Old Math Vs New Math - Long Division

Find out how students are learning how to solve long division problems using the Big 7 strategy.

[TerraSept]

Im 16 and I was taught the old way and not the new way, but I immediately understood how the new way works and I realize that I use the new way on the go and the old say when I need a more precise answer.

[rookiequasar]

I have a learning disability, though you wouldn’t ever know it when meeting me in person. Not unless you put anything higher than pre-algebra math in front of me, that is, and I’ve always found math exceedingly difficult to understand, especially the way they taught it to me and the rest of my classes in school. Nobody else seems to have struggled just retaining the basic rules for normal multiplication and division quite as much as I did and I’m so glad they didn’t have to go through what I did... and still do. Even now, or rather, especially now, I get flustered trying to do anything more than addition and subtraction on the fly.

I feel that this whole “understanding numbers” thing has really served to just make it more difficult for someone like me to process, and I wish I could have learned the old and new ways both to really help compare and see which method of processing information would work best. It’s not SUPER different, it’s all still math, but the way it’s been presented tends to make it feel so much more... convoluted? Somehow? I’m really hoping to find more videos on the older style of math solving. It was explained to me that a lot of the older method comes down to memorization, and it helps to link it all up to patterns. Sounds a lot smoother, oddly enough? Memorization is better for me than having to to go step by step and struggle to remember all the rules every time I try to think of the answer to an equation, because it has never and will never come easy. I like seeing the difference here, and this ended up bringing back the memories of how to actually DO long division. It’s uh, been three years since I had to do any, hahaha!

[jeremystone]

That’s how I always did division in my head and was “taught” the old way. Glad someone finally took what was in my head and put it in to steps

[Niyucuatro]

I don't really see how writing a few more zeros helps with the division.

[justinb]

Hrmm it's a different way of thinking, but I get to the answer a bit faster the old way, in my head, chalk it up to me knowing that way longer and maybe it'd be about equal with enough practice. Did open my eyes to it not being as bad as folks make it out to be.

[JohnnyDoeDoeDoe]

The broader point should be an understanding, rather than faith in any algorithm, old or new.

For starters, how can you be sure that the algorithm works? It's tempting to simply wave your hand and say "it's been used for millennia", but we believed the earth was the center of the universe for millennia too. Children often understand division as a way to fairly distribute something, and this is essentially where division originated from, the algorithm is merely an efficient 'trick' someone invented.

If you understand the 'why' and the 'what' behind operations like division and operands like integers, you have a strong basis to move onto more complex topics and look for the 'why' and 'what' there too. Ideas like this are essential for for jobs in STEM, and this kind of abstract thought will only become more valuable as markets around the world move away from labor based jobs and towards jobs requiring more abstract, and mathematically creative thinking.

[db-wmxm]

Did anyone notice that the new way of math required them to remember a times table instead of actually doing math

[ricksmith]

Both seem to be the same.  The "old" method, which I learned a long time ago, is basically the same as the "new" method.  He even alludes to it when solving the old way (he says 23 x 2 = 460).  The 2 is above the 8 and in the 10s column, so it is in fact 460 even though only 46 is written.  The reason it is not written as 460 (and 20) is to keep it cleaner and save writing.  This should be taught rather than the "long 7 method" or whatever he called it.  I guess both work, but the new way seems unnecessary.

[samsanders]

i'm glad you think that you don't need a pen and paper to long divide. how about 23 into 4, 593??? or 23 into 743, 571??? or even 8 into 5, 671, 284??? there is nothing wrong with learning traditional long division because it works. the "new" method actually makes sense, but don't try to make us believe that you don't need a pen and paper, ok?

[tonyad]

The idea of dividing candies was always taught. But it was done with smaller numbers. Let’s say 8 candies for 2 people. Smaller number, easier to understand the concept. And then you teach a formula, if will, to quickly divide a lot of candies to a lot of people so that you don’t spend all day sharing candies.

[georgejames]

Teach the basic and get these kids into real life education .
Learn to read a tape measure .
Build skilled carpenter .
Show them how to write better and clear .
Teach them to cook .
Sew and how to fix the lawn mower .
Give them a skill called respect and honor for seniors and parents .
Make them men and woman .
With skills to earn a good salary .

[kennethmcgovern]

He pretty much did the exact same thing in the "new" math. The only difference is that he didn't write out his work in an effort to make it look cleaner. It was merely organized different.

[Nandian]

I feel that anyone that says that the newer way is better than the old way has no understanding of Math to begin with. Both ways are exactly the same.

[notyou]

My kids shocked me with this. It messed them up because I showed them "old" math before they started school.

[christopherduncan]

Can't say I've ever been in a shopping mall and needing to do long division.

[teststudent]

No, they won't need a pen and paper when shopping. They will need a fargin huge whiteboard.

[bruceeferry]

Just because you CAN do something doesn't mean you should. The old method works and it's much simpler. Stick with it.

[coreya]

There making it harder to play with numbers only to simplify simple everyday math.

[robynhill]

I was taught this “new math” first in grade 4 in 1979 then for grade 5 taught the “old math” second. So I see the “new math” is actually the “very old math.” 😂

[zaneutwo]

Thanks for explaining this. Now i can help my grand kids with their math.😊