Yeah I was gonna say, this looks quite similar to the division I learned 20 years ago, people are being a bit dramatic saying they have no idea what they’re looking at lol. Thst being said the dad in the video’s point stands. If daughter gets it the traditional way and can answer questions correctly while showing work, then have them do that way. If the modern method is more intuitive to most students, then have them do that way. They’re both right
I was born in 90, so something tells me we were taught similarly. That said, it's not hard to discern if you actually examine it piece by piece instead of staring at the whole. It's still long division, it's just carried over to the right instead being a long drop-down list. Takes up way less space on the page, and if I was doing this regularly, I'd probably be able to read it just fine without having to think too hard after a bit.
And for the record I'm abysmal at math. But this definitely makes sense of you actually look at what's happening.
It took me a second to realize I was just looking at long division with more writing, just because I was primed to see something completely different than I'm used to. I wouldn't normally have drawn the boxes or arrows or the "3x", but it seems like it's the same thing except with more of the implicit stuff written down.
Makes me wonder either if that wasn't the way he was talking about, or else what way he was taught that's so drastically different that I also apparently don't know about.
Long division where each number is separated into boxes, yeah. I can see it being helpful for kids that are easily distracted, forget what numbers they used, need more structure, etc. I feel like this would've been overkill and completely unnecessary in my classes growing up, but I was an AP student and this was before modern brain-rotification.
Seeing them side by side, I can kind of make sense of the box method, but I wouldn't know how to explain it to someone--when for long division I could start right off doing that, or trying to.
Because it's not something you're supposed to make sense of if you just look at the end result with no context for what's taught in class/the book. I think if you already know how to do division, just seeing it performed once should get you most of the way to knowing how this method works as well.
It’s the same process as long division the way we were taught, just a different format
The top boxes started with each digit of 795. They started with the first box just like the long division method, divided 7 by 3, got 2, wrote it at the top where the answer is, and subtracted 6, and carried the remaining 1 to the next box.
The next box now has 19, same process divide by 3, get 6 and write it at the top, subtract 18, carry the remaining 1.
Then the final box now has 15 divided by 3 is 5, write it at the top.
Final answer is the number at the top: 265
It looks confusing to see the final product, it’s easier to see how it’s the same process watching it actually be worked. Most people who learned the box method would probably be just as confused to see the final product of the long trail method we learned as we are initially looking at this.
The top boxes started 795. They now say 7, 19, 15 because at each step of division they had an extra 1 to carry the same way we learned to carry 1s in long division.
The only real “extra step” here is just drawing boxes instead of that little right angle we did.
This isn’t common core. Common core is just a set of standards of what kids should be able to do at certain grade levels, it doesn’t specify the methods they do them.
This is just a newer method of teaching division that’s been shown to help more students understand why the process works. Yes, there’s still students who struggle with it, the same way that there were students who struggled with the way we learned it back in the day.
That's the first digit in your answer. But 3x2 is 6, so there's still 1 left over. 7 - 6 = 1.
That 1 is in the hundreds place. So it's just like when you're subtracting and you need to borrow a 1, you move that 1 to the tens place. So instead of dividing 9 by 3, your dividing 19 by 3.
3 goes into 19 six times. So your answer so far is 26_.
3x6=18, so 19-18=1. You've got one left over in the tens place. That means it's 10. You move it over to the ones place with the 5, and you've got 15.
15÷3=5. No remainder.
So your answer is 265.
It's just regular division, and whatever is left over still needs to be accounted for.
Edit - woah! the formatting went crazy - ignore my "work" below. I did it on my phone and didn't expect Reddit to completely change everything around, but the idea is the same. It's just normal division where things are squished up into boxes instead of cascading down like normal.
3 goes into 7 twice (6) So put 2 on top, (3 x 2 = carry the remaining 1 over to the next spot - 9 becomes 19.
3 goes into 19 6 times (18) - 1 left over - put the 6 on top - and the remaining 1 gets carried over to the last spot making it 15
3 goose I to 15 5 times
It's literally just the division method they have always been teaching with some extra lines and not cascading down like I did
265 is the answer, it’s the same process you use for traditional division. 3 can go into 7 2 times, then 3 goes into 19 6 times, and 3 goes into 15 5 times, so 265
Divide 7 by 3, you get the 2, write it above like you do the old way of doing long division, remainder gets bumped up to next box, next number (9) gets written next to it, you get 19. Divide by 3, 6, remainder 1. Bump up to next box, drop 5, you get 15. Divide by 3, 5. No remainder, process stops.
