On gifted forums, sometimes parents complain that the teacher says the kids have to do something X way, but DC gets the right answer doing it a different way. So why should they have to do it X way when Y way is obviously working?

It’s kind of reminiscent of the argument that elementary schools no longer need to teach math because we have calculators now.

I disagree with that sentiment. It’s important to do math multiple different ways. There’s value in learning a different way to get the same answer. You get a better understanding of how numbers (and later, symbols for numbers) are put together. That leads to more accurate math, better estimates, faster calculations even without a calculator or pencil, and a greater knowledge of the possibilities of what can be done.

Even if we have computers that can do calculus, it’s still important to know how calculus works, because you know what is possible, you have ideas about what to try for things… and that’s even ignoring that math just makes you smarter.

DC1’s school just switched from Saxon math to Chicago math, but we’re doing Singapore math at home. I’m glad ze’s learning the traditional computational methods at school (and we practice them in hir Brainquest workbook during summer and on the weekends), but I love love love that Singapore math looks at the same things in a different way. For example, we just hit multiplication of 2 or 3 digits by a 1 digit number. The traditional method ze’ll learn in school (and practice in brainquest) is to start with problems that don’t require any carrying. Probably lots of x2 and x3 simple problems (23 x 2 = ?, 12 x 3 = ?), in order to cement the idea of multiplying the ones digit and then the 10s digit (and then the 100s digit another day). Eventually they’ll introduce the concept of carrying (23 x 4 = ?). (Then next year, the mechanics of double digit multiplication.)

The Singapore method, instead starts with some pictures. It says, you remember when you learned multiplication how that was like having 3 rows of 4 balls? And 3 * 4 = 12? Well, what if, instead of each ball being worth one, that each ball is worth 10. So you have 3 rows of 4 (10) balls. (In pictures this is more obvious than in words.) They’ve done the 10 ball representation previously with place value and with skip counting and x10s, so they’ve seen this idea before multiple times. So 3 * 40 = 12 tens, and they know that 12 tens = 120. Then they move on to 3 * 400 with the same pictorial representation. Finally they finish up with 6 sample problems: 5*9, 5*90, 5*900, 9*5, 9*50, 9*500. These last problems are set up in a way such that there’s pattern matching insights there for students who are good at getting insights from pattern matching, but it isn’t forced on kids who aren’t. (At this point DC1 asked if 50*90 = 9*500 and 5*900.) The next day moves on to 2 and 3 digit times 1 digit without carrying, but teaches it using these insights with the distributive property (13* 2 = 10*2 + 3*2), and this is not the first time they’ve seen the distributive property either– they’ve worked a lot with it with addition. By the time Singapore math kids get to algebra a lot of tricky algebra concepts should seem pretty obvious.

I believe there’s value to being able to do math with both of these techniques. They each provide different insights to how numbers are put together. They each have different numerical problems for which they are the faster and easier method of solution. In addition, the standard US method tends to be easiest when one has a pencil handy, whereas Singapore math is often best for mental math. It isn’t that one technique is better than the other (though I confess that Singapore is more beautiful and I can see the sneaky ways it’s introducing higher level math while working with simple numeric problems, something beautiful in itself).

Being able to use multiple methods is even more valuable, however, than the sum of being able to use two individual methods. Because of the insight given by seeing two different ways to solve the same problem, I would argue that the value of learning a second method isn’t even multiplicative, but instead exponential (or maybe factorial…) Each new way provides a deeper insight into the magnificent world of numbers.

And, with that pattern matching turned on… if there are multiple ways to get to the right answer in math, maybe there’s multiple ways to get to a solution in other kinds of problems too. If everyone had that particular insight, then maybe government policy wouldn’t be quite so messed up (a long shot, perhaps).

**Do you think there’s a benefit to learning different ways to get the same answer?**

September 18, 2013 at 6:01 am

I totally agree. This is exactly why learning the connection between algebra and geometry is so intellectually transformative.

September 18, 2013 at 6:03 am

Yes! And geometry and computer programming!

September 18, 2013 at 6:21 am

In general, I think learning more than one method makes someone understand the concepts and relationships better than just learning a single method. (There’s a difference between being able to use the quadratic formula and understanding how it’s derived…)

September 18, 2013 at 6:48 am

Excellent point!

Though I think I derived the quadratic in Complex Analysis… my memory is a little fuzzy on that.

September 18, 2013 at 6:52 am

Would you recommend the Singapore maths at home for a bright-but-probably-not-gifted 5 y.o.? Mine loves math & is frustrated by not getting enough at school. (Last year he started some basic multiplication, division, and fractions.)

September 18, 2013 at 8:23 am

Yes!

I would recommend Singapore math to anybody. Though I would also recommend Saxon math to kids who are lower than average intelligence because it’s so good with the repetition.

One thing that we do is skip some of the extra practice problems in the Singapore textbook if it seems like DC “gets it” without them. But those problems are still there if it takes a little longer.

