.
>>67875898
The computer will simplify the expression to 20 / 5 * 4 and it will solve it from left to right so 20/5 * 4 = 4 * 4=16
>>67875047
>>67875073
>>67875191
In programming terms, the problem:
20 / 5 ( 2 * 2 )
Is similar to trying to parse a floating point number from the string:
9.555,33 or 9,555.33
You will get a different result if you parse it under a french/danish locale than when you parse it with a stanard english locale.
Different countries can have different rules of precedence of the operators.
While it is accepted in math that division and multiplication have the same precedence, people from different regions can disagree weather the correct order of solving a problem with multiple equivalent precedence operators is left->right or right->left.
You can see plenty of examples of both solutions in this thread.
Either write a math problem in proper math language or gtfo teaching math.
This problem is a good example of how NOT to write math problems.
>>67876044
Computers usually do not handle juxtaposed expressions at all.
The only proper aryan answer is 1.
>>67875660
>>67875830
Fair criticism. I agree with you. I guess it gives background but like you said, it's fucking remedial. It shouldn't be the chainsaw, it should be the scalpel for the kids who aren't getting it.
Also, again, Common Core is seeping into other subjects, as seen above.
>>67871381
This can easily be one of those dumb snippets simplified for kids, I concede, but it is worrying. It's even worse when you look at the Common Core AP version, which is ostensibly worse.
Also, what's your thoughts on this?
>>67875788
![51WBCizJMGL._SY344_BO1,204,203,200_[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/sFcPXYW.jpg "51WBCizJMGL. SY344 BO1,204,203,200 [1]")
>>67875788
>Peer review doesn't seem to mean much here.
Funny thing. It doesn't mean shit to the people writing common core either. There's no excuse for rolling out something this big without extensive peer reviewed pilot programs and testing.
From the quality of the deliverables I've seen from the textbook companies, it's clear that having diversity in the word problems is a higher priority than getting the arithmetic correct.
>>67876000
We gonna say "joows" now?
Give me more evidence your argument is shit.
PS: Nice trips
>>67875788
Not a conspiracy theory (seriously quit trying to paint dissidents to your crappy arguments in that light)
We stand on the shoulders of giants. Thinking that people are actually smarter now than 100 years ago, is dangerously arrogant. Telling kids today that they are actually smarter...is dangerously ignorant.
You have not addressed that CC is de facto curriculum and that was it's purpose. And until you address the first and main point, we just can't move on
>>67871524
>are
COMIC SANS MS
>>67874443
>There's a reason a huge amount of the general populace is freaking the fuck out about common core, and it's not because we're all completely wrong about the whole thing.
There is a reason why both teachers that were consulted in the creation of common core are now actively campaigning against it.
>>67876292
This is just yet another instance of cultural marxism. They're pushing for operator precedence equality.
>>67876087
stop spewing bullshit from your mouth m8
>9.555,33 or 9,555.33
is the same shit as pic related
different countries don't have different operator precedence
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Order_of_operations
>>67876470
>These mnemonics may be misleading when written this way,[7] especially if the user is not aware that multiplication and division are of equal precedence, as are addition and subtraction. Using any of the above rules in the order "addition first, subtraction afterward" would also give the wrong answer to the problem:[7]
because you won't even open the link probably
>>67868990
This is mostly due to thr crap question layout more than anything. It doesnt explicitly say where the brackets are located, are they under the fraction or in the fraction, this confusion could easily be solved with more brackets
>>67876280
>>67876326
Not only that, reading the fucking peer reviewed article you linked >>67875788
This has literally nothing to do with common core. It only mentions changes in education in passing, and mostly refers to it in the frame of testing and not educational methods or curriculum. As a matter of fact, it seems to talk more about implications in the justice system relative to criminal insanity rather than standards of education.
On top of that, you like to just give condescending passive-aggressive shots implying I'm some blind, lowly idiot that doesn't get it and fills in the blanks with conspiracy theories which is not at all what I'm fucking doing. At that point, I don't assume you're some Jewish shill the reptilians sent to invoke my conditioning like you seem to imply, but you're a deluded, pretentious fool with delusions of grandeur about the new thing he's bought into at work.
>>67876406
fucking seriously, Christ
Trying to say peer review doesn't matter here, WE'RE WORRIED BECAUSE THE PEERS REVIEWED IT AND SAID NOPE
/pol/ trying to argue about calculus and revising 3rd grade maths by the same occasion feels like dozen of people doing their homework together.
This is fucking hilarious and cute at the same time but my sides holy shit.
>>67872058
You have to use the order of operations, PEMDAS (Parentheses, Exponents, Multiplication, Division, Addition, Subtraction).
In this example, the equation is 20 / 5 * (2 * 2)
Parentheses first, so you get 20 / 5 * 4
Next is multiplication, so 20 / 20, which equals to 1.
If you get a different answer, that is because you do not understand math. Common core is actively teaching kids that blatantly wrong answers are correct. The English portion of common core is actual government brainwashing. Common core is preparing your children for a life of subservience and quiet obedience, and this isn't some nutjob conspiracy. Common core actively makes your children dumb and drills sentences such as "Orders from all government officials must be obeyed" into their brains.
>>67876421
What the fuck does politics have to do with maths?
>this shit again
It's a convention question.
If the problem was given as 20/5*(2*2), then basically everyone would answer 16.
And if was given as
x=20/5y
y=2*2
then basically everyone would solve it as x=1 y=4(yes, wolfram alpha wouldn't, but how many of you would interpret 1/2x as x/2).
It all depends on whether you follow the implicit multiplication before explicit multiplication/division convention or not.
>>67876703
that's not how pemdas works read the fucking thread multiplication and division have the same precedence and are solved from left to right
>>67876470
My post:
>Different countries can have different RULES of precedence of the operators.
What happenes when two operators have the same precedence?
Perhaps there is a ... RULE for that?
Your own article gives some examlples of different right>left and left>right rules
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Order_of_operations
>in APL, evaluation is strictly right to left
>in Smalltalk and Occam, it's strictly left to right
>Different calculators follow different orders of operations.
>Calculators may associate exponents to the left or to the right depending on the model.
I agree that the order of precedence is the same everywhere, the rules about the special cases aren't.
>>67876710
Well, children are being taught math incorrectly for political reasons. So this is shit that Americans ought to pay attention to.
I hope this thread keeps going on for hours and hours.
>>67876923
>a
>fucking
>leaf
>>67876830
You are wrong.
>>67876899
Honestly go and look it up and stop being a retard.
Now I know why some Americans are so stupid.
>>67877143
No, you look it up. The jews have always done that. That's how they operate.
>>67876896
But that just means that they have no precedence not that they use a different order it just means that 20 + 5 * 2 will be 25 * 2
>>67877049
10 - 3 + 2 is by your fucking burger logic 5 because you add before you subtract
but it's actually 10 + (-3) + 2 so it's 9
![obox[1].gif](https://i.imgur.com/JqovEfL.gif "obox[1]"){kind=small}