Navigate KTM
Kitchen Table MathKTM User PagesService Groups
Parent Groups
Personal PagesBlogs
Special listsHelp |
select another subject area Entries from ElementaryMathTwentyFirstCenturySkills 17 Jul 2005 - 21:02 CatherineJohnson updateI shouldn't be flip about this lesson. In fact, teaching young children to build the next set of math facts on the math facts they already know is a good idea. I'm pretty sure Parker & Baldridge recommend this approach (I'll check).for more on 21st century skills, see MoreSingaporeMath WickelgrenOnIntroducingAlgebra 08 Jul 2005 - 17:19 CarolynJohnston I've been looking again at one of Catherine's favorite books, Math Coach (by Wayne and Ingrid Wickelgren). Wayne and Ingrid have a lot to say about what they consider the most difficult aspects of elementary math -- long division and fraction manipulation. But it's what comes after that that interests me now: their discussion of the importance of teaching algebra early. Wayne suggests that the most important thing you can show your kid, what should motivate them most to want to continue in math, is the power of algebra to solve hard problems. Most problems in prealgebra and early algebra start out something like this: John is 27 years old. If his age is 3 times Pete's age, how old is Pete?If you have a kid like Christopher or Ben, you know he's going to spit out the answer on the spot and tell you not to waste his time with this stupid letter stuff. That's why Wayne Wickelgren suggests that, when you're ready to introduce your kid to the notion of algebra, the first thing you should do is sit down with him and let him watch you do a problem like this one: In two years, Jean will be twice as old as Chris will be. In six years, Jean will be four times as old as Chris was last year. How old is Chris now?In short, start with a demonstration of how algebra-at-your-fingertips gives you mindblowing powers. I was reading this last night and thinking: if I tell him that this problem is what algebra is all about, Ben will be blown away. Why scare him off? Maybe start with something simpler... But the hard thing about this sort of problem isn't going to be doing the algebra: it's going to be setting up the equations, given the word problem. And that's going to be hard no matter how I try to teach it. Doing the mindless rote stuff required to crank out the answer, once you have the equations, is the easiest part of the problem. And I know Ben: he'll think that's the cool part. Given that, I can't see a reason to hold off introducing algebra. Once a kid is at the sixth or seventh grade level in math, the heck with guess-and-check and pan-balance problems; the heck even with bar models. The most general tool that we currently have for solving word problems, and the only one that we have that isn't stymied by some word problem or other, is algebra. He may as well be motivated to go full speed ahead with the letters and symbols. Wickelgren says that algebra is the key to the castle; it's the most effective means for solving tricky math problems that's ever been devised. As such, you want it to be the tool that kids reach for instinctively when they have a tricky math problem to solve. Here's a quote from a great article by Ethan Akin, "In Defense of Mindless Rote": On the other hand, mathematics is cumulative and there are a great many skills that you have be unthinkingly familiar with. Every grumpy calculus teacher will tell you that most of the problems his students have come from weaknesses in algebra. For the students who say "I really understand it but...." the but is that for them algebra is not easy background knowledge. They are trying to build on a foundation of dust. A lot of college majors need a bit of calculus or statistics which are simply walled off to students who don't have sufficient skills in algebra. These are basically not hard subjects but they appear unnecessarily terrifying to such students. Conversely, a practiced facility with algebra can provide its own positive reinforcement. Not only is the mathematics built on the algebra, but facility in algebra gives the student confidence in the face of new mathematical challenges. As the above discussion makes clear, such confidence is entirely justified.I am motivated now to try to introduce real algebra by the end of the summer. No more pussyfooting around! Wickelgren on introducing algebra Wayne Wickelgren on algebra in 7th & 8th grade Wickelgren on math talent & when to supplement late bloomers in math & Wickelgren on children's desire to learn math Wayne Wickelgren on mastery of math & on creativity & domain knowledge Wickelgren on why math is confusing VisualLearningKThru2WikiPage 17 Jul 2005 - 16:51 CatherineJohnson The comments thread of this post will be the page Becky C requested on the use of direct, explicit visual aids in teaching K-2 math. Everyone can comment, edit & revise, so please share your experience & thoughts. PartitiveAndQuotitivePedagogy 11 Jul 2005 - 17:45 CarolynJohnston Catherine mentioned in one of her comments that she always finds it amusing when a mathematician encounters the notion of partitive vs. quotitive division: I absolutely think there's all kinds of elementary math knowledge real mathematicians don't have, or did have but forgot, etc. I always crack up when i see or read real mathematicians reacting to the 'partitive'-'quotitive' distinction in division. They think it's ridiculous! (And btw, I STILL can't explain the difference, so I'm not even going to bother to try....)She's absolutely right. When I first encountered the notion of partitive vs. quotitive division (Liping Ma goes into a lot of detail about it in her book) I thought it was unnecessary obfuscation. I know I never learned it myself. I don't know if my teachers knew it, but I know they never taught it to me (although Liping Ma says they didn't need to). And I don't know whether I need to know it in order to teach young children the full meaning of division, although Liping Ma says I do. But as it happens, I do know what the difference is: my husband explained it to me in brilliantly simple terms (having learned it at the same time I did, and distilled its meaning more efficiently than I did). Here it is: Partitive problems ask you to divide number of objects by number of groups, and get number of objects as an answer. the partitive type of word problem asks this question: if I have x objects, and I want to split them into y groups, how many objects will be in each group? Examples of partitive problems: I have a board of length 16 inches, and I need to make 10 shorter boards of equal length out of it. How long can each board be? (16 objects, 10 groups) I have a batch of 128 cookies. I need to split it into 8 equal bags of cookies. How many cookies will there be in each bag? (128 objects, 8 groups) I have 12 cans of pears, and I need to serve 24 kids at lunch. How many cans of pears will each kid get? (12 objects, 24 groups) It is somewhat difficult to frame word problems involving division by fractions as partitive problems, because you are dividing by the number of groups you want. Generally, you don't want a fractional number of groups. Note that in the problems I gave as examples of partitive division, the divisors are always whole numbers. But here is a partitive word problem that uses a fractional divisor: I have two cans of dog food that I need to split into 1-1/2 servings for my big and small dog. How many cans will be in a single serving? (2 objects, 1-1/2 groups -- awkward!) Quotitive problems ask you to divide number of objects by number of objects, and get number of groups as an answer. the quotitive word problem asks: If I have x objects, how many groups of y objects can I make from them? Examples of quotitive problems: I have a board of length 16 inches, and I need boards of length 1-3/4 inches. How many short boards can I cut from the longer board?