Mathematical ineptness among generally capable people

[badgersprite]

I've always considered the humanities like English and History to be my strongest subjects, since I like them so much, but, to my surprise, math was my best subject in high school. Mind you, having left high school, I haven't touched a math book in years so now I don't remember a damn thing I learned back then, and I wouldn't have it any other way.

I never want to think about the quadratic equation or the calculations I had to do for potential energy in physics ever again.

To be perfectly honest, though, I found that how good I was at maths depended 100% on who was teaching me. When I had a boring teacher, my grades slipped a lot and I just couldn't get into it. When I had a smart, interesting teacher who I liked a lot, I topped the class. That made a huge difference on how well I learned, and how motivated I was to do the work.

 

[Kwaren]

I plain just don't get it. Such as -2 x -2 somehow makes +4. If I owe you 2 apples then owe you twice that amount how the hell do I have 4 apples? I owe you 4 apples!

No, you owe me minus 2 lots of apples, which is different to oweing me 2 lots. It's complicated and can be a hard concept to get your head round

I have 0 apples. I owe you 2. That means I have -2 apples. If I owe you twice that, that means I have -4. If I owe 2, 2 times how did I end up with 4 things I didn't have in the first place?

The problem is, you don't owe twice as many apples. If you owed 2 apples, and then had twice as much debt, it would be -2 apples times 2, not a -2.

An earlier poster linked to a few good examples of how to imagine multiplying two negative numbers. This was one I liked:

Imagine you receive 5 bills in the mail, each for 7 dollars. You would owe a total of 35 dollars, or basically, you would have -35 dollars.

Now imagine that instead, you are the one sending out those bills. You would have -5 bills (since you're giving them out), each for -7 dollars (what the bill says is owed). In this situation, you would be receiving 35 dollars, so the answer would be a positive 35.

That makes no sense at all. If I pay 7 per bill at 5 apiece I still lose 35. -7 x-5=-35

 

[SonicKaos]

Put a math problem down in front of me and I'll have no problem solving it for you. Take away my calculator however and I'm f*****. I cannot do mental math whatsoever, but I can grasp the logic behind many formulas and whatnot.

I used to be great at math and poor at english (writing) until I had a horrible math teacher in grade 11. Completely lost interest in it and all of a sudden became a very good writer. I still can't do mental math because my mind just goes blank when people ask me a question, but I would write you a page about why I think that happens without issue.

It sucks, and yet at the same time it's great. I am not interested in math despite my love of logical thinking. I'd much rather express it in words.

 

[MassiveGeek]

I have ADD - meaning I have an absolutely awful short term memory and trouble with my concentration.

So, I'm pretty damn bad at math unless I have good help. Like, I have a grapher program on my phone and it helps tremedously, because it shows me how stuff turns out, I can predict the outcome and check it with little effort. If I don't have to keep everything in my head, then it can work really well.

But if I do have to keep everything in my head, it usually crashes and burns.

 

[Xyliss]

I plain just don't get it. Such as -2 x -2 somehow makes +4. If I owe you 2 apples then owe you twice that amount how the hell do I have 4 apples? I owe you 4 apples!

No, you owe me minus 2 lots of apples, which is different to oweing me 2 lots. It's complicated and can be a hard concept to get your head round

I have 0 apples. I owe you 2. That means I have -2 apples. If I owe you twice that, that means I have -4. If I owe 2, 2 times how did I end up with 4 things I didn't have in the first place?

Because your breaking down the sum -2x2 not -2x-2, if you owe me two lots of -2 apples then you have 4 apples

 

[Dexiro]

I actually think maths is just very badly taught. Throughout my life I've had like 2 good/average math teachers, out of 6.

One of those teachers spent my final year of high school, when it mattered most, playing darts and talking about his crappy life. I had to learn 2 years of maths as homework :/

Then when I started College I had a genuinely good maths teacher swapped out for a total ass half way through the year, and my grades plummeted and got me a nice big fail.

The first teacher was great and made sure you understood everything, my second teacher sped through everything and then told you to do 4-6 hours of homework every week. That tells me he has a pretty shoddy understanding of how people learn, and noone did the damn homework.

 

[Kwaren]

I plain just don't get it. Such as -2 x -2 somehow makes +4. If I owe you 2 apples then owe you twice that amount how the hell do I have 4 apples? I owe you 4 apples!

