₦airaland Forum

LionDeLeo:
My point is that the use of "of" rather than "order", is not incorrect. It can be defended.

I'm not trying to hold brief for the ignorance or knowledge of teachers.

the picture is saying the 'OF' as we were taught and as we understand is not what is ...if we were told 'OF' as u said means square root multiplication and powers ...do u think anyone wouldve disputed it

LionDeLeo:
Now, what exactly is your argument? Cos I'm not really understanding.

That they did not explain the meaning of "of" or that the "o" is not "of" but "order"?

you are saying 'of' means multiplication they taught 'of' to mean nothing

LionDeLeo:
Now, what exactly is your argument? Cos I'm not really understanding.

That they did not explain the meaning of "of" or that the "o" is not "of" but "order"?

this should explain

Friedyokes:
okay see what you are doing ...you are explaining to me ...my point is that they didn't ...which leads me to believe that they did not know and if they did not know ...the 'of' which we were taught in the manner we were taught does not relate to multiplication or square root or powers...which makes them wrong

LionDeLeo:
Two things at the same time. One at a time.

First, what is 4^2?

As in 4 to the power of 2

okay see what you are doing ...you are explaining to me ...my point is that they didn't ...which leads me to believe that they did not know and if they did not know ...the 'of' which we were taught in the manner we were taught does not relate to multiplication or square root or powers...which makes them wrong

LionDeLeo:
Okay, the issue now is how is "of" same as "order"?

no the issue is that they made no effort to explain what 'of' in bodmas means leaving us to assume it is of no use

LionDeLeo:
Not telling you that it is multiplication or order?

not telling us either ..they simply ignored it ..till we left school ....nd it being multiplication is still debatable ..saying square root and powers means multiplication is just confusing

LionDeLeo:
The equality between "of" and "order" had been discussed.

But did you liken it to multiplication based on this last post you quoted?

discussed not agreed upon ....Yes in that context of is multiplication

LionDeLeo:
But you may certainly be understanding it in a different perspective because I know some teachers may not know the exact meaning of the "of". But not knowing it doesn't mean that what they say is wrong.

they were wrong in not telling us what it means which is their entire job description

LionDeLeo:
Well, the use of "of" even as a preposition, based on your own understanding is still not different from its exact meaning in mathematics.

If for instance I say, 20% of 50, what do you think that connotes? Is it not still 20/100 × 50?

Again, if I say, 2/3 of 60, is that not 2/3×60?

So, even as a preposition, it still implies multiplication in mathematics.

by preposition there I mean I would never liken it to finding the squareroot or powers

LionDeLeo:
Meanwhile, if you are interested, I can prove the equality of all the arithmetic operations I have mentioned.

if I am to agree with u that would mean that they are connected ...but then bodmas is still separating them ...so it is the responsibility of the teacher to explain to us and they didn't ..that's the problem

LionDeLeo:
Actually, the point there is that, in teaching, methodologies are of critical importance.

There are things which we were taught at elementary levels which as we proceeded further in studies, we discovered they are not true, but teaching them in that fashion is very correct.

Example.
In junior secondary schools, what was the definition of atom.

We were told that they are the smallest indivisible particles that can take part in chemical reactions.

But is that definition correct? No.

Atoms are not the smallest indivisible particles and the components that actually take part in chemical reactions are not atoms but electrons and protons.

Again, in primary schools, we were told that examples of nouns are chair, school, etc.

But we later discovered that this is not true because you cannot say this is the part of speech a word belongs to until it is used in a sentence.

That is a school. School is a noun here.

But

They school here. School is a verb here.

While

This is a school library. Here, school is an adjective.

Hence, you classify a word based on the job it does in a sentence.

let's say I agree with u that giving false information/deliberately misinforming impressionable students was very correct ...at what stage do u think that this misinformation needs to be corrected ..because I can say for fact till I left secondary school no teacher made the correction...nd yes if I had known that.. I would've seen equations involving simplification in a whole new light (example changing sub of formula : my teacher just told me that the roots should be removed fest if he had related it to bodmas it would've simplified things)....if till today u asked me what bodmas was I would've told u that 'of' is a preposition

LionDeLeo:
Modified, with addition. "Of" has always meant "multiplication" I have always known this.

if 'of' in bodmas means multiplication why is it written differently...if addition means subtraction why was it written differently in BODMAS

if you are telling me that 'of' 'square root' and multiplication mean the same thing what then is the point of Bodmas shouldn't it be bdmas or are u saying they added it for its pronunciation

My point in essence was that teachers telling us 'of' was misleading ...it would've been better if they had said order ...nd if we asked they'll tell us when we go higher we will understand (an excuse they gave all the time )

LionDeLeo:
Nay! You are missing the point.

What I mean is that both "of" and "order" mean the same thing, in principle. And as such, our teachers are very correct.

Infact, even from your little example, I can prove to you that multiplication and division mean same thing.

Same applies to addition and subtraction.

let's say I agree with u that 'of' nd 'order' mean the same thing are u going to tell me that in all u years of school without checking u interpreted 'of' as square root?...because although I found it weird ...I nd i assume a lot of students interpreted 'of' as a preposition in bodmas

LionDeLeo:
How do you explain the contextual meaning of "order" to a nursery school pupil?

u have left justifying that 'of' means multiplication nd now u r saying the children are too young ...we were taught bodmas from primary school through junior secondary and not once did any of our teachers make the correction or are u saying that a primary 6 or jss student can't handle it ?

