Tag Archives: Illustrative Mathematics

Anticipating @IllustrateMath’s Jim and Jesse’s Money

How might we learn to show our work so that a reader understanding without having to ask questions? As we work with our young learners, we want them to grow as mathematicians and as communicators.

We ask students to show their work so that a reader understands without having to ask them questions. What details should we add so that our thinking is visible to others?

To show (and to assess) comprehension, we are looking for mathematical flexibility.

Learning goals:

  • I can use ratio and rate reasoning to solve real-world and mathematical problems.
  • I can show my work so that a reader can understanding without having to ask questions.

Activity:

Learning progressions:

Level 4:
I can demonstrate mathematical flexibility with ratio and rate reasoning to show what I know more than one way using tables, equations, double number lines, etc..

Level 3:
I can use ratio and rate reasoning to solve real-world and mathematical problems.

Level 2:
I can make tables of equivalent ratios relating quantities with whole-number measurements, and I can use tables to compare ratios.

Level 1:
I can use guess and check to solve real-world and mathematical problems.

Anticipated solutions:

Using Appropriate Tools Strategically:

I wonder if any of our learners would think to use a spreadsheet. How might technology help with algebraic reasoning? What is we teach students to create tables based on formulas?

How might we experiment with enough tools to display confidence when explaining my reasoning, choices, and solutions?

Choice of an appropriate tool is learner based. How will we know how different tools help unless we experiment too?

#ShowYourWork, make sense and persevere, flexibility with @IllustrateMath

How might we learn to show our work so that a reader understanding without having to ask questions? As we work with our young learners, we want them to grow as mathematicians and as communicators.

We ask students to show their work so that a reader understands without having to ask them questions. What details should we add so that our thinking is visible to others?

To show (and to assess) comprehension, we are looking for mathematical flexibility.

I taught 6th grade math today while Kristi and her team attended ASCD.  She asked me to work with our students on showing their work.  Here’s the plan:

Learning goals:

  • I can use ratio and rate reasoning to solve real-world and mathematical problems.
  • I can show my work so that a reader can understanding without having to ask questions.

Activities:

Learning progressions:

Level 4:
I can demonstrate mathematical flexibility with ratio and rate reasoning to show what I know more than one way using tables, equations, double number lines, etc..

Level 3:
I can use ratio and rate reasoning to solve real-world and mathematical problems.

Level 2:
I can make tables of equivalent ratios relating quantities with whole-number measurements, and I can use tables to compare ratios.

Level 1:
I can use guess and check to solve real-world and mathematical problems.

Anticipated solutions:

Sample student work:

NCSM 2016: Sketch notes for learning

NCSM 2016 National Conference – BUILDING BRIDGES BETWEEN LEADERSHIP AND LEARNING MATHEMATICS:  Leveraging Education Innovation and Research to Inspire and Engage

Below are my notes from each session that I attended and a few of the lasting takeaways.

Day One


Keith Devlin‘s keynote was around gaming for learning. He highlighted the difference in doing math and learning math.  I continue to ponder worthy work to unlock potential.  How often do we expect learners to be able to write as soon as they learn? If we connect this to music, reading, and writing, we know that symbolic representations comes after thinking and understanding.  Hmm…Apr_11_NCSM-Devlin

The Illustrative Mathematics team challenged us to learn together: learn more about our students, learn more about our content, learn more about essentials for our grade and the grades around us.  How might we learn a lot together?

Conference Sketch Note - 25

Graham Fletcher teamed with Arjan Khalsa. While the title was Digital Tools and Three-Act Tasks: Marriage Made in the Cloud, the elegant pedagogy and intentional teacher moves modeled to connect 3-act tasks to Smith/Stein’s 5 Practices was masterful.
Conference Sketch Note - 26

Jennifer Wilson‘s #SlowMath movement calls for all to S..L..O..W d..o..w..n and savor the mathematics. Notice and note what changes and what stays the same; look for and express regularity in repeated reasoning; deepen understanding through and around productive struggle. Time is a variable; learning is the constant.  Embrace flexibility and design for learning.

Conference Sketch Note - 27

Bill McCallum challenges us to mix memory AND understanding.  He used John Masefield’s Sea Fever to highlight the need for both. Memorization is temporary; learners must make sense and understand to transfer to long-term memory.  How might we connect imagery and poetry of words to our discipline? What if we teach multiple representations as “same story, different verse”?

Conference Sketch Note - 28

Uri Treisman connects Carol Dweck’s mindsets work to nurturing students’ mathematical competence.  Learners persist more often when they have a positive view of their struggle. How might we bright spot learners’ work and help them deepen their sense of belonging in our classrooms and as mathematicians?

Conference Sketch Note - 29

Day Two


Jennifer Wilson shared James Popham’s stages of formative assessment in a school community. How might we learn and plan together? What if our team meetings focus on the instructional core, the relationships between learners, teachers, and the content?

Conference Sketch Note - 30

Michelle Rinehart asks about our intentional leadership moves.  How are we serving our learners and our colleagues as a growth advocate? Do we bright spot the work of others as we learn from them? What if we team together to target struggle, to promote productive struggle, and to persevere? Do we reflect on our leadership moves?

Conference Sketch Note - 31

Karim Ani asked how often we offered tasks that facilitate learning where math is used to understand the world.  How might we reflect on how often we use the world to learn about math and how often we use math to understand the world in which we live? Offer learners relevance.

Conference Sketch Note - 32

Day Three


Zac Champagne started off the final day of #NCSM16 with 10 lessons for teacher-learners informed from practice through research. How might we listen to learn what our learners already know? What if we blur assessment and instruction together to learn more about our learners and what they already know?