No, you owe me minus 2 lots of apples, which is different to oweing me 2 lots. It's complicated and can be a hard concept to get your head round

I have 0 apples. I owe you 2. That means I have -2 apples. If I owe you twice that, that means I have -4. If I owe 2, 2 times how did I end up with 4 things I didn't have in the first place?

Because your breaking down the sum -2x2 not -2x-2, if you owe me two lots of -2 apples then you have 4 apples

If I owe something I don't have how do I end up with something I never had?

 

[Kenko]

Im good at writing, reading and understanding things. As well as quite adept at learning languages.
Even though im terrible at math I have been good at it. Problem isnt that im bad at it or stupid, its just that my brain hates it. I cant bring myself to do much math as it boooores me so badly its frustrating.

 

[Dexiro]

I have 0 apples. I owe you 2. That means I have -2 apples. If I owe you twice that, that means I have -4. If I owe 2, 2 times how did I end up with 4 things I didn't have in the first place?

Because your breaking down the sum -2x2 not -2x-2, if you owe me two lots of -2 apples then you have 4 apples

The way you're explaining it makes it sound like you're adding -2 and -2, I'll have a go :3

Ok so we know that "-2 x 2 = -4" because you have 2 lots of -2 apples. The presence of that "-" means you're going to get a negative answer.

With "-2 x -2" though the 2 "-" signs are going to negate each other, making the answer "= 4". To put it into words you'll have -2 lots of -2 apples.

[spoiler = To recap:]
No "-" symbol gives a positive answer : "2 x 2 = 4"
One "-" symbols give a negative answer : "-2 x 2 = -4"
Two "-" symbols give a positive answer : "-2 x -2 = 4"
Three "-" symbols give a negative answer : "-2 x -2 x -2 = -8"
Four would give a positive, etc...
[/spoiler]

 

[Xyliss]

I plain just don't get it. Such as -2 x -2 somehow makes +4. If I owe you 2 apples then owe you twice that amount how the hell do I have 4 apples? I owe you 4 apples!

No, you owe me minus 2 lots of apples, which is different to oweing me 2 lots. It's complicated and can be a hard concept to get your head round

I have 0 apples. I owe you 2. That means I have -2 apples. If I owe you twice that, that means I have -4. If I owe 2, 2 times how did I end up with 4 things I didn't have in the first place?

Because your breaking down the sum -2x2 not -2x-2, if you owe me two lots of -2 apples then you have 4 apples

If I owe something I don't have how do I end up with something I never had?

Owing -2 is not the same as owing 2, if you owe -2 its like saying a double negative so they cancel out to mean you have 2. An earlier post explained this well

 

[Xyliss]

I have 0 apples. I owe you 2. That means I have -2 apples. If I owe you twice that, that means I have -4. If I owe 2, 2 times how did I end up with 4 things I didn't have in the first place?

Because your breaking down the sum -2x2 not -2x-2, if you owe me two lots of -2 apples then you have 4 apples

The way you're explaining it makes it sound like you're adding -2 and -2, I'll have a go :3

Ok so we know that "-2 x 2 = -4" because you have 2 lots of -2 apples. The presence of that "-" means you're going to get a negative answer.

With "-2 x -2" though the 2 "-" signs are going to negate each other, making the answer "= 4". To put it into words you'll have -2 lots of -2 apples.

[spoiler = To recap:]
No "-" symbol gives a positive answer : "2 x 2 = 4"
One "-" symbols give a negative answer : "-2 x 2 = -4"
Two "-" symbols give a positive answer : "-2 x -2 = 4"
Three "-" symbols give a negative answer : "-2 x -2 x -2 = -8"
Four would give a positive, etc...
[/spoiler]

That's exactly right! And better than I was explaining it

 

[TheEvilCheese]

I am currently taking Maths, Physics and chemistry at A level (end of college?) and yeah.. I am good at it =/

However, In my GCSE's I got B's in English, History and ECS and an A in english literature (all forming arguments and analysing with some imaginative writing.)

 

[Kwaren]

I have 0 apples. I owe you 2. That means I have -2 apples. If I owe you twice that, that means I have -4. If I owe 2, 2 times how did I end up with 4 things I didn't have in the first place?

Because your breaking down the sum -2x2 not -2x-2, if you owe me two lots of -2 apples then you have 4 apples

The way you're explaining it makes it sound like you're adding -2 and -2, I'll have a go :3

Ok so we know that "-2 x 2 = -4" because you have 2 lots of -2 apples. The presence of that "-" means you're going to get a negative answer.