LionDeLeo:
Then, I ask again, what exactly is the difference between "order" and "of" in mathematics context?

But let me answer that.

In principle, no difference.

How?

Example;

4^3 implies 4 to the power of 3 or the "order" in which 4 should be multiplied by itself is 3.

How do you do that?

4×4×4=64. Is this not multiplication (of)?

okay when u were taught bodmas did u interpret the 'of' to mean multiplication nd square root ...or when ur teacher taught u he or she said 'of' means square root nd powers ....remember we were taught as kids

See nash

Just minding my business and..

LionDeLeo:
4×-2=-8
30÷-5=-6
+14
Now -8-6+14=0

Note, I performed multiplication b4 division (against BODMAS).

Second case, of course 5 & 2 must be multiplied first before adding to 1.

But I assure you, if you have cases involving several multiplication, addition and subtraction, I can solve them in which ever order without necessarily taking BODMAS into cognisance.

I repeat, BODMAS is simply a way of reminding you in case you forget, nothing more. It is not a formula.

Meanwhile, is this a complex math?

Do you even call this math?

Go and find out the difference between math and arithmetic.

I was expecting something like one complex integral calculus.

Dude, math is an important tool in my field of study and practice.

you have to agree that math of this grade is considered high in the primary/js level where bodmas is being taught ...people with higher education may find it easier to calculate ....but then this is what is being taught to children ...and the point for creating bodmas was to simply it for children ...so would you say telling children that the 'O' means of while it means order(powers and square root) is right? which was the point of the picture

LionDeLeo:
I guess you have just stated the only one you know.

Now, is BODMAS a formula?

If I decide to carry out division operation before multiplication, will I be wrong?

Or I decide to solve subtraction b4 addition, will the result be wrong?

Or if I carry out division before square or square roots, will the result be different?

If they all give me same results, then note these approaches are contrary to what BODMAS dictates.

Have you seen how you throw your illiteracy to the surface.

BODMAS is just an aid to memory for primary school children, not a formula, get that into your skull.

SOLVE THESE AND DO NOT USE BODMAS

THEN TELL ME THE ANSWER

30÷-5+4×-2+14=?

1+2×5=?





Nd for clarification bodmas is a rule that shows the order to which mathematical operations are carried out so the misinterpretation of that 'O' by teachers was wrong

GloriaNinja:
WILL HE SHUT THE Bleep UP! WHO CARES! WHO HE EPP?

quest for likes

No be them aki and pawpaw type

The shark no ready

Wat am I looking at

If nah like dat

Kidnap= free visa + scholarship

I dae reason go chibok now






Nah joke oh

Which kind ugly hand be that

Even till now harmattan still they hammer you

Are effing kidding me??
.ur choice tho trade in a rolls Royce for a golf 4


If ur really serious then the gionee m6s is a better choice

This better be an infinx advert

If not u gave the most stupid reasons ever

1.looking at a screen for a long period will cause ur eyes to get irritated on any device
2. Obviously LEDs get hot hence the 'painful feel"..have u tried holding a lightbulb after its been on for while?

Xander cage ...movie was pure shít

waywardpikin:
Kikiki

Those people watching Legion, is it still as awesome as y'all proclaimed?

I'm still trying to muster the courage to watch Iron Fist as I dey here like this. It's not even a matter of entertainment again, it's a matter of responsibility

it takes a special kind of dedication to watch legion ..but its worth it ..it just takes a diff approach at the usually stereotypical superhero movie....

I have mad respect for Netflix but ironfist was shiit ...danny rands character nd other things was just off IMO

Still watched it to the end tho so there's that

stanliwise:
I am shocked that you have not realize that I have not blame the husband and neither do my previous post suggest so; The main point is that I am reacting to Domestic violence and if she has not attacked her husband physicall! I repeat physically and such attack MUST be life threatening either to himself or someone...And if such case does not meet this two condition then...He has nothing to say or start with.
Apart from her case...NO MAN SHOULD SHOULD TAKE LAW INTO HIS OWN HAND BECAUSE OF ANGER AND TRIVIAL ISSUES.
#SayNoToDomesticViolence

what then was ur point of quoting me?? ..because all I asked was for the full story ...because we don't know if they both fought and injured each other...read wat ur wrote ...ur making guesses as to what might have happened "if it does not meet this two conditions"... Nd I asked for the full story so that we will be sure of What happend

stanliwise:
Even when her dead body is on the floor, people like you would still be asking for the other side of the story. SMH

nd what if her husbands dead body is somewhere on the floor ...all I'm asking is for the entirerity of the story so we wouldn't judge impartially ...or do u no if she injured her husband too??...do u no if he looks even worse than she does??...or is ur sexism so much that u feel women are so weak that they can't cause damage to men too??...

She posted just her views meaning anyone that reads would side her

Did u read the part where i said I didn't condone it ??

Optimist1998:
Elastic potential energy = kinetic energy
Basically what this person said

oh okay then ..thanks