(16 objects, 1-3/4 objects) I have a batch of 128 cookies. I need to split it into bags of 12 cookies to give to children at school. How many such bags can I give away? (128 objects, 12 objects) I have 12 cans of pears, and I need to serve a half can of pears to every kid at lunch. How many kids can I serve? (12 objects, 1/2 objects) Problems involving division by fractions are easier to frame as quotitive word problems. Note that in the first and third sample problem, the divisor is a fraction; I didn't have to gin up an awkward problem involving big and small dogs in order to give you an example of quotitive division by a fraction. Liping Ma's only point vis a vis quotitive and partitive division is that teachers should know the difference. It doesn't have to be explicitly laid out for the kids. But teachers need to know about it because they need to give a mix of types of word problems. She says that it may be obvious to us that numerically they are the same problems (in fact it is SO obvious that we miss the distinction!), but to the kids it may not be. I'm not sure that's true, but I'm willing to give her the benefit of the doubt. Liping Ma actually gave a set of US and a set of Chinese elementary school teachers the following problem: frame a word problem for 1-3/4 divided by 1/2. The best of the Chinese teachers gave examples of both partitive and quotitive word problems; they were all able to give at least one word problem for the division. But some of the US teachers couldn't do the calculation. The difference: in China, elementary math teachers are respected for what they do, and given time to consult with each other in order to improve their pedagogical knowledge. Elementary Chinese math teachers are specialists in math education. Catherine has studied the Liping Ma book very carefully. I think Catherine concluded that the fundamental problem in the US is that teachers need release time to consult with each other and improve their knowledge. I believe that the fundamental problem is that teaching is not a respected profession in the U.S., and that the other problems -- lack of release time, and mathematical weakness in the teachers themselves -- all follow from this. MorganOnLearningModalities 18 Jul 2005 - 00:30 CarolynJohnston This is a comment by Carolyn Morgan on the WillinghamOnLearningModalities thread: it's a beauty, so I'm posting it. Things I note about her teaching approach:
SteveH is correct. Whatever you do, you must bring all students to UNDERSTANDING. And this is what students really do want. "Understanding" or "not understanding" are the reasons students "hate" or "love" math. A good math teacher learns how to "approach" a student having difficulty. The teacher has all of these ideas (hopefully) stored away back there some place, ready to be pulled out when needed. But a teacher's most important job is determining where the student's understanding fell apart, identifying where there might be gaps in reasoning, and knowing how to bridge those gaps. This is where choosing the right approach comes in. It might involve reteaching, reviewing a step that is being omitted, or helping a student reason through a difficult story problem. So a hand goes up, and a student says, "I need help." (Those are my favorite times of the math hour because it means I get to find the puzzle piece that is needed to make this all fit together in his/her head and give understanding to what I've just taught or to what's needed to solve this problem.) So I have some choices, but I always look to see what the student has already done or tried. That tells me what to do next. I then start by having the student read the problem to me (if it is a word problem). Then I make a choice: I might say, "OK, draw Bill's house. Now write 'B' on it for Bill. Now, draw the schoolhouse; now write 'S' on it. Now, draw the road from the house to the school. Now, look at the problem again to see how far it is to the school (and the student answers outloud 4 1/2 miles). OK, write that number on the map you've just drawn." I could have drawn that little map for the student, and might do it under certain conditions, but having a student draw the map involves his sight and his movement (and mouth from speaking and ears from hearing his own voice) and it involves more importantly his BRAIN. (I've got to make sure his BRAIN is working and focused on the problem so he can "understand".) So I would continue, "Start at Bill's house with your pencil; now walk to school. OK how far did Bill just walk? ('4 1/2 miles') OK, write that down. Now, he's at school, but he wants to come home, so have Bill walk back home. How far did Bill walk to get home? OK, write that down under the first number. How would you know how much he walked to school and back on that one day? ('add the two numbers together.') Good, do that. OK, but that is just one day. Now, let's read the problem one more time and let's see what the questiion was. (How far does Bill walk in a week going to school and back?) OK, now how could we figure that out?" Many times the problem just works itself out in the student's brain as they begin to draw out a picture of the problem. Or, if I've checked over his work and seen that he's added 4 1/2 miles 5 times for the 5 days of the week, I can see that he's overlooked a part of the question. So I have the student reread the question. Many times, the student will catch his own mistake when he hears his voice repeat the words "to school AND BACK". If not, I have him read just that part again. Something really important: for some students it's just a matter of not knowing "how or where to get started". There are gaps in processing the information and gaps in understanding. Not only does he need to know where to start, but he needs to know that where he is starting will get him going in the right direction and will help him get the right answer. This is very important to a student's confidence. If a student doesn't know "where to start" or isn't sure "if he's going about solving it properly", a teacher's trying to find the right modality isn't necessarily the answer. This is where an "constructivist" approach is so devastating to