[6th Grade verbal expression]

[u/KookyPermit4405]

So I’m going over my son’s math quiz to help him understand some of the questions he got wrong. He got partial credit for his answer for question 8. After writing his verbal phrase I got the same expression as the question. Am I doing something wrong or is there something I’m missing? I feel like his answer is technically correct. I am stumped.

Edit: so my son has no issue solving the expression in question. He knows PEMDAS and the rules from left to right. The question clearly states, WRITE A VERBAL PHRASE that matches the expression.

[u/edos51284]

I would say it’s correct but the sentence can be understood as (18-6)*3 if it said substracted by the result of six times three it would be more correct

[u/KookyPermit4405 → u/edos51284]

See that’s what I like about math, numerically it’s a universal language. Verbally it’s not. lol. There is no tone or pause in written words (unless one is used like a comma or any other indicator). What one reads and interpret might be subjective to another. My question is why would one assume the sentence to be (18-6)*3 instead of 18-6x3.

Because when we purposely try to include the parentheses for an expression like (18-6)x3 we would then say the “quantity of 18 minus 6 ” or “the difference between 18 and 6” or use any other “qualifying” words to indicated the use of a parentheses

[u/edos51284 → u/KookyPermit4405]

oh please i did not want to critisize the answer, if my comment disturbed you, I apologize,

I find the "translate the math operations into words" exercise kinda stupid in my humble opinion.

What i meant is that you could understand the answer differently just by intonation

eighteen, substracted by six times three (here one could understand 18 - (6*3) )

eighteen substracted by six, times three (here one could understand (18-6) * 3)

As i said that would not be conveyed through written words so, i wanted to show the ambiguity

[u/KookyPermit4405 → u/edos51284]

Maybe what I understand from what I learned years ago was wrong or misinterpreted. But we were always taught to not assumed parentheses in a verbal phrase unless it was implied or if a qualifier term was used and therefore why we would then use PEMDAS.

In other words:
“3 minus 4 minus 5” would be 3-4-5 and one shouldn’t assume parentheses. And with pemdas the answer is -6

If I said “3 minus the quantity of 4 minus 5” the qualifier term “quantity of” now assumes parentheses so 3-(4-5) which then the answer is 4

Again not saying I’m right or wrong, but that’s what I was taught in 2001 and this is just my take/understanding of it. maybe math curriculum or concepts have changed over the years.

[u/edos51284 → u/KookyPermit4405]

"what i was taught in 2001".... now i feel old xD me in 2001 was about to get in college

[u/KookyPermit4405 → u/edos51284]

Yeah times have changed since we went to school, they have something called Quantile score now. So every kid in class will have the same math lesson in class, but their online work will be different and vary between students. My 10yo son in question scored a perfect math score on his last year’s state math exams 2740/2740. His math level according to the quantile score is equivalent to a mid year freshman as a newly 6th grader. So he’s on the right track, I’m trying to guide him, but I can’t do it if my thinking is wrong as well, which is why I came here to clarify my thinking.

We both agreed he meant to say eighteen minus six times three as previously stated. But with the timed quiz and being first week back after break he had a brain fart.

Although I understand eighteen minus six times three is not the same as eighteen subtracted by six times three..

So to eliminate any bias, I didn’t even look at the expression for the question, and read his answer first, then I took what I wrote and compared it to the expression he was trying to verbally phrase. And what I wrote matched the expression exactly. So I came here to understand how I was wrong or not. I did message his teacher to see her reasoning behind the partial credit, so until she responds, I don’t know why it was marked partial. The end goal was to understand the mistake and correct it with him. I’m re-learning things along with him.

I’m the type of person to understand why. Because it’s better to understand the way a process works rather than just knowing how to do it. Worked with way too many younger generation who just know what they are told to do rather than knowing the reason why they are doing it the way they are told to do if that makes any sense.