It depends on the shape of the board. If it's a 2x4, and cutting off a section of it takes ten minutes, yes, the student's right.
But what if it's a square sheet of plywood? Cutting it half takes ten minutes. Then take one of those pieces (which are now rectangular) and cut it in half in the short way. That's half the distance, so it's only five minutes. Another five minutes to cut the other piece in half, and you have four pieces in twenty minutes.
Of course in the sheet-of-plywood scenario since the size of the pieces aren't specified, you could just lop a couple of corners off of the plywood and call it done in a couple of minutes.
But considering the illustration, I'm going to call this one a poorly worded question and either a dumb teacher or a teacher who's really over thinking it.
Mel V., A sheet of plywood isn't a board. It clearly says a board.
The student is right because Marie makes one cut to divide the board into two pieces, taking 10 min. To make three pieces she will make two cuts, taking 20 min.
it'll take her 10 minutes to saw the second board. The question supplies the answer with no math work required at all. "if she works just as fast" indicates the next task takes the same amount of time as the first task. So the correct answer is 10.
if the question was "If she works just as HARD how long will it take her to saw another board into 3 pieces?" the answer would be 20 minutes for the two cuts to ge three pieces.
Given the information presented, the student is right. I'm not entirely sure the teacher is wrong, unless they were scoring this test without a corresponding answer sheet from whoever put together the test - and if that's the case, they're wrong and the teacher didn't catch it.
It's math, not an exercise in language, although tests do sometimes fall prey to semantics. It's a poorly worded question wrapped around a simple math problem. You could say the entire task takes the same amount of time and have Marie end up with 10 boards instead of two - and you see how applying language works against what the question's asking. No need to complicate things any further.
The teacher (or test writer) may have been overthinking it, but they aren't alone.
It depends on the shape of the board. If it's a 2x4, and cutting off a section of it takes ten minutes, yes, the student's right.
ReplyDeleteBut what if it's a square sheet of plywood? Cutting it half takes ten minutes. Then take one of those pieces (which are now rectangular) and cut it in half in the short way. That's half the distance, so it's only five minutes. Another five minutes to cut the other piece in half, and you have four pieces in twenty minutes.
Of course in the sheet-of-plywood scenario since the size of the pieces aren't specified, you could just lop a couple of corners off of the plywood and call it done in a couple of minutes.
But considering the illustration, I'm going to call this one a poorly worded question and either a dumb teacher or a teacher who's really over thinking it.
If it takes Marie 10 minutes to cut a board in half, she shouldn't be thinking about a career as a carpenter.
ReplyDeleteMel V., A sheet of plywood isn't a board. It clearly says a board.
ReplyDeleteThe student is right because Marie makes one cut to divide the board into two pieces, taking 10 min. To make three pieces she will make two cuts, taking 20 min.
If for the second task, Marie uses the other side of the saw, the one with teeth, it will take thirty seconds.
ReplyDeleteit'll take her 10 minutes to saw the second board. The question supplies the answer with no math work required at all.
ReplyDelete"if she works just as fast" indicates the next task takes the same amount of time as the first task. So the correct answer is 10.
if the question was "If she works just as HARD how long will it take her to saw another board into 3 pieces?" the answer would be 20 minutes for the two cuts to ge three pieces.
Given the information presented, the student is right. I'm not entirely sure the teacher is wrong, unless they were scoring this test without a corresponding answer sheet from whoever put together the test - and if that's the case, they're wrong and the teacher didn't catch it.
ReplyDeleteIt's math, not an exercise in language, although tests do sometimes fall prey to semantics. It's a poorly worded question wrapped around a simple math problem. You could say the entire task takes the same amount of time and have Marie end up with 10 boards instead of two - and you see how applying language works against what the question's asking. No need to complicate things any further.
The teacher (or test writer) may have been overthinking it, but they aren't alone.