the student. That student wants to be able to KNOW what to do to get the right answer. It's terribly upsetting and deflating to a student not to know "where to start" and "if they're taking proper steps to solve the problem correctly." To leave this student to come up with his own idea isn't helping him. Hopefully, though, a teacher will NOT just repeat the instructions that were given initially (if any were given). If a student didn't get it the first time, at least try a different approach. One of my former students said of another teacher, "Why should I ask her for help? She always just repeats the same instructions that didn't make sense the first time." This student, smart as a cookie, just wanted to understand the entire process and to know how to work to get the right answer. Carolyn Morgan On Conceptual Gaps Congratulations Carolyn Morgan MathAndTextPrototypeLesson 21 Jul 2005 - 13:56 CatherineJohnson When I was in graduate school (DID I MENTION THAT I HAVE A PHD IN FILM STUDIES?) one of my professors told me that the definition of a reader is a person who owns more books than he can read before he dies. I have now updated that definition for the impending ERA OF THE BLOOKI. The definition of a reader is a person who owns so many books she can't even get her own web site read before she dies. Now that's out of the way, I have managed to make a circuit of my favorite blogs this afternoon--and have discovered that J.D. has his prototype lesson up at Math and Text! It looks wonderful. I'm going to read it now. updateIt is wonderful. I love clean, lots-of-white-space invitations to maths...and there was something about the final lesson on figuring out which number is larger that made me happy. I had the 'click' sensation Carolyn Morgan talks about. That sensation is so reinforcing, that I think it ought to be an item on textbook write's & editor's lists: Does the student feel a click? I was confused by just one part of the lesson, which was the first visual display. A middle school teacher has left a detailed comment explaining why she stumbled over it, too. Take a look.update 2: more on the clickI'm realizing I've had many, many conversations in which people who like math bring up the click--that moment of knowing you've got it. Either you've got the right answer, or you've got the concept. That's what my cousin was talking about when she said it's incredibly boring never to know whether you got the right answer or not:It’s boring when you don’t have the light bulb go off in your mind because, ‘Oh! I got it right!’ The best you could think was, ‘Well, maybe I got it right.Our friends Fred & Wendy were here a couple of weekends ago, and Fred said exactly the same thing about maths. He loved maths (I may have to give up on 'maths'....) and he wanted to study it at Yale, as an undergraduate. What he especially loved was the click. He quickly realized that college-level maths was a different animal, and he shifted to statistics, eventually earning a Ph.D. in experimental psychology (and then a law degree after that). Fred is a seriously smart guy (clerked for one of the Supremes, etc.).....and what's he talking about when he remembers math? The click. FirstPerson (interview with my cousin about Everyday Math) CarolynMorganOnConceptualGaps 18 Jul 2005 - 19:27 CarolynJohnston CarolynMorgan, who wrote the material in MorganOnLearningModalities, has written some more on conceptual gaps in students. She asked me to include it in her earlier post -- but that one was just perfect; just the right message and length. So I'm going to post the new piece here. This highlights a teaching strategy that we used to use a lot in teaching at the college level, and on ourselves when learning new and difficult research material -- if a kid is stuck, have him work through a much simpler but still analogous example. Then work your way back up to the original problem. Conceptual gaps Often no matter what modality you try, a student just won't get it because there are conceptual gaps in his learning. A precious student comes to mind. He had trouble with fractions. He just didn't understand the concept. He could recognize fractions, write fractions, read fractions properly. He could even (through tough perseverance) add, subtract, multiply, divide fractions. But the concept of a fraction was fuzzy. Very fuzzy. His learning center teacher and I and other previous teachers, I'm sure, had him cut pies in half, divide groups into equal parts, but he continued to have those gaps. Something was just not clicking and none of us knew what it was, or wasn't. I say all of this because that "conceptual gap" showed itself, not in computation of fractions, which he became very good at. It showed it's ugly head in the middle of a word problem, that most 5th graders could handle with very little trouble. A specific example comes to mind, which I will share now. There is a problem in Saxon 6/5 something like this one:Joe walked 288 feet, to the end of the pier and back. How long was the pier?This student had no idea how to go about solving this problem. When he asked for help, I realized that it was because he really didn't understand what a fraction was, and how finding a half of 288 feet would solve his problem. I think he knew that there were two distances, but he didn't see them as halves. To begin with the number was too huge for his mind to grasp. So I picked up his pencil and drew a line on his paper and said, "OK, here is another pier, but it's a very short pier. And when Joe walked on this pier to the end and back, he had walked 10 feet. How long was the pier? He immediately, said, "Five feet." I said, "Good for you. How did you know that?" His answer was, "because 5 + 5 = 10". Notice how his mind was working. He still didn't see it as half of 10. That was why he couldn't solve the 288 feet problem. He didn't know two numbers that equaled 288. But he did know 2 numbers that equaled 10. And he picked 5 because he knew the 2 numbers had to be equal. But he didn't see it as halves. So I knew we were only a part of the way there. So I said to him, "OK, now, let's think about how we could work that problem so we could start with the 10 feet and know that he had walked 5 feet one way? Let's see if you can do another one and maybe that will help. Let's make another pier and make it shorter. (I'm drawing the pier.) OK, Joe walked to the end of the pier and back and he had walked 8 feet. How long is the pier?" He immediately said "4 feet". And so I said something like, "OK, when Joe walked 10 feet to the end and back, the pier was 5 feet long. (And we wrote that information down by the pier I had drawn.) And when Joe walked 8 feet to the end and back, the pier was 4 feet long (and we labeled that pier also)." Now, my question: "OK, how could we work that problem to figure out that answer?" And bless his heart. He said, "2 divided into 10". (Now I would have preferred that he say, "ten divided by two" but I was not going to quibble at this juncture.) "Good for you," I said. "Now let's try