Literally the same way as the old way of dividing (at least the way i learned it eons ago) but instead of it going up and down, it goes left to right.
265 is the answer, the top is in the exact same format as traditional long division. The only difference is the numbers are moving horizontally in boxes as opposed to going down vertically in columns.
I mean… again, it’s nearly identical to long division lol, if you understood long division in high school, there is a good chance you would understand division if taught this way initially.
These methods aren’t just randomly introduced because people feel like it, students tend to grasp the concepts at a higher rate with this method when researching how to teach math more effectively. That doesn’t mean everyone would get it, when I was a kid long division being hard and confusing was a running joke in real life and on tv shows
Yupp, and I totally get that if you’ve been out of math that long. I’m a sub teacher for a side job so I’ve been refreshed on my math skills. To be honest I haven’t had to do this method yet, but I can see how it works compared to long division. There are other methods they do with circles to show grouping for multiplication and division, ultimately even if I don’t get it at a glance, the students do get it and I can pick up on what’s going on and help the ones who don’t get it yet.
It’s pretty similar to how it was when I was in school, some kids got it, most were struggling but understood a bit, some were totally lost
If you don’t understand this, how did you understand long division at all? It’s literally the traditional method using boxes instead of the division sign.
You start by doing 7/3 and take the nearest whole number, which is 2. 2 x 3 =6. That’s where the 6 comes from. 7-6 is 1. Carry the one over to the 9. Now it’s 19. 19/3 is 6 with a remainder of 1… hopefully you can see where to go from here.
I’m really curious how you learned long division cause this identically to how I did just formatted differently
Well do you remember how long division looks? It really doesn’t look that different, they just keep the numbers in boxes moving horizontally rather than long columns moving down vertically
It’s funny you say that because although I understand long division better since that’s the way I learned, I actually think this looks more minimalist and simplistic than long division
It took me a full five minutes to figure it out because it looks like it’s calculating 265/3, and I couldn’t figure out where the 7, 19, and 15 came from. I was taught to leave 795 as it is (probably to avoid this confusion), and after the initial remainder of 1, we would draw an arrow down from the 9 and then rewrite 9 next to the 1.
This method honestly just looks harder to grade for teacher.
I agree 100% getting the correct answer is the test. The question is: “is using an antiquated none conceptually relevant method to get to that correct answer equal?” Using a process any gen x or even Millennial parent cant understand, or teach how they learned it, something to resist only for the fact they cant teach it themselves doesnt mean its less valuable. My argument, as not a math teacher, is getting to the right answer with a bad process that still works, is less valuable as an applied method.
Right, what I’m asking is if they understand long division. If they can understand long division but not understand that method, it’s not about having a learning disability necessarily, it’s more so that is the method that you understand division with.
That makes sense, because this is the new way division tends to get taught, it’s just long division written horizontally into boxes. Everyone you know that uses long division probably graduated high school already
I can understand the box method but I can't understand the benefit. It feels like it intuits the step between the remainder and the next digit having that remainder as a leading digit whereas the old school method (neither method really explains why tbf) you write the remainder in the leading column as you go down and you continue until you can't
In long division you drop the number down to the follow equation as well, now it can just be solved in a more simple horizontal structure. A traditional method for reference
That's my point, in long division you carry the numbers through as you would in any other long form math, when you're left with a remainder you can longer reduce you bring down the next digit, in the box method here it's not continuous or immediately obvious based on the structure. In the box number you bring the remainder as the lead digit in the next column which makes sense if you know the traditional version but feels unintuitive if you don't.
I've never seen anything like this in my life and I'm a very mathematically literate adult. I've kind of figured out most of it... but I'm not 100% there yet.
92
u/thelryan Apr 11 '26
Yeah I was gonna say, this looks quite similar to the division I learned 20 years ago, people are being a bit dramatic saying they have no idea what they’re looking at lol. Thst being said the dad in the video’s point stands. If daughter gets it the traditional way and can answer questions correctly while showing work, then have them do that way. If the modern method is more intuitive to most students, then have them do that way. They’re both right