# Oreo Verification

So things have gone a bit crazy lately. While on summer vacation, this happened:

All for a blog post that I wrote in February.
(My previous high for views in one day was 299.)

In the original post where my class suggests that the Double Stuf Oreo is only 1.86x stuffed, the data set is small. There were several groups all working on their own measurements so they didn’t have many cookies to work with.

After all the attention (I feel really weird about it), the math part of my brain had to verify the findings. And after all, I’d hate to be wrong on the internet.

## More Data

36 Regular Oreos (1 package)

30 Double Stuf Oreos (1 package)

Split Oreos (bad splits are on the right, not measured)

23 Oreo wafers

## Thrill Packed Conclusion

Do the calculations yourself! Or I suppose you can it read here.

## Lastly

For me, this was never about proving Nabisco right or wrong. I don’t care about the “stuf”ing of the Oreos as long as they are delicious (which they are, Double Stuf is my favorite). This was about having the students do some great mathematical exploration on their own. Before doing this in class, I had no idea what the result would be. As a couple of the groups proved, you can show that they are double “stuf”ed by measuring the heights of the cookies.

## 13 thoughts on “Oreo Verification”

1. Derek D says:

Very nice work! Saw the link to this blog on a yahoo front-page article, (congrats on the media coverage). Looks like you’re keeping your classes exciting. If only we had real-life math exercises like this when I was in high school!

-Derek D. (2000 alum)

2. Suzan R says:

As a middle school math teacher, I read everything having to do with math in schools. This is one of the most entertaining and motivational items I’ve read in a long time! Thank you!

3. sWp says:

Um… as a teacher, you should know the difference between right and left…

“Split Oreos (bad splits are on the right, not measured)”

1. Thanks dude. Never made a mistake before!

4. I love this! When school starts in September I was planning to run an investigation with Ritz Crackers – new boxes are smaller, how does the value compare….. I think the kids would be far more interested in cookies!! Thanks!

5. Statistician McGee says:

Would be better if there were some actual statistics involved. Really there is only a single observation here.

6. Dan, I can’t tell you how incredibly awesome this is. I was doing a presentation on problem-solving today, I brought in oreos for people to eat while they were doing the calorie problem, and then this happens. Awesome freaking timing.
And this is a great way to get the word out that math class doesn’t have to suck.

7. Ty says:

Just a random thought, your measurements assume that all of the wafers are the same size. If we’re to assume that your scales work (as your math is correct), and simultaneously assume that the cookie company isn’t lying, then we must assume that double stuf wafers weigh less than normal oreo wafers. Your measurements did not account for this as a possibility, and it would explain the discrepancy. If wafers are the same weight, then it would technically still be possible if enough of the wafer was lost due to friction in splitting the cookies (even in the good splits, I’m sure you lost some crumbs!), although I can’t see how this could get anywhere close to the required amount of measurement error to make the math work here (you would need a little over 0.15g lost per wafer, or just under 4%, to get a ratio of 2). Your sample size is also just a single box for each, even less for the wafers, so it’s possible that the variation in amounts of stuf per cookie is simply too high.

8. Corey S. says:

Wow I wish everyone would have such an inventive math teacher – then maybe math wouldn’t be so “boring” as my daughter says. Kudos to you Mr. Anderson for getting your kids involved and for making learning fun (for all of us actually!!!) Of to buy some oreos to test!