that on another one. (drawing another pier) If Joe walked 20 feet going to the end of this pier and back, how long is the pier? How could we work that problem?" And he understood the answer, and he smiled and wrote it. "Now," I said. Let's look at our problem in the book. Joe walked 288 feet to the end of a LOOONNGG pier and back. How can we figure out the length of this long pier? A HUGE, HUGE GRIN burst all over his face, as he said, "2 divided into 288". It took getting down into smaller numbers of which he had some concept. He knew 8's and 10's. He could grasp numbers that size. And from there, he was able to know "how" to do the problem. He didn't understand fractions any better. He was just so happy that he knew how to get the right answer. And he felt successful. That story happened two years ago. I don't know when he will fully grasp fractions. In a new story problem, in a new setting, he may have to be led all over again, step by step, from something small and "graspable" to something larger. And he may need that help for many years. I just hope he has teachers who understand him. MorganOnLearningModalities Congratulations Carolyn Morgan CognitiveHoles 19 Jul 2005 - 16:27 CarolynJohnston Bernie and I were talking tonight, and he told me a story that worried me a bit. Ben came to visit us at work the other day, and wanted to get a snack from the vending machine. So he went into his dad's office and asked for some money. Bernie gave him a few coins, and Ben went into the snack room, picked out what he wanted, and put his money into the machine; but he didn't have enough. So he came in and asked for more; but he couldn't tell Bernie how much more he needed. He didn't seem to have much sense of how much more he needed, either. Well, it wouldn't be the first time we came across this sort of gap in his understanding. We have a sort of a family byword for these things, very much like Catherine and Ed's no-common-sense-y; we call Ben's gaps his Cognitive Holes. They are located in unexpected places -- they're generally about something, like handling coins, that you think is very easy by comparison with other things he can do, like long division. And they tend to be very big gaping holes in his knowledge, and at first they were very frightening. But we come across them less often now than we used to, and we've found that once we know they are there, we can remediate them pretty quickly. So I thought this was another run-of-the-mill Cognitive Hole. Well, you tackle these by filling them in. Ben and I were ready for a change from what we've been doing lately, anyway (introductory equations, solved by adding and subtracting). We've been doing them all week, and struggling, and we finally got a 'click' a couple of nights ago (those babies are practically audible, aren't they?), and last night when he took his section test he got a 100. So tonight, when it was math time, instead of doing algebra, I got out some coins. I had 3 quarters, and a dime. "OK, you're at our work, and you want a snack, and these are the coins I have", I told him. "The snack you want costs 60 cents. Which coins do you take?" He went for two of the three quarters, and the dime. Good. "How much do I get back from the machine?" I asked. Nothing: good. "OK, your snack costs 40 cents". He goes for the two quarters: he tells me the machine returns a dime. "The snack costs 80 cents." He takes all the coins, and tells me the machine returns 5 cents. In short, he passed my common sense test with flying colors, and Math Time was fun and a breeze for once. So what the heck was happening the other day? In short, what part of this Cognitive Hole we think we've uncovered am I not mapping correctly? Tomorrow, we try it a little differently; we'll simulate the precise problem we had the other day with the snack machine at work. I'll give him too little money, tell him the snack costs a certain amount, and get him to tell me how much more he needs. There may in fact be no Cognitive Hole, this time, just some situational rigidity. This is the deal with smart people on the autism spectrum; sometimes they know what they need to know, they just stiffen up when it comes time to apply it in the real world.
TitlesOfConstructivistMathCurricula 19 Jul 2005 - 01:46 CatherineJohnson Jo Anne Cobasko has taken the time to construct a complete list of NCTM standards based math programs. update: Department of CorrectionsThis list is David Klein's handiwork, not Jo Anne's. Thank you, David! (For everything you do.)All of us should keep this handy, because none of these programs ever calls itself constructivist, and schools don't seem to advertise this piece of information, either. When I first raised the issue of TRAILBLAZERS being a constructivist curriculum with a teacher on the textbook selection committee, she looked at me blankly. I got a number of those blank looks before I discovered that everyone in the school knows what the word constructivism means, and knows what a constructivist curriculum is. The reason I know this is that I finally read the original committee report, which states explicitly that the new curricula must have a constructivist approach with modeling. I was a little behind the curve there. Elementary schoolEveryday Mathematics (K-6)TERC's Investigations in Number, Data, and Space (K-5) Math Trailblazers (TIMS) (K-5) Middle schoolConnected Mathematics (6-8)Mathematics in Context (5-8) MathScape: Seeing and Thinking Mathematically (6-8) MATHThematics (STEM) (6-8) Pathways to Algebra and Geometry (MMAP) (6-7, or 7-8) High schoolContemporary Mathematics in Context (Core-Plus Mathematics Project) (9-12)Interactive Mathematics Program (9-12) MATH Connections: A Secondary Mathematics Core Curriculum (9-11) Mathematics: Modeling Our World (ARISE) (9-12) SIMMS Integrated Mathematics: A Modeling Approach Using Technology (9-12) Programs explicitly denounced by over 220 Mathematicians and Scientists:Cognitive Tutor AlgebraCollege Preparatory Mathematics (CPM) Connected Mathematics Program (CMP) Core-Plus Mathematics Project Interactive Mathematics Program (IMP) Everyday Mathematics MathLand Middle-school Mathematics through Applications Project (MMAP) Number Power The University of Chicago School Mathematics Project (UCSMP) printable page Thanks, Jo Anne, for taking the time to do this! key words: DavidKlein listofconstructivisttextbooks constructivist textbooktitles NSFfundedcurricula WhyIsSubtractionHarder 18 Jan 2006 - 14:23 CatherineJohnson Christopher is sitting here doing his mixed practice, and he just asked me, "Why is subtraction harder than addition?" He was doing the problem: $20 - e = $3.47 I have no idea why subraction-with-borrowing is harder than addition-with-borrowing, or even if it is harder. I'm asking all of you because I've noticed that sometimes the answer to incredibly simple-seeming questions tell you a huge amount that you didn't know before. Can't think of any examples offhand, but I'm going to start keeping track. updateOh! It's probably the left-to-right issue, yes?
