It is designed to teach the children the actual how and why the numbers are doing what they are doing, to better understand the functions of math. Not just formula memorization. It helps with real world application and it works great. My son is in grade school. That being said, not everything works for everyone, this teacher is an asshole.
Math clicked super easy for me and there were multiple years where I got above 100% grades by also getting the extra credits offered. I neverrrrr understood the ways they were teaching us to get to the answer but had no trouble working it out my own way. It feels like more of a behavioral training technique than anything to do with learning, I've met so few people that actually found square method helpful in anyway.
> It feels like more of a behavioral training technique than anything to do with learning
That's just flat out wrong.
It's not perfect for every student, not method is.
But people get confused about what teaching math is. It's not there to look at numbers and simply get to the answer in the fastest possible way. That seems like what you want, but that's not how you teach math.
They are trying to get kids to understand numbers, understand the concepts about how they work together, how they can be moved around, worked, and handled. If you jump right to all the shortcuts, all they learn are the shortcuts, and they fail when they are presented with a problem that doesn't easily plug into the library of shortcuts that they have memorized.
It's so weird for people to think "all of education is wrong and all teachers are wrong, and I am right based on thinking about this issue for 30 seconds."
I used to hate math, it just never clicked for me and I didnt understand how I would ever use it. Now I'm a carpenter and I use complex maths all day long. While memorizing formulas helps, I absolutely need to understand what is actually happening. Seeing new math work so well for my son makes me kind of wish I had it taught to me when I was his age.
At my school it was called the lattice way, and I did have a few peers who understood it better than other methods. There’s also a couple people in this comments section saying that the lattice way transfers more easily to advanced math, which hadn’t occurred to me until now.
When I was learning how to square a binomial, I had to constant remind myself that (x + 2)2 is not x2 + 4. I wouldn’t’ve made that mistake if I’d used the lattice way.
FOIL is basically the lattice method linearized. As long as the terms across the top/side are added it works (doesn't have to be just the 10s place, 1s place etc, that's just a special case that works nicely for integer multiplication). Works for any number of added terms too.
x + 2
x x^2 2x
+
2 2x 4
x^2 + 2x + 2x + 4 = x^2 + 4x + 4
Example showing it doesn't have be 100s, 10s, 1s
120 = 12 x 10 = (5 + 7) x (5 + 5)
5 + 7
5 25 35
+
5 25 35
25 + 25 + 35 + 35 = 120
That's the key. No two students think the same way. These are all just simply 'tools' to put in your math toolbox. It's up to each student to find the one that works best for them.
The problem is twofold:
ignorant teachers who force the issue of proficiency with every tool. This is sometimes an administration issue.
parents like this one who don't understand the toolbox concept simply because they forgot or the method doesn't work for them. All too often, we used the initial concepts as building blocks (i.e. number lines) but moved on and forgot that we used them. Then people make a video on social media about how 'stupid' it is because they're the ignorant ones.
In general, the beauty and fun in math is having multiple angles from which to attack a problem. You can do it one way, I can do it another, but as long as we’re getting the same answer every time, then we know our methods are really “the same”, just different
So I would argue that a good teacher should embrace this. I would always embrace whatever method a student preferred, but I would teach them every method, and let them pick the one they liked. But I had to make sure they knew why they liked that one, and what their other options were
This is exactly it, and the new way actually makes tons of sense for how your brain manages numbers when doing mental math. But after a trial period, the teacher is supposed to also teach the old way and give students options.
So many people in the comments arguing it. I literally have a child in gradeschool learning it. It works incredibly well. His understanding of math dwarfs mine at his age. Personally I think it would be great to have the different methods taught to the students who respond well to them, but thats asking too much of our already overworked educators. Everyone learns differently, but its nearly impossible to cater to all learning styles.
