Measurement homework in a math textbook… horribly out of scale.
You must log in or # to comment.
It’s clearly 11cm not 10 when looking at where they drew the lines to the ruler.
They provided you with the scale to measure the marker. You were not supposed to bring in a second, different scale.
I wasn’t supposed to unravel their whole conspiracy. But here we are, the truth laid bare, and I can’t unsee it.
Maybe someone hit the 110% size on a copy machine?
It’s a bound textbook!
Eh, could also just be ‘assume each box is 1 cm’ without intending to be accurate.
Now if they said use a ruler to figure it out and they claimed it’s 10 then there’s an issue where someone needs a new tool
That’d be my guess. Lot of potential scaling issues in print.
One of my exes was really into making clothing. I learnt second hand (via venting) how difficult it is to get a printer to print
1cm=1cmaccurately when you buy a “pattern” (basically a tracing you follow to chop up the fabric).They would check every printout, and half the time they had to print the same thing multiple times because the printer decided to be stupid and add a half centimetre here or there or subtly stretch it; which matters a lot for a good fit. It was a whole big thing, apparently. At least for cheap printers.
Usually it’s not the printer head that is the problem. Fabric that moves or stretches or shrinks is however a problem. (yes the printer should be tracking that. Good luck with that.)
They printed on paper to later re-trace the shape on fabric manually
But the squares that are supposed to be a cm and the ruler below it are printed on the same page, they scale together.
At least it looks like a printed ruler to me.
The ruler is very clearly cut out from a different sheet.
Those are squares, not cubes
The kids work with actual physical cubes in class. The consistency is way more important than pedantry
How would using physical cubes make learning measuring less confusing?
It lets them use a consistent reference for counting, as well as 1D, 2D, and 3D measurements. They also give something to learn with tactilely, rather than just an abstract set of ideas.
Basically lock the idea of measurements in with the cubes. Then, only when they are confident, split them off into counting and the dimensional concepts.
It works very well for a lot of children.
It starts by using cubes for counting
Does it really matter if you write down a length in squares or in cubes? 😂
Cubes implies you’re working in 3 dimensions as in 10 cm³
And square imply cm². Both are equally stupid to measure a length. Or are you arguing that cubes a one dimension more stupid?
It’s definitely in the “lies to tell children to help them learn” category. The concept of length Vs counting is only just being taught here. The difference between dimensional cubes is a bit beyond most of them.
Technically, they could be cubes as seen from directly above.
Is that a lightsaber hilt?
No need, the math question already killed the youngling.
I just hope you had a good ruler, and not a printed ruler from your home printer. If this is aprinted ruler, I am not sure which print made the mistake, as in home printers it is very difficult to get things at exact measurements.
I wondered the same thing.It’s not “very difficult”. You just cognizant of the scale your ruler is drawn on and scale you are printing it, i.e. not have printer auto scale it for example.
They probably intended it to be a centimetre but somewhere from concept to final print the squares ended up 1mm longer and wider than intended. Not really a problem as they figured teachers might need the extra space to use centimetre cubes to help with teaching but didn’t figure someone would bring a ruler along.
Then they be saying “Never let a graphic fool you.”
That math problem did not scale well…
The shear audacity of this graphic
Who cares?
Nobody? This is mildlyinfuriating
What’s the issue here? Your ruler is metric, not centimeter-cubic. 🤷
That’s why they took centimeter cubes.
They just didn’t draw the z axis which is where the difference is.
I’d like to thank all the people that think the representations in math problems should be or are to scale for my quite impressive SAT scores, it helped a lot in my college admissions to have you all for comparison, and I slept through half of high school so I really needed that.
Most of the time, those who accept the lie will go farther in society. They’re not just testing your scholastic aptitude, but also your compliance.
How many lights do you see, Picard?
4, but I can understand your confusion. You see the fifth light but don’t realize the question is specifically about the interrogation lamps and not the ceiling light. I mean, it was very obvious, and this is is a cognitive test for children, but you know. I get it.
(Probably a rhetorical mistake to accidentally cast me in the role of Picard btw)
there are four lamps but you coming in here brightened my day so much it’s five today interrogator
you… you were coming on to me right?
/unpicard
shit are you supposed to pronounce the slash?
kif?
Listen, it’s math homework for a child.
It’s larger, because they’re still developing their motor control, and the actual, a child that does this is very likely to count each square with their finger.
There are plenty of reasons to show measurements out of scale. Larger print is easier to read. For literally, it’s for children who’s eyes are not yet fully developed it’s important that things be larger and easier to see.
Not all printers are created equal, and these sheets are likely to be xeroxed repeatedly, larger than scale print makes it serviceable for much longer if you happen to lose the original.
The underpaid and over worried children’s educator likely does not have the energy or the time to print this crap exactly to scale.
The scale is different every page, so it’s not for finger size. It’s a bound textbook that I assume was not picked by my child’s teacher.
Am I allowed to be mildly infuriated if I blame capitalism for poor product quality?
Crappy unit choice. For clarity I would cross out “centimeter cubes” and write “milliliters”, or just put the length as roughly 1/50 of a pint
Why would you write milliliters?
Because they CAN! hah.
Ah! I remember the second grade as if it were Tuesday.