![]() QuestionAboutReciprocals 31 Jul 2005 - 18:04 CatherineJohnson My 'benchmark' for the moment when I understand elementary mathematics well enough to move on is: reciprocals I find reciprocals utterly mysterious. They're not quite in the magic category anymore, which is my benchmark for complete and total lack of comprehension. If a maths concept seems like magic, that means I know nothing. Of late, inside the expanding math section of my brain, reciprocals have put a toe outside the magic category. But not much more than a toe. Danica McKellarTuesday's SCIENCE TIMES has a profile of Danica McKellar, who played Winnie on Wonder Days. It turns out she's a UCLA math major who published a proof (pdf file) now known as the Chayes-McKellar-Winn theorem.car wash problemMcKellar's web site has a mathematics section where she answers reader questions. She's a natural born teacher:Q: Hi Danica, I heard a question from Mr. Feenie on a "Boy Meets World" episode which he claimed to be unanswerable. After hearing that, I decided to figure it out. If it takes Sam 6 minutes to wash a car by himself, and it takes Brian 8 minutes to wash a car by himself, how long will it take them to wash a car together? Danica Answers: Hm, unanswerable? That's TV for you. :) Let's do it: This is a "rates" problem. The key is to think about each of their "car washing rates" and not the "time" it takes them. Alot of people would want to say "it takes them 7 minutes together" but that's obviously not right, after you realize that it must take them LESS time to wash the car together than either one of them would take. So, what is Sam's rate? How much of a car can he wash in one minute? Well, if he can wash one car in six minutes, then he can wash 1/6 of a car in one minute, right? (think about that until it makes sense, then keep reading). Similarly, Brian can wash 1/8 of a car in one minute. So just add their two rates together to find out how much of a car they can do together, in one minute, as they work side by side on the same car: 1/6 + 1/8 = 7/24 of a car in one minute. That's their combined RATE. (Note: that's a little bit less than 1/3 of a car in one minute). From this point, the way you want to think of it depends on your favorite way of dealing with fractions. You now have their rate. It's 7/24 cars per minute. You can either just take its reciprcal and say: 24/7 minutes for one car, and you're done. Or, equivalently, you can think of the 7/24 cars/minute RATE as 24 minutes for 7 cars. (think about that until it makes sense, too) So just divide 24 by 7 to find out how many minutes it would take to do just one car. You get around 3.42 minutes for one car, just a little less than 3 and 1/2 minutes. Done! Yes, I think they should work together, it gets done much more quickly that way. :) By the way, you said when you watched the TV show you decided that YOU would figure it out, right? How did you do? I love this. McKellar is teaching two things here:
As to the problem itself, she addresses the most common error novices will make confronting this particular rates problem, which is:
Amazing! And all in the space of a few short paragraphs. I think McKellar's teaching skill here is connected to her acting. There's a large element of 'performance' in teaching, at least in my experience, and to be a good performer you have to know where your audience is, what they want to hear & what they need to hear. She does. back to reciprocalsHere's my reciprocal question.From this point, the way you want to think of it depends on your favorite way of dealing with fractions. You now have their rate. It's 7/24 cars per minute. You can either just take its reciprcal and say: 24/7 minutes for one car, and you're done. Or, equivalently, you can think of the 7/24 cars/minute RATE as 24 minutes for 7 cars. (think about that until it makes sense, too) So just divide 24 by 7 to find out how many minutes it would take to do just one car. You get around 3.42 minutes for one car, just a little less than 3 and 1/2 minutes. Done!I don't understand why you would use the reciprocal to solve this problem. I understand perfectly well (let's hope) why you would divide 24 by 7. I didn't even know you could use the reciprocal to find the answer. 7 fact familiesI haven't had time to sit down and think this through, but I suspect the reciprocal answer to a rates problem is the same concept as the 7 fact family I put together after teaching the Primary Mathematics lesson on ratio & proportion (Primary Mathematics 6A Textbook, p. 21-46): 7 fact families![]() (back to top) TerrificallyHelpfulAdviceFromDanKAndCarolynM 23 Jul 2005 - 18:24 CatherineJohnson Dan K and Carolyn Morgan have given me some incredibly helpful advice on teaching fractions 'in a hurry.' I'll get it pulled up front as soon as I can, but in the meantime take a look at the Comments thread. TwoMathEdBlogs 27 Jul 2005 - 19:26 CatherineJohnson Stephanie just sent me a link to a fascinating list of prerequisites for college math, which includes a terrific Comments thread, at Tall Dark and Mysterious, a blog written by "Twentysomething curmudgeon seeking employment teaching college math in BC." And btw, these are not prerequisites for a serious college math course: A year ago, I would have posted that list under a heading more along the lines of “Things Students Should Know By Grade Nine”, but alas, experience as extinguished such optimism on my part. This is long, but it's so valuable I'm quoting the entire list, which I'll probably 'archive' over on....the 'math lessons' page? Another Content Question for the folks at Information Architecture, Inc. (Definitely read the Comments section as well): Based on my experiences, students graduating from high school should, in order to succeed in even the most basic college math classes: 1.Be able to add, subtract, multiply, and divide fractions. Moreover, they should understand that the horizontal bar in a fraction denotes division. (Seem obvious? I thought so, too, until I had a student tell me that she couldn’t give me a decimal approximation of (3/5)^8, because “my calculator doesn’t have a fraction button”.) 