September 18, 2013 at 4:14 pm

p.s. You’ll want to use the placement test on the singapore page– I’m guessing you’ll probably want 2A&B or 3A&B.

September 18, 2013 at 7:16 am

Not sure it counts as a pedagogical technique, but here’s yet more data to suggest that there are very smart/clever people with (too much?) time on their hands — for when you get ready to introduce string theory:

http://now.msn.com/bohemian-rhapsody-a-capella-parody-bohemian-gravity-about-string-theory-quantum-physics?ocid=vt_fbmsnnow

A fan, here, of learning to do things multiple ways and also to think through how things can be done (i.e. “Here’s a problem, how can we solve it?”).

September 18, 2013 at 8:25 am

Very cute!

September 18, 2013 at 8:18 am

I love sneaking in more advanced math under the guise of simpler problems. If a kid has just learned that 5+3=8, there’s no reason she can’t then be asked to look at that problem in different ways: 5 plus what equals 8? 8 take away what equals 3? What is we used a letter in place of that “what”? What if we look at 5+3=8 and we take away 3 from both sides of the equals sign? There’s no reason algebra should blow people’s minds later on.

September 18, 2013 at 8:25 am

Yeah, I remember back in the old days we used to do things like 5 + ? = 8 way back in first grade when we were learning addition. (Back before Houghton Mifflin math was Chicago math.) It’s not so hard to move from 5+ ? to 5 + x.

September 18, 2013 at 12:05 pm

So true. But my eighth-grade algebra teacher tried to get us to say that we knew the answer was 3 because we had subtracted 5 from both sides, when actually we just magically knew the answer because we had worked with these basic facts for so long. She should instead have said that for those cases where you don’t magically know the answer, you can subtract five from both sides. Then show us that it works on this easy problem. Then shown a hard problem. And check the work by doing the actual addition with the discovered number.

September 18, 2013 at 12:14 pm

Yes!

September 18, 2013 at 10:25 am

I feel like I never really learned to understand math at all. :-( I wish someone, somewhere, had presented different ways to approach it because I *know* my brain is capable of it; I just don’t have the right toolbox. It was One Way Till Eternity where I went through K-12, and if you didn’t get it, tough nuts. I remember crying over a set of long-division problems in 4th grade. Trauma!!

September 18, 2013 at 10:35 am

That’s so sad! If you got a masters degree in my program, I’d totally teach you math. :)

September 18, 2013 at 12:09 pm

Doesn’t everyone cry over long-division problems in the 4th grade? I know I did!

I think even the same-old methods can make sense later when your brain is more developed. I definitely found some incomprehensible books suddenly easy to read after college. (Not Camus, though.)

September 18, 2013 at 12:16 pm

(#1 loved long division in 4th grade)

September 18, 2013 at 6:54 pm

Yea #1!

September 20, 2013 at 9:04 am

I faked being sick when we learned long division because it frustrated me so much. I struggled the same with subtraction and he teacher sent a note home saying I was lazy. In Algebra 1 I tried to get tutoring from the teacher and again heard I was lazy. I’m smart, and probably could have majored in math if it was presented differently. I loved stats class and math theory in grad school.

September 20, 2013 at 9:26 am

That is SO SAD!!! But I’m so glad you recovered in grad school!

September 20, 2013 at 9:56 am

I just wish I had learned more at those earlier ages, because when it’s presented right, math not only makes sense but is pretty interesting!

September 20, 2013 at 12:57 pm

and beautiful!

September 21, 2013 at 7:51 am

Oops! DH is teaching DC1 long division via Singapore math this morning. I meant to wait on that a bit and review time or money in the Brainquest book this morning instead, but I was on the phone with a coauthor and DH took over homeworkbook help. DC1 seems to be doing fine though.

September 18, 2013 at 3:27 pm

I feel the same way! My mom taught me arithmetic and multiplication/division when I was 5, but that was around the last time I truly felt comfortable with it. For some reason, the way teachers taught (no clue what style it was) algebra and up made zero sense to me. I always sensed that geometry could make sense but I never grasped it like I should have and just felt plain stupid in high school.

September 18, 2013 at 4:15 pm

Your school failed you!

September 19, 2013 at 10:32 am

I got an A in geometry, Bs in algebra, a C in trig. Then went to college and got As in calculus and statistics. I have no idea if the teaching approach was the key but I suspect so. Now, I am just happy that the tax returns generally come out right. :-)

September 19, 2013 at 10:39 am

My calc 2 teacher was really really good at showing all steps, so we’d find ourselves finally understanding something from a much earlier class. (My calc 1 teacher was TERRIBLE, so I basically learned all my calc 1 while taking Calc 2, and he also did the same for people finally getting trig for the first time and many other things, I think in his calc 3 class). For that reason, in my math classes here, even though it makes my students giggle, I say things like, “Because these have the same denominator, we can just add across the top.” Because maybe I’ll catch someone who isn’t so good with fractions.