Conference Sketch Note - 33

Eli Luberoff and Kim Sadler created social chatter that matters using Desmos activities that offered learners the opportunities to ask and answer questions in pairs.  How might we leverage both synchronous and asynchronous communication to give learners voice and “hear” them?

Conference Sketch Note - 34

Fred Dillon and Melissa Boston facilitated a task to highlight NCTM’s Principles to Actions ToolKit to promote productive struggle.  This connecting, for me, to the instructional core.  How might we design intentional learning episodes that connect content, process and teacher moves? How might we persevere to promote productive struggle? We take away productive struggle opportunities for learners when we shorten our wait time and tell.

Conference Sketch Note - 35

SMP2: Reason Abstractly and Quantitatively #LL2LU (Take 2)

Screen Shot 2014-09-21 at 3.16.32 PM

We want every learner in our care to be able to say

I can reason abstractly and quantitatively.
(CCSS.MATH.PRACTICE.MP2)

But…What if I think I can’t? What if I have no idea how to contextualize and decontextualize a situation? How might we offer a pathway for success?

We have studied this practice for a while, making sense of what it means for students to contextualize and decontextualize when solving a problem.

Students reason abstractly and quantitatively when solving problems with area and volume. Calculus students reason abstractly and quantitatively when solving related rates problems. In what other types of problem do the units help you not only reason about the given quantities but make sense of the computations involved?

What about these problems from The Official SAT Study Guide, The College Board and Educational Testing Service, 2009. How would your students solve them? How would you help students who are struggling with the problems solve them?

There are g gallons of paint available to paint a house. After n gallons have been used, then, in terms of g and n, what percent of the pain has not been used?
Screen Shot 2014-09-28 at 1.49.19 PM

 

 

 

 

 

A salesperson’s commission is k percent of the selling price of a car. Which of the following represents the commission, in dollar, on 2 cars that sold for $14,000 each?
Screen Shot 2014-09-28 at 1.52.50 PM

 

 

 

 

In our previous post, SMP-2 Reason Abstractly and Quantitatively #LL2LU (Take 1), we offered a pathway to I can reason abstractly and quantitatively. What if we offer a second pathway for reasoning abstractly and quantitatively?

Level 4:
I can create multiple coherent representations of a task by detailing solution pathways, and I can show connections between representations.

Level 3:
I can create a coherent representation of the task at hand by detailing a solution pathway that includes a beginning, middle, and end.   

Beginning:
I can identify and connect the units involved using an equation, graph, or table.

Middle:
I can attend to and document the meaning of quantities throughout the problem-solving process.

End:
I can contextualize a solution to make sense of the quantity and the relationship in the task and to offer a conclusion.

Level 2:
I can periodically stop and check to see if numbers, variables, and units make sense while I am working mathematically to solve a task.

Level 1:
I can decontextualize a task to represent it symbolically as an expression, equation, table, or graph, and I can make sense of quantities and their relationships in problem situations.

What evidence of contextualizing and decontextualizing do you see in the work below?

Screen Shot 2014-09-28 at 5.16.42 PM

Screen Shot 2014-09-28 at 5.16.56 PM

Screen Shot 2014-09-28 at 5.17.10 PM

[Cross-posted on Easing the Hurry Syndrome]

SMP2: Reason Abstractly and Quantitatively #LL2LU (Take 1)

Screen Shot 2014-09-21 at 3.16.32 PM

We want every learner in our care to be able to say

I can reason abstractly and quantitatively.
(CCSS.MATH.PRACTICE.MP2)

I wonder what happens along the learning journey and in schooling. Very young learners of mathematics can answer verbal story problems with ease and struggle to translate these stories into symbols. They use images and pictures to demonstrate understanding, and they answer the questions in complete sentences.

If I have 4 toy cars and you have 5 toy cars, how many cars do we have together?

If I have 17 quarters and give you 10 of them, how many quarters will I have left?

Somewhere, word problems become difficult, stressful, and challenging, but should they? Are we so concerned with the mechanics and the symbols that we’ve lost meaning and purpose? What if every unit/week/day started with a problem or story – math in context? If learners need a mini-lesson on a skill, could we offer it when they have a need-to-know?

Suppose we work on a couple of Standards of Mathematical Practice at the same time.  What if we offer our learners a task, Running Laps (4.NF) or Laptop Battery Charge 2 (S-ID, F-IF) from Illustrative Math, before teaching fractions or linear functions, respectively? What if we make two learning progressions visible? What if we work on making sense of problems and persevering in solving them as we work on reasoning abstractly and quantitatively.  (Hat tip to Kato Nims (@katonims129) for this idea and its implementation for Running Laps.)

Level 4:
I can connect abstract and quantitative reasoning using graphs, tables, and equations, and I can explain their connectedness within the context of the task.

Level 3:
I can reason abstractly and quantitatively.

Level 2:
I can represent the problem situation mathematically, and I can attend to the meaning, including units, of the quantities, in addition to how to compute them.

Level 1:
I can define variables and constants in a problem situation and connect the appropriate units to each.

You could see how we might need to focus on making sense of the problem and persevering in solving it. Do we have faith in our learners to persevere? We know they are learning to reason abstractly and quantitatively.  Are we willing to use learning progressions as formative assessment early and see if, when, where, and why our learners struggle?

Daily we are awed by the questions our learners pose when they have a learning progression to offer guidance through a learning pathway.  How might we level up ourselves? What if we ask first?

Send the message: you can do it; we can help.

[Cross-posted on Easing the Hurry Syndrome]