2.Have the times tables (single digit numbers) memorized. At minimum, they should understand what the basic operations mean. For instance, know that “times” means “groups of”, which will enable them to multiply, for instance, any number by 1 or 0 without a calculator, and without putting much thought into the matter. This would also enable those students who have not memorized their times tables to figure out what 3 times 8 was if they didn’t know it by heart. 3.Understand how to solve a linear (or reduces-to-linear) equation in a single variable. Recognize that the goal is to isolate the unknown quantity, and that doing so requires “undoing” the equation by reversing the order of operations. Know that that the equals sign means that both sides of the equation are the same, and that one can’t change the value of one side without changing the value of the other. (Aside: shortcuts such as “cross-multiplication” should be stricken from the high school algebra curriculum entirely - or at least until students understand where they come from. If I had a dollar for every student I ever tutored who was familiar with that phantom operation, and if I had to pay ten bucks for every student who actually got that cross-multiplication was just shorthand for multiplying both sides of an equation by the two denominators - I’d still be in the black.) 4.Be able to set up an equation, or set of equations, from a few sentences of text. (For instance, students should be able to translate simple geometric statements about perimeter and area into equations. ) Students should understand that (all together now!) an equation is a relationship among quantities, and that the goal in solving a word problem is to find the numerical value for one or more unknown quantities; and that the method for doing so involves analyzing how the given quantities are related. In order to measure whether students understand this, students must be presented, in a test setting, with word problems that differ more than superficially from the ones presented in class or in the textbook; requiring them only to parrot solutions to questions they have encountered exactly before, measures only their memorization skills. 5.Be able to interpret graphs, and to make transitions between algebraic and geometric presentations of data. For instance, students should know what an x- [y-]intercept means both geometrically (”the place where the graph crosses the x- [y-]axis”) and algebraically (”the value of x (y) when y [x] is set to zero in the function”). 6.Understand basic logic, such as the meaning of the “if…then” syllogism. They should know that if given a definition or rule of the form “if A, then B”, they need to check that the conditions of A are satisfied before they apply B. (Sound like a no-brainer? It should be. This is one of those things I completely took for granted when I started teaching at the college level. My illusions were shattered when I found that a simple statement such as “if A and B are disjoint sets, then the number of elements in (A union B) equals the number of elements in A plus the number of elements in B” caused confusion of epic proportions among a majority of my students. Many wouldn’t even check if A and B were disjoint before finding the cardinality of their union; others seemed to understand that they needed to see if A and B were disjoint, and they needed to find their cardinality - but they didn’t know how those things fit together. (They’d see that A and B were not disjoint, claim as much, and then apply the formula anyway.) It is a testament to the ridiculous extent to which mathematics is divorced from reality in students’ minds that three year olds can understand the implications of “If it’s raining, then you need an umbrella”, but that students graduating from high school are bewildered when the most elementary of mathematical concepts are juxtaposed in such a manner.) 7.More generally: students should know the basics of what it means to justify something mathematically. They should know that it is not enough to plug in a few values for x; you need to show that an identity, for instance, is true for all x. Conversely, they should understand that a single counterexample suffices to show that a claim is false. (Despite the affinity on the part of the high school text I am working for true/false questions, the students I am working with do not understand this.) Among the educational devices to be expunged from the classroom: textbooks that suggest that eyeballing the output of a graphing calculator is a legitimate method of showing, for instance, that a function has three zeroes or two asymptotes or what have you. Another blog by a college calculus professor: Learning Curves NewStudyOnManipulatives 29 Jul 2005 - 17:27 CatherineJohnson I want to follow up on Carolyn's post on Congressional math incentives, but before I do that here's a reminder: Anne Dwyer has posted new notes on her summer math class. And...quickly checking her page just now, noticed this comment: So, what have I learned so far? This is fascinating, because Kevin Killion, of Illinois Loop, just pointed me to a new article in Scientific American showing that manipulatives are less effective than pencil and paper with young children. I'll write a bit more on this later (bike ride time!), but here's the critical passage: Teachers in preschool and elementary school classrooms around the world use "manipulatives"--blocks, rods and other objects designed to represent numerical quantity. The idea is that these concrete objects help children appreciate abstract mathematical principles. But if children do not understand the relation between the objects and what they represent, the use of manipulatives could be counterproductive. And some research does suggest that children