[XAP]Bob wrote:Equally valid to say that there are three front left legs, 3 front right etc...
Makes more sense to do so when number of dogs > number of legs per dog
Not really. Anyhow to put it another way 5*3 = 3+3+3+3+3 3*5 =5+5+5
[XAP]Bob wrote:Equally valid to say that there are three front left legs, 3 front right etc...
Makes more sense to do so when number of dogs > number of legs per dog
pete75 wrote:[XAP]Bob wrote:Equally valid to say that there are three front left legs, 3 front right etc...
Makes more sense to do so when number of dogs > number of legs per dog
Not really. Anyhow to put it another way 5*3 = 3+3+3+3+3 3*5 =5+5+5
Manc33 wrote:I have never mentioned "outside observers". That has been introduced into it from nowhere for no reason, a red herring, a complication.
[XAP]Bob wrote:pete75 wrote:[XAP]Bob wrote:Equally valid to say that there are three front left legs, 3 front right etc...
Makes more sense to do so when number of dogs > number of legs per dog
Not really. Anyhow to put it another way 5*3 = 3+3+3+3+3 3*5 =5+5+5
Now do that for 100 dogs.
Which is more sensible:
100+100+100+100 or
4+4+4+4+4+.........
When one number is larger than the other it makes sense to use that number as the base for addition.
drossall wrote:Manc33 wrote:I have never mentioned "outside observers". That has been introduced into it from nowhere for no reason, a red herring, a complication.
You're right, of course; I woke up this morning realising that the analogy didn't work. I must be getting old.
But I do think that you are arguing that the air doesn't exist, because you don't feel the pressure of it on your skin.
pete75 wrote:[XAP]Bob wrote:
Now do that for 100 dogs.
Which is more sensible:
100+100+100+100 or
4+4+4+4+4+.........
When one number is larger than the other it makes sense to use that number as the base for addition.
It may well be but doesn't follow the rules of repeated addition which is what the person who set the question wanted to see demonstrated, Personally I think it's a pretty pointless exercise presumably invented to teach something about numbers or sets of numbers.
In my day we had similar silly questions like water is running into a bath from a tap at 1 gallon minute a minute and out of the plug hole at 1/2 a gallon a minute. It holds 20 gallons. How long will it take to fill. Correct answer 40 minutes sensible answer put the plug in and it will take 20.
The first rule of answering exam type questions is give the examiner what they want.
beardy wrote:The difference is that the question isnt really a maths question but a question about a teaching method and to see if the pupil has grasped the concept about the teaching method.
A case of the "teaching and assessment" tail wagging the education dog.
beardy wrote:The difference is that the question isnt really a maths question but a question about a teaching method and to see if the pupil has grasped the concept about the teaching method.
A case of the "teaching and assessment" tail wagging the education dog.
[XAP]Bob wrote:
The student did - they solved the correct multiplication problem, using the method prescribed (which is in itself a bad question).
The fact that the examiner is an idiot shouldn't affect the student's grade.
pete75 wrote:[XAP]Bob wrote:
The student did - they solved the correct multiplication problem, using the method prescribed (which is in itself a bad question).
The fact that the examiner is an idiot shouldn't affect the student's grade.
As I said the first rule of exam success is to give the examiner what they want. BTW I very much doubt this was a question given to a student - primary school pupil is my guess.
......................... What's wrong with contraflow cycle-lane systems as applied to 2-way roundabouts?Audax67 wrote:I suppose we may be thankful that conversation hasn't degenerated into a discussion of contraflow cycle-lane systems as applied to 2-way roundabouts.