5 ms·

You don't think it's important for people to learn long division? Other than being one step away from total technological reliance, these kinds of exercises are

You don't think it's important for people to learn long division? Other than being one step away from total technological reliance, these kinds of exercises are way of teaching the relationships between numbers, which is INCREDIBLY important.

ewjordan 16y ago
Bah. Long division is a rather unenlightening algorithm that doesn't teach most people anything at all about how numbers interact. That's assuming they even remember how the algorithm works. Which they don't, as a rule. ROI-wise, there are far better places to spend time learning the relationships between numbers than long division.
adbge 16y ago
> Other than being one step away from total technological reliance I rely on technology to cook my food for me. Personally, I think that should be a little more alarming than relying on a calculator. My point being: embrace technology, don't fear it. > these kinds of exercises are way of teaching the relationships between numbers, which is INCREDIBLY important. One could learn about relationships between numbers without knowing long division. Honestly, the only time I do non-trivial division by hand is when I'm doing napkin math to entertain myself. If I didn't know how, I'd just rely on my phone. It's fairly unlikely that I'm going to be in a situation where I need to do long division and don't have access to a computer/phone/calculator. Now, I'm not sure that I agree with not teaching long division but, at the same time, I'm not convinced that it's terrifically important.
joevandyk 16y ago
How does long division help at explaining the relationships between numbers? All it was for me was a mechanical set of steps to arrive at the answer.
grovulent 16y ago
I think it's relative to the use to which you intend to put that knowledge. There are zillion of different algorithms that could be applied to do long division. I could for instance, apply an algorithm that works for first order classical logic extended with the set of peano axiom and a successor function. Certainly someone who knows THAT algorithm understands something more about division than folk who just use paper and pen with arabic numerals. But do most people need to see the relationships between the two algorithms to do all the stuff in life that they need to? Clearly not. So to be convinced of your position I'd need to see why the particular knowledge of the particular algorithm you think is so important is really necessary to the work that most people go on to do with long division. I'm not saying the issue is completely cut and dried - but I personally can't see what your argument might be. - edit - I might just add... that it's ALL technological reliance to some degree. I mean - what if they don't have pencil and paper? What if they don't have arabic numerals? These both were important technological advances that made long division as we know it possible. It simply couldn't be done with an abacus in any way that wasn't horribly time consuming. Technological reliance doesn't hold as an argument against employing new and faster algorithms except where it may still be difficult for many to get access to that tech. In the case of calculators in the western world - that's clearly not an issue.

ewjordan 16y ago

Bah. Long division is a rather unenlightening algorithm that doesn't teach most people anything at all about how numbers interact. That's assuming they even remember how the algorithm works. Which they don't, as a rule. ROI-wise, there are far better places to spend time learning the relationships between numbers than long division.

adbge 16y ago

> Other than being one step away from total technological reliance I rely on technology to cook my food for me. Personally, I think that should be a little more alarming than relying on a calculator. My point being: embrace technology, don't fear it. > these kinds of exercises are way of teaching the relationships between numbers, which is INCREDIBLY important. One could learn about relationships between numbers without knowing long division. Honestly, the only time I do non-trivial division by hand is when I'm doing napkin math to entertain myself. If I didn't know how, I'd just rely on my phone. It's fairly unlikely that I'm going to be in a situation where I need to do long division and don't have access to a computer/phone/calculator. Now, I'm not sure that I agree with not teaching long division but, at the same time, I'm not convinced that it's terrifically important.

joevandyk 16y ago

How does long division help at explaining the relationships between numbers? All it was for me was a mechanical set of steps to arrive at the answer.

grovulent 16y ago

I think it's relative to the use to which you intend to put that knowledge. There are zillion of different algorithms that could be applied to do long division. I could for instance, apply an algorithm that works for first order classical logic extended with the set of peano axiom and a successor function. Certainly someone who knows THAT algorithm understands something more about division than folk who just use paper and pen with arabic numerals. But do most people need to see the relationships between the two algorithms to do all the stuff in life that they need to? Clearly not. So to be convinced of your position I'd need to see why the particular knowledge of the particular algorithm you think is so important is really necessary to the work that most people go on to do with long division. I'm not saying the issue is completely cut and dried - but I personally can't see what your argument might be. - edit - I might just add... that it's ALL technological reliance to some degree. I mean - what if they don't have pencil and paper? What if they don't have arabic numerals? These both were important technological advances that made long division as we know it possible. It simply couldn't be done with an abacus in any way that wasn't horribly time consuming. Technological reliance doesn't hold as an argument against employing new and faster algorithms except where it may still be difficult for many to get access to that tech. In the case of calculators in the western world - that's clearly not an issue.