Singapore 1 CWP: Is the wording for this problem confusing?

[Rbsmrter]

The other day my daughter and I were reviewing a word problem that involved calculating how many pages had been read. It was something along the lines of Mrs. Smith read from page 7 to page 14. In the example, the workbook showed subtracting 7 from 14, then adding one. I think its the wording that threw me off. If I were to say I read from page 7 to page 14, I would have stopped at page 14, not after page 14. I'd rephrase it as saying I read through page 14. It threw my daughter off too because she didnt understand why the teacher read 8 pages instead of 7 (pgs. 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13). Is it completely strange of me to think there is a difference between reading "to" a page and reading "through" a page?

[boscopup]

Usually when people say "to" a page, they're including that page. If I tell you to read "pages 1 to 2", you'll read pages 1 and 2, right? Otherwise, why wouldn't I just say "read page 1". :)

 

In every curriculum I've used that was literature based, when it said "read pp3-15", they meant to read page 3, 4, 5, ..., 14, 15.

 

This type of problem is tricky for little kids, and I usually use the example of reading pages 1 to 2, so it's really obvious that 2 pages were read, so you do 2-1+1=2.

[Rbsmrter]

You're right. It would make sense to just say read page 1. Maybe I'm just used to seeing something along the lines of "read pp3-15." rather than written out. In my mind I would read that as through, so in that case I would definitely understand reading page 15. I must have been really overthinking it or it was just a really long day!

[thegirlwhopaintedtrees]

I remember that I had to think through that when I helped DD with that same problem! I also thought reading to page 14 meant stopping at the beginning of that page. ie through page 13.

[kiana]

I think that in this case I would say "Gosh honey, that is confusing. But looking at the solution book it seems they meant pages 7 through 14. Can you try it again knowing that they meant that?"

[boscopup]

I think that in this case I would say "Gosh honey, that is confusing. But looking at the solution book it seems they meant pages 7 through 14. Can you try it again knowing that they meant that?"

 

 

Yep, sometimes we have to explain what they mean. Just this past week, there was a CWP5 problem saying that one thing was 30% more than another. My answer was wrong per the book, then I realized they they were making it 30% of the bigger number more, ie 2:3 situation. I had used a 3:4 situation. I think normally when you say 30% more, it's 30% of the smaller number, so I explained that to DS and said, "but the book is doing it this way, so let's see what we get their way." :)

[Farrar]

No, I agree. Those problems confused me in the CWP as well until I got used to them. I think I remember arguing with the book in the exact same terms as your dd: "But she read page 7,8,9,10,11,12, and 13!" It also wasn't 100% clear to me that she didn't read page 8,9,10,11,12, and 13 - starting just after page 7. It all just felt ambiguous to me. It's a bit like when someone says "next Tuesday." Sometimes they mean the coming Tuesday and sometimes they mean the Tuesday after the nearest Tuesday. VERY confusing. But, of course, when they say it, it seems completely clear.

[Rbsmrter]

I think that in this case I would say "Gosh honey, that is confusing. But looking at the solution book it seems they meant pages 7 through 14. Can you try it again knowing that they meant that?"

 

 

Great minds think alike :) That's exactly what I did. I admitted that I had read and understood it incorrectly. Once I explained what I was thinking and what the book was asking she really seemed to grasp the difference.

[Rbsmrter]

No, I agree. Those problems confused me in the CWP as well until I got used to them. I think I remember arguing with the book in the exact same terms as your dd: "But she read page 7,8,9,10,11,12, and 13!" It also wasn't 100% clear to me that she didn't read page 8,9,10,11,12, and 13 - starting just after page 7. It all just felt ambiguous to me. It's a bit like when someone says "next Tuesday." Sometimes they mean the coming Tuesday and sometimes they mean the Tuesday after the nearest Tuesday. VERY confusing. But, of course, when they say it, it seems completely clear.

 

 

It's funny that you used the example of days. After nine years of marriage my husband and I still dont see eye to eye on what "next Tuesday" means.

 

We finished up 2B awhile ago, so for review we've been going back through some of the problems we skipped over in IP and CWP. I'm glad I happened to find these questions. There are only a few questions of this type in CWP, but somehow I managed to miss them the first time around. One of the things I love about Singapore is that, as I teach, I'm constantly having to rethink my thought processes.

[Spy Car]

I think it is very confusing, and that this confusion is especially regrettable when the authors are intentionally setting up children to fail on this one, because it is a tricky concept, and the natural inclination is to think 14-7=7 and be wrong. Not having precise language in the question undermines the intent of the lesson, by causing ambiguity.

 

Love the CWPs, but hate this wording.

 

Bill

[kiwik]

I am glad I am not the only one with the next Tues thing.

[Monica_in_Switzerland]

I agree with Bill- the problem should be challenging because of the math, not because of tricky wording. I skipped it when we came to it.