often have problems understanding and using manipulatives. Meredith Amaya of Northwestern University, Uttal and I are now testing the effect of experience with symbolic objects on young children's learning about letters and numbers. Using blocks designed to help teach math to young children, we taught six- and seven-year-olds to do subtraction problems that require borrowing (a form of problem that often gives young children difficulty). We taught a comparison group to do the same but using pencil and paper. Both groups learned to solve the problems equally well--but the group using the blocks took three times as long to do so. A girl who used the blocks offered us some advice after the study: "Have you ever thought of teaching kids to do these with paper and pencil? It's a lot easier." Dual representation also comes into play in many books for young children. A very popular style of book contains a variety of manipulative features designed to encourage children to interact directly with the book itself--flaps that can be lifted to reveal pictures, levers that can be pulled to animate images, and so forth. Graduate student Cynthia Chiong and I reasoned that these manipulative features might distract children from information presented in the book. Accordingly, we recently used different types of books to teach letters to 30-month-old children. One was a simple, old-fashioned alphabet book, with each letter clearly printed in simple black type accompanied by an appropriate picture--the traditional "A is for apple, B is for boy" type of book. Another book had a variety of manipulative features. The children who had been taught with the plain book subsequently recognized more letters than did those taught with the more complicated book. Presumably, the children could more readily focus their attention with the plain 2-D book, whereas with the other one their attention was drawn to the 3-D activities. Less may be more when it comes to educational books for young children. This perfectly supports the study Carolyn mentioned way back when, showing that fraction manipulatives are good for middle schoolers. CA state study on manipulatives Fraction Manipulatives Quick Thought about Fraction Manipulatives Fraction Manipulatives Part 2 New Study on Manipulatives Part 2 WichitaBoyOnMath 31 Jul 2005 - 22:15 CatherineJohnson We have an embarrassment of riches! At least 2 great comments from WichitaBoy, and Ed sat down and wrote out his constructivism-as-psychoanalysis thoughts, too. Here's one of WichitaBoy's observations: "Writing is organizing." Now there's a great thought I can take to the bank. Here's one back for you: professional mathematics is organizing. You have vague thoughts, you notice a vague pattern, and you try to organize your thoughts, to nail down the pattern, to really clarify what's going on beneath the hood. When you've nailed it completely, when you understand with perfect perspicacity the essence of the pattern, then you've got a proof of a new theorem. If you've really organized it, you've got a theorem that goes in the "Book of God". There's this, too, in response to my saying that what is brilliant about Saxon Math--the structure--is largely invisible: Read Confucius or Socrates. The ideal teacher should be able to fade into the background like the Cheshire cat. And so with the ideal textbook. BernieOnVisualVersusSymbolicUnderstanding 03 Aug 2005 - 00:40 CatherineJohnson Bernie Johnston (you may recognize the last name) left this comment in response to my post about visual versus symbolic understanding of math: Not all mathematical understanding is visual. If it were, all mathematics would be geometry. That's essentially the view the ancient Greeks had, but the development of symbolic computation and an efficient number system have rendered that view obsolete by allowing us to approach mathematical understanding from other quite different directions. Various mathematicians think in various ways. I've known strong algebraists who literally cannot draw a 3-dimensional cube and understand it. On the other hand, I've known topologists who could see 4-dimensional space in their mind's eye the way I can see a cube. I prefer to think of different mathematical approaches as analogous to taking pictures of a house. You can take a picture from the front or from the sides or from the back, but none of these ipso facto captures the entire house. And even after viewing the pictures you might want to do a walk-through before buying. So, while I don't know the definitive answer to the question of exactly what conceptual mathematics is, I'm certain that it need not be a visual representation alone. I was relieved to learn this. I think one problem for me, in trying to learn & re-learn math, is that I really have no idea what it looks like when a person has learned math. All I really know is....they're good at math, majored in math, took graduate degrees in math, and now do or do not work in jobs requiring all kinds of math I don't understand. Makes it difficult to have any sense at all of where I'm headed, and how far I've come.
It's in my cart! BasicCollegeMathematics 02 Aug 2005 - 01:14 CatherineJohnson A round-about path from Vlorbik to Tall, Dark, and Mysterious to Basic College Mathematics at mathnotes.com. Scroll down. MathAndTextPrototypeLessonRevision 03 Aug 2005 - 17:05 CatherineJohnson I've just noticed that J.D. has posted his revision of his prototype lesson at MathandText. I can't wait to read it. updateOK, I have NOT read J.D.'s revision, because my copy of Adobe Reader has completely and totally gummed up my Mac. It never ends.MathForumArchivedNewsletters 14 Aug 2005 - 01:37 CatherineJohnson I've just been alerted to a terrific resource, the Math Forum Newsletter. They have an article about Kitchen Table Math in the latest issue! (Although so far I haven't been able to find it.....I don't think....) Sigh. However, I have managed to attach and display the logo they sent me!
