How combat dyscalculia?

[Pawelk198604]

I have problems learning the multiplication table as an adult. I'm an adult, but I’ve always had problems with math, despite having Asperger’s, but i'm quite good in technical stuff  

i would have loot of problems if not use calculator i just wonder does is possible to improve my math go to engineering studies?

Edited August 28, 2017 by Pawelk198604

[Scotius]

Good luck with that I'm 42 and i'm still unable to memorise that darned thing. My whole life it was maddening - in school i got good grades in everything but math. I learned english and russian without trouble. I read a lot. I know for a fact that i'm a reasonably intelligent man. But give me an equation to solve, and my brain comes to a screeching stop. That's so frustrating!

[Majorjim!]

I feel your pain, I too have dyscalculia. I would search for local adult learning schemes. That or always have a calculator with you.

[Steel]

On 28/08/2017 at 8:10 PM, Pawelk198604 said:

I have problems learning the multiplication table as an adult. I'm an adult, but I’ve always had problems with math, despite having Asperger’s, but i'm quite good in technical stuff  

i would have loot of problems if not use calculator i just wonder does is possible to improve my math go to engineering studies?

I'll give you a hint: don't learn multiplication tables.

In my opinion, memorising multiplication tables is archaic and has absolutely no place in learning good mental arithmetic skills. I have a physics degree and a masters in aerospace engineering and I haven't memorised these tables. What is a far better idea is to come up with a system that you can use to work out the answers to multiplication questions.

For example, when I come across a mental multiplication I need to do, I usually start by multiplying by either 5 or 10 (which I know instantly, since 10 times a number is easy and 5 times a number is just half of 10 times) and then adding or subtracting numbers from there. An example:

6 x 8? I could do this in two ways:

1) 5 x 8 = 40 (that is the bit I can do easily, since 5 x 8 is just 10 x 8 (=80) /2), then I add 8 to get 48.

2) 6 x 10 = 60 (again, this is the easy bit), then subtract two lots of 6, (so 12) to get 48.

 

(Bare in mind that there are other methods for mental arithmetic that may work better for other people, this is just what works well for me.)

 

This (or any other another method that works for you) also gives the ability to work out multiplications that are not included on the tables. For example, most grade school multiplication tables go up to 12 x 12 =144. So what happens if you want to do 13 x 16 and you have only memorised up to 12 x 12? For me I just add 10 x 13 (130) and 5 x 13 (65, 130 + 65 = 195) and then add another 13 to get 208.

Edited August 30, 2017 by Steel

[p1t1o]

I remember learning the tables but echo what @Steel said, memorising them isnt worth much.

I had a terrible time at university studying chemistry, approximately half the syllabus was understanding concepts (this part I could do), the other half was wrote memorisation. Many lectures consisted of nothing but copying down what was on the board for the full 50 mins, to be fully memorised. So in exams, which would consist of say 5 questions for 20 marks each, I would get high (18-19-20) marks for some of the questions and low (3-4-5) marks for those that relied on memorisation, giving me a very mixed bag of results.  

I dont have any tricks to combat the wrote memorisation, just that its a ubiquitous problem. People with good memory's have a great advantage. On the other hand, if you can understand the underlying concepts of a problem, you can figure out answers regardless of what you remember - not only that but you can make real headway even against problems that you havnt been taught a memorisable answer to.

Example: For biochemistry exams, we had to learn by heart the Krebs cycle - you literally didnt have to know  a thing about it, if you could reproduce the cycle diagram, you could score 18-19-20 out of 20 for that exam question. But if you understood some the chemistry, not only can you reproduce the cycle without memorising it 100%, but you also understand what is going on on a much deeper level, making concepts peripheral to this much easier to grasp as well.

There were a lot of people in my year who were not particularly good at chemistry, but were great at memorising things. They would get first class degrees but in practical laboratory classes would not know their hand from their behind.

***

For what its worth, engineering studies are maths-heavy, but learning multiplication tables isnt much of an advantage - you've always got access to a calculator. You will have to learn many equations though, there is always stuff you need to memorise, to some degree or another.

Have you done/learned/been taught any calculus/differentiation yet? If you can handle that, you're good.

Edited August 30, 2017 by p1t1o

[LN400]

Repeating what's been said here: Don't worry about memorizing any table or constant. That's not what maths is about. Maths is more about pattern recognition, finding systems in apparent chaos, logical reasoning. Memorizing tables and algorithms is great if one wants to be a drone or a parrot but it is not key to get a grasp on maths. More important is to understand why an algorithm works. There are chemistry professors who can't remember Avogadro's number if their life depended on it but they are still great chemistry professors. You don't have to remember pi to the 20th decimal's place, you dont have to remember what 7x8 is. What you do need is the knowledge that is "what is pi anyway and where can I look it up?", "what is multiplication anyway?" and so on. Learn what all the words, terms and symbols mean and let go of the tables.