September 19, 2013 at 3:34 pm

I’m really replying to N&M here: can I sit in on DC1’s lessons please? I would learn so much :)

September 19, 2013 at 4:12 pm

Hahaha, no probably not much out of DC1’s lessons, ze is only in third grade. But you could sit in on my office hours and learn a lot. :)

You missed my best lecture though– that was this week. I do an amazing job teaching how to do normal distributions.

September 18, 2013 at 10:35 am

My dad loves loves loves math. And as a kid I HATED it. It’s still an area where I feel like I don’t have a firm foundation, even though I now need to use stats in my job all the time. So, when my dad was helping me with math homework, and he would “trick” me into doing algebra (or something), and then say, with a big happy smile on his face, “See, you just did algebra!” I would cry, because it was so hard and frustrating for me to do even the basics. I didn’t want to know multiple ways or more interesting ways of doing things, I just wanted to know the Single Simplest Way and get my homework done. Ugh. I want to cry 25 years later just remembering how demoralized I was. And by the way, my dad is a lovely lovely person and we have a great relationship, so it wasn’t that he was somehow being mean or anything, I think I just couldn’t take his enthusiasm for something that felt so oppressive, and I didn’t have the mental or emotional capacity for complicating it in any way. Not that this touched a nerve or anything.

September 18, 2013 at 11:30 am

I’m expecting to see several folks in my office this week with the same kind of stories about their relationship with math. But lightbulbs will come on and they’ll get it and do really well on the midterm. The first part is getting rid of the fear.

Of course you had the mental capacity! You were just missing an important building block and emotions got in the way.

September 18, 2013 at 12:11 pm

Wait, people can understand math?

Just kidding.

Another advantage of multiple ways is that you can check your work.

September 18, 2013 at 12:16 pm

Definitely. It’s not important to get something right the first time, it’s important to get it right before you submit it. Attention to detail is such an important skill.

September 18, 2013 at 11:12 pm

I could not agree more about providing multiple approaches. We have Singapore math sitting on our bookcase (it just got unpacked after our move), and I haven’t yet had a chance to break it out for our kids. Now I’m excited to get them started!

September 19, 2013 at 8:31 pm

Wooo!

September 19, 2013 at 8:36 am

Life at our house is similar to CG’s where she is my 8 year old and her dad is my husband. Tear and screaming are part of math homework almost every night. K struggles to understand math and numbers, and using multiple methods to teach it just makes her frustrated. The result is that, instead of understanding multiple approaches to math, she doesn’t understand any of them.

September 19, 2013 at 8:41 am

Perhaps DH should focus on hir mastering just one first. Or, even more likely, perhaps DH shouldn’t be the person trying (or he needs to try a different approach to tutoring). Sometimes the tutor isn’t a good match, especially when the tutor is family. You might have more luck if you tried, or if you hire someone else entirely.

September 19, 2013 at 10:05 am

I’ve considered an independent (unrelated tutor). Part of the problem is that our school curriculum uses lots of different methods for teaching math concepts, but they don’t seem to spend long enough on any particular method for her to master it.

She also seems to have a general struggle with, and reluctance to try, hard things. Which, according to this article, is something that many smart girls/women seem to have issues with.

http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-science-success/201101/the-trouble-bright-girls

September 19, 2013 at 10:11 am

It’s something many smart people have trouble with! When leechblock turns off, I’ll dig up our post(s) on perfectionism.

here’s a sampling (there’s more if you search “perfectionism“– we talk about it a lot!)

http://nicoleandmaggie.wordpress.com/2012/11/30/ask-the-grumpies-math-averse-teen-boy%E2%80%8F/

http://nicoleandmaggie.wordpress.com/2012/07/31/the-negativity-jar/

http://nicoleandmaggie.wordpress.com/2011/08/17/preschool-perfectionism/

http://nicoleandmaggie.wordpress.com/2013/07/17/on-flash-cards/

http://nicoleandmaggie.wordpress.com/2012/10/03/helpless-husbands-and-the-fixed-mindset-excuse/

http://nicoleandmaggie.wordpress.com/2013/03/12/rbochildren-2/

September 19, 2013 at 10:18 am

p.s. Mindset: The New Psychology of Success

by Carol Dweck is a good place to start on perfectionism.

http://nicoleandmaggie.wordpress.com/?s=mindset

December 20, 2013 at 1:40 am

[…] A: practice, and alternate methods. […]

December 20, 2013 at 5:48 am

When I see something like 16 * 23 in real life, I don’t think about the digits, I think “well 16 quarters would be 4 dollars, take 32 cents off that and I get $3.68 so its three hundred and sixty eight.”

December 20, 2013 at 5:53 am

:)

December 20, 2013 at 7:14 am

Just now the mental image of counting quarters is particularly salient for me because while I use my own washer and dryer at home, tomorrow I’m flying to a ski resort where I will be using coin-operated laundry machines.

December 20, 2013 at 7:42 am

Sounds fun!