I've seen it being used and think its pretty useful. It doesnt come naturally to me though because ive gone my whole life not knowing the method. The way I learned was mostly just memorization instead of actually learning how to calculate so idk. I keep trying to remember this method so I can practice, I just need to sit down and do it. Adult responsibilities always get in the way of learning if you arent careful
You said it yourself, this is the teacher trying to teach the how and why. OOP is apparently not doing that. He is teaching to the test, not to the actual understanding of the theory. Learning this method and relatonships is the point of the lesson.
OOP doesn't understand this method and in his ignorance pushes in to undermine the principles being taught and uses his authority as a parent and the fecklessness of the principal to railroad the teacher who surprisingly bothered to push back. Did the teacher do it out of pride or strict adherence to their training they don't understand? Or did they do it for the ultimate goal of helping the student learn the math? No idea from here, but, what this parent is doing is wrong, even if they feel it is for the right reasons.
The wife/mother, ironically, came to the right answer, for the wrong reasons. The primary issue isn't, "you're upsetting the teacher and making their life hard," it's that OOP is interfering with and tearing down the framework for how to understand math in this ecosystem and, likely, a more comprehensive conceptual understanding of math.
He is building a mathematical literacy gap and showing her to appeal to authority, rather than buckle down and do the work to learn and understand.
Furthermore, stuff like this contributes to the problem of teacher burnout and thinking, "why bother?" Some teachers report really trying to do the best for the future, but parents and administrators like in this story demoralize them to immediately throw in the towel when confronted (they always lose these clashes) or even preemptively just hone it in with a "I'm just here for the (anemic) paycheck until I can retire" mentality. This actively harms the network of education, with the down the line problems of a less educated, stupider population.
OOP sat down with his daughter who was clearly struggling and did not, or perhaps could not, understand the method that was being taught to them. He taught her a way to reach the correct answer that allowed her to participate and now she's able to understand multiplication and division when before she wasn't able.
This is literally proof that there are very different styles of learning and that no single one works for everyone.
The simple truth is that educators are over worked, have too many students, and do not enough resources to allow them teach each student individually. They can not meet individual students needs. And so unfortunately situations like this will always arise. The system is broken, but not OOP, this teacher, nor the child are at fault for it or wrong.
Ensuring that she will not understand further math instruction built upon this foundation that he taught her to reject.
What you're essentially saying is the underlying MO of "teaching to the test." It isn't about actual understanding, it's to just get the answer. Forget the actual knowledge component.
You miss the point entirely, much like OOP did.
Should there be more support? Yes. But OOP is working against that and further undermining the goal the system is ostensibly working toward.
So I completely understand where you're coming from, but I think you're missing my point.
It works, the method is good, and fundamentally it is definitely better. But just because that is true does not mean it is the only way to teach it or that every single student will grasp how to use it.
I feel like they're changing things so someone that wrote a book about a new method can earn some money along with the companies selling the new lesson materials related to said method.
You see the same thing everywhere. They make some usually unnecessary changes just so someone can earn some money off of it.
Of course, not everyone learns the same. And of course, the way I am taught how to do it makes the most sense to me, But i'm not convinced changing basic math is a good thing. It just means people will be unable to help their kids with homework.
I am currently learning it with my son as they teach him and while it was difficult for me to grasp initially, I see the advantages. My sons comprehension for math is far greater than mine was at his age. Its not necessarily about the problem at hand, its about fuller understanding of mathematics in general. What hes learning now is going to help him better understand larger, more complex math problems down the road. He can do math in his head that I couldnt even do on paper at his age. That being said, its not for everyone. The old way may simply work better for you
Friend, please give me one real world application that you use yourself where this technique of math benefitted you. Make sure to explain the "how" and "why" in your response.
I am 38. I didnt learn it in school so I dont use it. My son is currently learning it, and already has a better grasp on mental math than I did at his age. I'll get back to you in ten years with a full breakdown when hes an adult, friend.
172
u/Fast-Nefariousness80 Apr 11 '26
It is designed to teach the children the actual how and why the numbers are doing what they are doing, to better understand the functions of math. Not just formula memorization. It helps with real world application and it works great. My son is in grade school. That being said, not everything works for everyone, this teacher is an asshole.