 

As for tips: Say for instance you want to become better at mental arithmetics and you would like to practice multiplication. First step is to recognize that multiplication is nothing more than addition where all numbers you add up are the same number over and over. 3 x 5 = 5 + 5 + 5, all 5's, alternatively 3 + 3 + 3 + 3 + 3 which add up to the exact same value of 15. Then recognize the value of a cumbersome value like for instance 19 as the easier to work with 20 minus 1, then recognize that if you add say 7 20's you will get 140 which means adding 7 19's instead lands you 1 short of 140 for every 19 you add. Since the number of 19's is 7, then you will end up 7 1's or 7 short of 140, or in other words 133.

Edited August 30, 2017 by LN400

[YNM]

Could you count things in groups ? If it's yes, then you're not having discalculia.

Memorizing tables is a brute thing. They're not going to help you straight away for multiplications of large numbers - that one requires a bit more "unusual" arithmetic than small numbers. Or you'd just have a log slider or a calculating machine on hand.

If you can easily remember some phone numbers in groups, then it's OK. You can go on.

Edited August 30, 2017 by YNM

[LN400]

A bit of expanding on my previous post: On decimals and multiplication. Say you want to know what 3.4 x 7.2 is.

First understand what the 2 numbers are saying: 3.4 is 3 whole somethings and 4 tenths of this something, 7.2 is 7 whole something and 2 tenths of a something. This might seem trivial but there might be something more to it so let's see:

Multiplication is adding the same number and it doesn't matter which of the 2 numbers we choose to add to itself so let's do the 7.2.

3.4 means we need to add 3 whole 7.2 (7.2 being this something above) and add to that sum 4 tenths of 7.2. Now what is a tenth of 7.2? Move the decimal to the left and get 0.72 which is zero whole something, 7 tenths of this something and 2 hundredth of this something.

In total we'll get

7.2 + 7.2 + 7.2 + 0.72 + 0.72 + 0.72 + 0.72

= 7 + 7 + 7 + 0.2 + 0.2 + 0.2 + 0.7 + 0.7 + 0.7 + 0.7 + 0.02 + 0.02 + 0.02 + 0.02

= 21 + 0.6 + 2.8 + 0.08

= 21 + 3.4 + 0.08

= 24.48

Point is, treating multiplication as addition works even when you have decimal numbers but the key is to recognize what the decimals are telling us. Of course, this algorithm is long winded and there are much quicker algorithms but this one shows you exactly what is going on underneath the bonnet, even when you are using the quick algorithm.

Edited August 30, 2017 by LN400

[YNM]

1 hour ago, LN400 said:

A bit of expanding on my previous post: On decimals and multiplication. Say you want to know what 3.4 x 7.2 is.

3.4 x 7.2 = 34 × 72, then add two decimals.

Edited August 30, 2017 by YNM

[LN400]

Just now, YNM said:

3.4 x 7.2 = 34 × 72, then add two decimals.

Perfectly true but my point was rather to highlight what was going on behind the scene when you multiply

[YNM]

Just now, LN400 said:

Perfectly true but my point was rather to highlight what was going on behind the scene when you multiply

The big question is whether OP (@Pawelk198604) really does have dyscalculia or not. If he isn't then he's just using the "wrong" method. I'm also not very good with brute memorizing (the only way out for me to actually remember star names is to "see" them IRL, that took me a lot of times), so I never quite remember them anyway.

Though, yeah, apparently multiplications was used (repeated) soo often in primary schooling I end up "just remember" them.

[HebaruSan]

And as any US restaurant customer knows, it's easy to calculate 15% of any number.

15% = 10% + 5% = (total bill with the decimal moved one place left) + (that value again divided by 2)

[Pawelk198604]

The only thing i can remember that  

2*2 = 4

4*2 = 8

8*2 = 16

16 * 2 = 32

32 * 2 = 64

64 * 2 = 128

128 * 2 =  256

256 * 2 = 512

512 * 2 = 1024 

 

I learned this by accident by accidentally pressing sum button on calculator  

It was on my gimnazjum (middle school) I asked about that my teacher she was actually one of me beast teacher i ever had, she worked on Elwro during communism time, 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elwro

They produced computer the best one in whole former eastern block  

 

I asked why computer parts are always specified as 8 bit, 32 bit or 64 bit, that what dreamed at that time was Nintendo 64 gaming console with was very expansive at that time in Poland ,  i asked her why all this parts for computer are are described at 8,16,32 and so on.

