Quote:
Originally Posted by elchivito
The way most of us were taught is fine, but it isn't the only method. Some kids are able to conceptualize a problem better using the method described in the OP. I use both, plus some others depending on the kid's learning style. There is no "better" method. Good teachers keep abreast of these modalities and apply them as needed.
It's pointless to keep beating a kid over the head with one method that isn't working. The result is a kid who thinks he "sucks at math".
|
My approach exactly. My kids have also had to endure the new methods, which I have to figure out first before I can explain it to them. So, I have taught them the methods and shortcuts that I use, so they can be sure they have gotten the right answer, then they take the numbers and plug them into the equation methodology that the teacher wants. It is important for them to be able to solve the equation the way it is being taught, but equally important that they understand how and why they got the answer. When faced with a circumvent method, generating the answer first and then reverse engineering the equation to suit the method makes for a kid that can actually grasp the problem.
I also push rote memorization on them for all their times tables and division, squares and roots. Even though the schools say that isn't the best way, I still believe that just knowing the answer can't be beat.