Really, dude? Contrary to logic? How about plain wrong? is my sarcasmometer broken, because it sounds like you're saying ... nevermind. I can't believe there is seven pages of responses to this thread. I'd rather be right and fail than wrong and pass, personally, and I'd hope my kids, and any other kid in America or the entire world, would feel the same way. If this was presented to the teacher afterwards and she continually stood her ground then she should be tested before she can teach again.... and careful with those answers, the right answers won't make us happy on some of those.
unless the teacher is willing to drop the problem or admit their mistake the answer is what they say it is. If i received a complaint about that particular teacher and problem then (as an administrator) I would probably have them remove that problem or credit the student. you've never had a boss who made mistakes and blamed them on you and the rest of the staff? what happened to anyone who argued with him? unemployed. Just sayin'. Sh!+ happens move on. careless teacher, badly worded problem, move on.
This isn't a professional environment, it's a classroom. Regardless, we aren't talking about whether it's a fight you can win, you are saying her answer is right because she says it is. That's not accurate.
The question should read: It took Marie 10 minutes to saw a board into 3 pieces. If she works just as fast, how long will it take her to saw another duplicate board into 4 pieces?
fair enough. I never meant that her answer was the right one for that problem. I said that she wanted a different answer but she worded that problem badly. She failed to write the question properly. but it's still fighting a losing battle.
It's 15 minutes. Buuuuut why, it says another board into three pieces, and each cut takes 10 minutes. Stop. This is how your mind processes when you are solving math on paper. It takes Marrie 10 minutes to saw a board into two pieces, thus five minutes for each piece. It takes her five minutes to produce one piece, and three times that amount of time to produce three pieces. This concept can be applied to many math problems, and frankly, it's a benign slap in the face. It tells kids all the math they've learned in class is only good for a sheet of paper. There are math questions that would be impossible to solve on a sheet of paper (think outside of the paper).
It seems like the question is trying to test someone's understanding of x done per unit time...much like many derivatives you'll do later on in math...but the whole question is really awkward and obviously causes confusion. They don't make it clear that one cut produces 1 or 2 pieces of wood...instead it seems like they're trying to say 1 cut produces one piece of wood and you are to disregard the original piece as an actual 'piece'. There are many ways this question could have been asked...it's obviously a half-ass effort by whoever created it.
It's late, and my reading ability is probably impaired, but are you....... .......actually advocating...... ......the the correct answer is.... 15 minutes?
What are you talking about? It's simple logic: one cut produces TWO pieces. One cut takes 10 minutes. Two cuts=20 minutes=three pieces. ...and just out of curiosity, what math problems can't be solved "on paper" but can be solved otherwise...and what exactly is the method for solving said problems?? Archimedes patiently awaits your response.
Thank you...........count me in as one of the people who finds it hard to believe we're even having this discussion. If you saw a board INTO two pieces, you've made one cut; if you saw another board INTO three pieces, that task takes two cuts. I can't fathom how anyone can read it differently............though I do tend to agree that this could be a life lesson in how those in charge are sometimes wrong, and sometimes you have to just live with that.
The more proper question is "What is a girl doing cutting wood??" If it was any guy doing it, he'd have 3 pieces cut in less than 3 minutes, and this thread does not have to exist.
teacher's reasoning is wrong, BUT you can't really tell unless you know the dimension of the board. there are just too many assumptions here. assume it's a square board, it would take 15 minutes to cut the board into 3 unequal pieces. first into 2 equal pieces, then take 1 of those 2 and cut into 2 smaller pieces in a different direction. there are just too many ways you can cut a board without more details.