 

She said that what i just saw was pattern, the pattern Power of number two, the basic of binary system, on which all computers on earth are run. She told that she was programmer in Elwro company and known ALGOL, COBOL, FORTRAN, BASIC,  TURBO PASCAL, ASSAMBLER programming language, she pressured my mom into writing my into TURBO PASCAL programming lesson that was conduced by other teacher from my school. In her opinion i can "learn math from backside by learning programming" i even liked that at first this whole turbo pascal but i started to not like it when computer science teacher started to teach us about loops and Conditional loops i cannot keep with that     

 

 

Edited August 31, 2017 by Pawelk198604

[YNM]

1 hour ago, Pawelk198604 said:

The only thing i can remember that  

2*2 = 4

4*2 = 8

8*2 = 16

16 * 2 = 32

32 * 2 = 64

64 * 2 = 128

128 * 2 =  256

256 * 2 = 512

512 * 2 = 1024

You're not having dyscalculia then.

All other multiplications are the same : how many times to add.

Also, 2*3 = 3*2.

[LN400]

Rather than dyscalculia, I would say you have some knowledge but there are gaps in that knowledge. That is very, very common. I'll suggest you go back to the very basic with the purpose of finding those gaps, identify them and fill them. Start with the basics and work your way up to more and more complex ideas and concepts. Don't be surprised if such a gap seems trivial or "too obvious to be bothered with". They are far from that. Fill the gaps as you find them. It's quite amazing what that allows further down the road. Read up, ask here or elsewhere, and don't skip a gap for being "uninteresting".

[Streetwind]

I think you're suffering from "all the cool kids claim math is hard" syndrome, not any actual disability with numbers. Sometimes when I listen to groups of people - especially younger ones - it feels like declaring publicly that you are not good at math is sort of a social requirement to fitting in with your peers. Everyone pretends to relate, everyone exchanges brownie points with everyone else, and hey, it's something to break the ice with strangers! Just don't be caught out a nerd by admitting you can actually do basic multiplication in your head!  

The one advice I can give you about getting better at math is "use it". And I don't mean "sit down and study multiplication tables". I mean "look at the world around you and the topics that interest you, and see if some of your questions can be answered with math".

Once upon a time, many years ago, I got into modded Minecraft for the first time. Some of those mods really were my style, and I loved playing with them. Quite obsessively so, even. Problem? Most parts of most of them were poorly documented, often offering little other than a short changelog quip to explain how a whole new feature worked.

So what's a player to do when he wants to figure out what the optimal setup for this or yonder machine is, or how much fuel that needlessly complex but fun to use generator consumes over the course of its warmup cycle? Math, that's what a player is to do. I sat down with a stopwatch, pen, and paper, tested precisely how each of those things behaved in every possible situation, wrote everything down, and reverse-engineered entire game systems from that. I had forgotten nearly all I learned in school about algebra, convinced I would never again need it in my life - and suddenly I found myself in need of being able to build polynomial functions out of points of data, just because I was playing a videogame that excited me. So I went on the internet and re-learned a whole bunch of stuff. Turns out that yes, you can and do make use of things they teach you in school later-on.

Today, I'm still no wizard at math. Some of the more in-depth discussion of orbital mechanics still makes me feel dumb as bricks because it touches things I've never worked with. But I've shed this fear of math as a whole, and I've shed this silly conviction that it is somehow something you have to be born for. Because it's not. But just like a language, you can't learn it if you never use it.

[wumpus]

On 8/30/2017 at 8:16 AM, LN400 said:

Repeating what's been said here: Don't worry about memorizing any table or constant. That's not what maths is about. Maths is more about pattern recognition, finding systems in apparent chaos, logical reasoning. Memorizing tables and algorithms is great if one wants to be a drone or a parrot but it is not key to get a grasp on maths. More important is to understand why an algorithm works. There are chemistry professors who can't remember Avogadro's number if their life depended on it but they are still great chemistry professors. You don't have to remember pi to the 20th decimal's place, you dont have to remember what 7x8 is. What you do need is the knowledge that is "what is pi anyway and where can I look it up?", "what is multiplication anyway?" and so on. Learn what all the words, terms and symbols mean and let go of the tables.

As for tips: Say for instance you want to become better at mental arithmetics and you would like to practice multiplication. First step is to recognize that multiplication is nothing more than addition where all numbers you add up are the same number over and over. 3 x 5 = 5 + 5 + 5, all 5's, alternatively 3 + 3 + 3 + 3 + 3 which add up to the exact same value of 15. Then recognize the value of a cumbersome value like for instance 19 as the easier to work with 20 minus 1, then recognize that if you add say 7 20's you will get 140 which means adding 7 19's instead lands you 1 short of 140 for every 19 you add. Since the number of 19's is 7, then you will end up 7 1's or 7 short of 140, or in other words 133.