BestPerformingStudentsPartThree 14 Nov 2005 - 02:32 CatherineJohnson The question of how our top students compare to everyone else's top students has made me realize I need to be paying attention to this. My goal as a homeschooler-on-the-side is for Christopher to be able to major in a math-related subject in college if he chooses, which apparently means he should be able to score a 625 or higher on TIMSS. So I'm going to start scouting information on all ranges of student achievement, and posting it here. Here's my first: ![]() Researchers determined which items students who achieved at the various levels on the total test were likely to get right. Then they placed the items on a scale from 200 to 750. So we have a pretty good idea of what the best students know that others have difficulty with. I'm going to spring this one on Christopher tomorrow. I really can't tell whether he could have gotten this item right at age 9. If you showed him 10 girls and 20 boys he would have known instantly that boys and girls weren't half and half. But I tend to think he would have been thrown by the sight of the numbers '10' and '20.' As well, I'd say this problem imposes a high cognitive load. You have to keep Juanita and Amanda straight in your mind, unless you've developed seriously good informal chart-making skills, which Christopher has not done now and certainly had not done in 4th grade. update: Christopher's answerChristopher turned 11 yesterday (boo hoo). His first impulse, as I feared, was to say 'yes,' Amanda is right. He obviously had the 'environmental dependency' effect of seeing the numbers '10' and '20' and thinking: 1/2. But then he corrected himself, and said, confidently, that Juanita is right and Amanda is wrong. (Nice to see that the Designated Stupid Person concept has spread to TIMSS, too.) His explanation was a bit strangled, but it was right. He said, 'Well, if there's 1 girl for every 2 boys, then there's 1 girl and 2 boys, then 2 girls and 4 boys, then 3 girls and 6 boys...' This is pretty interesting, because I think he had a 'number sense' or 'pattern' way of getting this answer. In other words, I think he got the answer without really knowing why or how he got it. He just knew it. Juanita's correct statement of the problem instantly became his statement of the problem; he didn't have to do any adding or subtracting or logical reasoning to test Juanita's statement. Then, when I asked him to explain why Juanita was right, he explained how her answer would work as a kind of Fancy Skip Counting Mechanism. If you kept counting up by 2-to-1 ratios, eventually you'd hit 30 kids, and your ratio would be 10 girls, 20 boys. After he gave this illustration I asked him, 'how many girls and how many boys would there be in the class' (forgetting that in fact THE PROBLEM TELLS YOU THIS UP FRONT) and Christopher said, instantly, '10 girls and 20 boys.' When I asked him how he knew (TIMSS should just have 'Catherine' be the Designated Stupid Person) he said, 'I just knew it.' Apparently he had forgotten the fact that we'd been given this information, too. Like mother like son. In any case.....this is something I was talking to Carolyn about the other night: what is the relationship of implicit knowledge to expertise when you're talking about math? Certainly in every other field (I think) implicit knowledge is a sign that you're getting good at what you do, because you don't have to think about it. You 'just know it.' But math has been confusing for me in this realm.....our friend Fred was here a few weekends ago, and I asked him to take a look at a RUSSIAN MATH problem that was stumping me. Fred is a Big Brain; he went to Yale undergrad, then got a Ph.D. in experimental psychology at Stanford, I think it was; then got a law degree at Yale; then clerked for the Supreme Court. So I hope you're impressed. Anyway, Fred was keenly interested in math when he went to college, but pretty quickly found out that pure mathematics wasn't going to be for him.anti-constructivist digression"I always loved finding the right answer," he said. This is SO important; it's one of the core pleasures of math. Finding the right answer. Radical constructivists gleefully snatch this pleasure this pleasure away, the drips. back on topicAnyway, once he realized that pure mathematics was beyond him, Fred moved to statistics. Looking at the Russian Math problem, he instantly knew how to do it. But he didn't know why He knew. This was yet another Problem Involving Reciprocals, and Fred said, 'I don't know why I knew to use the reciprocal there.' So...... This is where I get confused. Fred is a super-smart person with, I would say, high expertise in elementary math & in applied math. On the other hand, he isn't doing a math-related job as a career, so maybe he's no longer in the 'expert' category after all these years. I don't know where to put him. So I don't know what to think about the fact that he could instantly solve the RUSSIAN MATH problem, but didn't know why his solution worked. Is that a sign that he has advanced knowledge (because people with advanced knowledge often 'just know' things they can't explain), or a sign that he doesn't? This brings me back to Christopher. Watching and listening, I felt like the fact that he instantly knew Juanita was right was a sign he's developing expertise. It was as if math is starting to be 'in his bones.' On the other hand, I don't think he could show me how to do the problem, if the problem were too advanced to do just by eyeballing it. (If the numbers weren't 'friendly.') Actually, that's a good question. In the next day or two I'll find out what he would do with a more complicated version of this question.How good are our best? BestPerformingStudentsPartTwo a word problem only the top 10% of 9 year olds solve England vs America vs Singapore LipingMa 24 Aug 2005 - 20:09 CatherineJohnson Here's Liping Ma: Multiple Approaches to a Computational Procedure: Flexibility Rooted in Conceptual Understanding Although proofs and explanations should be rigorous, mathematics is not rigid.... Dowker (1992)asked 44 professional mathematicians to estimate mentally the results of products and quotients of 10 multiplication and division problems involving whole numbers and decimals. The most striking result of her investigation "was the number and variety of specific estimation strategies used by the mathematicians." "The mathematicians tended to use strategies involving the understanding of arithmetical properties and relationships" and "rarely the strategy of 'Proceeding algorithmically.'" "To solve a problem in multiple ways" is also an attitude of Chinese teachers. For all four topics, they discussed alternative as well as standard approaches. For the topic of subtraction, they described at least three ways of regrouping, including the regrouping of subtrahends. [they also talked about which approach worked best in which situation] For the topic of multidigit multiplication, they mentioned at least two explanations of the algorithm. One teacher showed six ways of lining up the partial products. For the division with fractions topic the Chinese teachers demonstrated at least four ways to prove the standard algorithm and three alternative methods of computation. For all the arithmetic topics, the Chinese teachers indicated that although a standard algorithm may be used in all cases, it may not be the best method for every case. Applying an algorithm flexibly allows one to get the best solution for a given case. For example, the Chinese teachers pointed out that there are several ways to compute 1 3/4 dividedby 1/2. Using decimals, the distributive law, or other mathematical ideas, all the alternatives were faster and easier than the standard algorithm. Being able to calculate in multiple ways means that one has transcended the formality of an algorithm and reached the essence of the numerical operations--the underlying mathematical ideas and principles. The reason that one problem can be solved in multiple ways is that mathematics does not consist of isolated rules, but connected ideas. Being able to and tending to solve a problem in more than one way, therefore, reveals the ability and the predilection to make connections between and among mathematical areas and topics. |