With "-2 x -2" though the 2 "-" signs are going to negate each other, making the answer "= 4". To put it into words you'll have -2 lots of -2 apples.

[spoiler = To recap:]
No "-" symbol gives a positive answer : "2 x 2 = 4"
One "-" symbols give a negative answer : "-2 x 2 = -4"
Two "-" symbols give a positive answer : "-2 x -2 = 4"
Three "-" symbols give a negative answer : "-2 x -2 x -2 = -8"
Four would give a positive, etc...
[/spoiler]

I still don't get it. This is why I study language and not math.

I now declare that I am the perfect poster boy for this thread.

 

[gl1koz3]

Math is fun when applied to actual problems. I find it hard to swallow when the problems presented at school are just random grandma shopping problems. Therefore was like crazy for physics because thats where all the boring math shit is actually put to use. I'd much rather have them skip all that theory crap and just go and show us how it's being used. Plain memorizing doesn't help the people who don't care anyway. The high school physics teacher always had great presentation before any new subject. Unlike the math teachers... And the slow grandma at the uni. Wasn't that bad, but too slow. Just couldn't care.

 

[Spade Lead]

I'm incredibly right-brained (literature, images, imagination, etc.), so math has always given me some degree of difficulty (especially now with these damn theorems and quadratic equations); I can grasp most mathematical concepts up to and including Pythagorean Theorem, after that it's pretty much gibberish

I made the mistake of taking an Astronomy class in school. It is under the physics department, and as such, there is some physics in it. I hope to do well enough to pass it.

Actually, reading through this thread, I'm starting to think that I got cheated intellectually. I'm not a good writer to compensate for my inability to grasp a lot of higher mathematics, so I fail at both the formal humanities/arts and maths. OK, I've got a good grasp on science and how that works when not confronted by sigmas and epsilons, but that sort of renders a lot of science difficult to learn properly.

Scientific Skills are more useful than my language skills, marketability wise...

 

[fletch_talon]

*Yes, I'm saying maths. I'm tired of the math/maths/lolmathsematics/lolpseudoamericantool debate and I'm not American so I'll say maths.

Personally I'm not a fan of maths because beyond the basics it serves no purpose in any job I might find myself wanting to do.
I used to be pretty good at it, then it got more advanced and suddenly it went from, "this is how this works" to "remember this formula, it works because it does". In other words a combination of the new style of math, and the teaching style adopted in the later grades.

But what I really quoted you for was to have a chuckle at your mini-rant and label it mathsemantics.

 

[Shockolate]

I have a friend who simply can NOT understand Discrete Mathematics. A natural in everything, but when he went to university, he needed it for his whatever-the-fuck-he's-trying-to-get.

He failed it horribly. I haven't done it, so I won't judge, but does anyone here have any experience with Discrete Mathematics? It's really made me curious.

 

[Jaime_Wolf]

There's a lot to address here, but I think there are solutions to some of the things you've brought up.

To clear up a few issues: you do not have dyscalculia. I've worked with people with this and it is PROFOUND. It's a pretty categorical thing and is more akin to dyslexia (can't remember what different operators do, consistentnly forgets which is the numerator and which is the divisor, etc.) than other problems that just cause some vague "difficulty" with things.

Most of the problems you brought up were either semantic issues (you didn't know what a term meant, for example "divisible") or misunderstanding the directions (not putting the fraction as a mixed number for the case of 1 4/5 or 9/5). These are mechanical problems, not problems of understanding. There's no understanding required to do the problems you mentioned so long as you follow the procedure. You don't have to have any idea how the procedure works at all. Failure to correctly perform arithmetic is almost always the result of poor teaching (no one ever made clear to you what the terms meant or the questions were asking) or of insufficient practice.

Now as for later math, people tend to do MUCH better even when they struggled at basic math. This is primarily because the focus shifts from procedure to reasoning, which people can usually remember and grasp a lot more easily. Once you understand the axioms, using set theory to show why addition and multiplication work as they do (why you don't add denominators, why you do multiply them) is pretty easy.

The issue is that while adults grasp the reasoning approach pretty readily, children have incredible difficulty with it. Arguably so would adults if they hadn't learned the procedures first. Imagine trying to derive addition from set theory WITHOUT EVER HAVING DONE ADDITION. So you essentially have to start with the procedural manipulation even when you have no idea why you're doing it. And, taught well, there's a lot of evidence that this is the right way to do it. Adults with a strong base in mechanical, procedural math tend to do considerably better when they reach advanced math (a generalisation of course, but a true one).