One thing to remember is that mathematically speaking, constants are boring.  You can simply replace them with a variable name and proceed to do whatever math you like with them (plus divide without fear that it is a zero [because you wouldn't write down a zero, you'd just remove it]).  Once you've finished any algebra and higher math on the equation, then you can either plug your constants into a calculator or do any simple tricks that would speed things up (and since you should have a bunch of constants piled up, there should be more opportunities for tricks).

This might be a weird way to learn math, but if it works for you go for it.  I remember in my engineering studies, plenty of my classmates had the opposite problem: stick a variable in the equations such that they couldn't mindlessly plug it in a calculator (it was a long time ago) and they panicked.  This is a much deeper problem than anything you have.

And comments about the mathematical unimportance of constants shouldn't be ignored.  Mathematicians are said to have three numbers: "zero, one, many" (no idea if they are the basis for Pterry's Trolls) and smbc has plenty of jokes about physicists rounding constants off to the nearest 10 ("5 is good enough for pi").  This isn't to say that it isn't important to get the constants *right*, but plenty of STEM students get by with letting a calculator handle the all the constants (whether they learned their tables or not).  But you certainly need to keep a placekeeper (one that looks and acts like a variable) in your equations, and you have to have your algebra (and to a lesser extent the rest of "calculating math") cold to do so.

[Pawelk198604]

1 hour ago, Streetwind said:

I think you're suffering from "all the cool kids claim math is hard" syndrome, not any actual disability with numbers. Sometimes when I listen to groups of people - especially younger ones - it feels like declaring publicly that you are not good at math is sort of a social requirement to fitting in with your peers. Everyone pretends to relate, everyone exchanges brownie points with everyone else, and hey, it's something to break the ice with strangers! Just don't be caught out a nerd by admitting you can actually do basic multiplication in your head!  

The one advice I can give you about getting better at math is "use it". And I don't mean "sit down and study multiplication tables". I mean "look at the world around you and the topics that interest you, and see if some of your questions can be answered with math".

Once upon a time, many years ago, I got into modded Minecraft for the first time. Some of those mods really were my style, and I loved playing with them. Quite obsessively so, even. Problem? Most parts of most of them were poorly documented, often offering little other than a short changelog quip to explain how a whole new feature worked.

So what's a player to do when he wants to figure out what the optimal setup for this or yonder machine is, or how much fuel that needlessly complex but fun to use generator consumes over the course of its warmup cycle? Math, that's what a player is to do. I sat down with a stopwatch, pen, and paper, tested precisely how each of those things behaved in every possible situation, wrote everything down, and reverse-engineered entire game systems from that. I had forgotten nearly all I learned in school about algebra, convinced I would never again need it in my life - and suddenly I found myself in need of being able to build polynomial functions out of points of data, just because I was playing a videogame that excited me. So I went on the internet and re-learned a whole bunch of stuff. Turns out that yes, you can and do make use of things they teach you in school later-on.

Today, I'm still no wizard at math. Some of the more in-depth discussion of orbital mechanics still makes me feel dumb as bricks because it touches things I've never worked with. But I've shed this fear of math as a whole, and I've shed this silly conviction that it is somehow something you have to be born for. Because it's not. But just like a language, you can't learn it if you never use it.

Oh yes orbital mechanic i still have problem with that  
Especially when i got contract in KSP of course to put satellite on specific orbital inclination, someone told me that best way to change inclination is the apogee but still have problem why????   

[Streetwind]

8 minutes ago, Pawelk198604 said:

Especially when i got contract in KSP of course to put satellite on specific orbital inclination, someone told me that best way to change inclination is the apogee but still have problem why????  

Do you have a problem with understanding why it's best done at apoapsis, or do you have a problem with completing the contract even though you match inclination it at apoapsis?

The first is all about vector addition. The second is probably something for the Gameplay Questions forum  

[Pawelk198604]

Just now, Streetwind said:

Do you have a problem with understanding why it's best done at apoapsis, or do you have a problem with completing the contract even though you match inclination it at apoapsis?

The first is all about vector addition. The second is probably something for the Gameplay Questions forum  

i just understand it's now, it's because ship is the slowest on apoapsis, but on other hand if we want to accelerate fast it's better to do on periapsis  

[YNM]

Perhaps OP (@Pawelk198604) could have the "general wonders" topic, where he can ask whatever he asks 

[Pawelk198604]

5 hours ago, YNM said:

Perhaps OP (@Pawelk198604) could have the "general wonders" topic, where he can ask whatever he asks 

hi what do you think about my "EVE Proespector 1"   i plan make it burn up in EVE atmosphere but only managed flyby mission 

 

[NSEP]

Maybe use some paper to write down a problem, its much easier to memorise math problems and calculate them if you write them down, i might not have dyscalculia but it makes things alot easier for me.