Comment by semi-extrinsic

neom 2 days ago

wow.

I have been posting on hackernews "I have dyscalculia" for years in hopes for a comment like this, basically praying someone like you would reply with the right "thinking framework" for me - THANK YOU! This is the first time I've heard this, thought about this, and I sort of understand what you mean, if you're able to expand on it in any way, that concept, maybe I can think how I do it in other areas I can map it? I also have dyslexia, and have not found a good strategy for phonics yet, and I'm now 40, so I'm not sure I ever will hehe :))

I even struggle with times tables because the lifting is really hard for me for some reason, it always amazes me people can do 8x12 in their heads.

Reply View 9 replies

semi-extrinsic 2 days ago

You're welcome :)
The foundations for these concepts were laid by Piaget and Brissiaud, but most of their work is in french. In English, "Young children reinvent arithmetic" by Kamii is an excellent and practically oriented book based on Piaget's theories, that you may find useful. Although it is 250 pages.
This approach has become mainstream in maths teaching today, but unfortunately often misunderstood by teachers. The point of using different strategies to arrive at the same answer in arithmetics is NOT that children should memorize different strategies, but that they should be given as many tools as possible to increase the chance that they are able to play around with and compress the concept being learned.
The clearest expression of the concept of compression is maybe in this paper, I don't know if it helps or if it's too academic.
https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ780177.pdf

Reply View | 1 reply
- neom 2 days ago
  
  I should be able to chat with an llm about this paper, but my gut says you've given me the glimmer of where I need to go. This is something I've been deeply deeply frustrated about for 30 years now, I had really given up hope of ever being able to process mathematics (whatever they are) properly, it's a real task to figure out how to get someone to see how your brain work and then have them understand how to provide you with some framework to grasp what they know.
  Once again I wanted to thank you for slowing down and taking the time to leave this thoughtful comment, if everyone took 5 minutes to try to understand what the other person is saying to see if they can help, the world would be a considerably better place. Thank you.
  
  Reply View | 0 replies
Cyber_Mobius 2 days ago

Just a tangent, but there's a nice trick for 8 x 12.
In algebra, you learn that (a - b)(a + b) = a^2 - b^2. It's not too hard to spot this when it's all variables with a little practice but it's easy to overlook that you can apply this to arithmetic too anywhere that you can rewrite a problem as (a-b)(a+b). This happens when the difference between the two numbers you're trying to multiply is even.
For a, take the halfway point between the two numbers, and for b, take half the difference between the numbers. So a = (8 + 12) / 2 = 10. b = (12 - 8) / 2 = 2.
Here, 8 = 10 - 2 and 12 = 10 + 2. So you can do something like (10 - 2)(10 + 2) = 10^2 - 2^2 = 100 - 4 = 96.
It's kind of a tossup if it's more useful on these smaller problems but it can be pretty fun to apply it to something like 17 x 23 which looks daunting on its own but 17 x 23 = (20-3)(20+3) = 20^2 - 3^2 = 400 - 9 = 391

Reply View | 0 replies
eszed 2 days ago

Calculating 8x12 in my head relies on a trick / technique - they call it "chunking", I believe, in the Common Core maths curriculum that US parents get so angry about - that (I'm also in my 40s) was never demonstrated in schools when we were kids. (They tried to make me memorize the 12x table, which I couldn't, so I calculated it my way instead; took a little longer, but not so much that anyone caught on that I wasn't doing what the teacher said.) I'd like to think I was smart enough to work it out for myself, but I suspect my dad showed it to me.
I'll show it to you, but first: are you able to add 80 + 16 in your head? (There's another trick to learn for that.)

Reply View | 5 replies
- neom 2 days ago
  
  96, easy. Lets go, real time math tutoring in the hackernews comments, 2025 baby! :D
  
  Reply View | 4 replies
  
  jacobolus 15 hours ago
  
  There are lots of good ways to break down this multiplication problem:
  8 × 12 = 8 × (10 + 2) = 8 × 10 + 8 × 2 = 80 + 16 = 96
  8 × 12 = (10 − 2) × 12 = 10 × 12 − 2 × 12 = 120 − 24 = 96
  8 × 12 = (10 − 2) × (10 + 2) = 10 × 10 − 2 × 2 = 100 − 4 = 96
  8 × 12 = (5 + 3) × 12 = 5 × 12 + 3 × 12 = 60 + 36 = 96
  8 × 12 = 4 × 24 = 2 × 48 = 96
  8 × 12 = 2³ × (2² × 3) = 2⁵ × 3 = 32 × 3 = 96
  etc.
  
  Reply View | 0 replies
  
  eszed 2 days ago
  
  :-)
  12 is made up of a 10 and a 2.
  What's 8 x 10? 80.
  What's 8 x 2? 16.
  Add 'em up? 96, baby!
  They teach you to do math on paper from right to left (ones column -> tens column, etc), I find chunking works best if you approach from left to right. Like, multiply the hundreds, then the tens (and add the extra digit to the hundreds-total you already derived), then the ones place (ditto).
  It's limited by your short-term memory. I can do a single-digit times anything up to maybe five digits. Two-digits by two digits, mostly. Three-digits times three digits I don't have the working memory for.
  
  Reply View | 2 replies