# Why I love this picture #2

A while back, I discussed why I loved this photo. It’s possible that I have a series starting here (sort of like I have with “Real or Fake”. Anyway…)

Today’s photo is a beautiful example of tech integration because the tech is actually integrated. Integrated with what? Well, in this case, with manipulatives.

See? The student has the problem presented online and will record her answer online, but there clearly is no expectation that the work will be fully digital. Which is a good thing because it can be difficult to ignore how effective manipulatives can be in helping student model and visualize mathematical topics (in this case, 3-D images. She’s building a rectangular prism given the front, stop, and side view.)

That’s why I love this picture.

# A model of talking math with your kids

Christopher Danielson (@trianglemancsd) started a cool thing. It’s called “Talk Math with your Kids“. There’s a hashtag (#tmwyk) that is pretty cool to check out, too. According to Dr. Danielson “We know we need to read with our children every day, but what should we do for math? Answer: Talk about math with them as we and they encounter numbers and shapes in our everyday lives.”

I try to do this as much as I can. I have an 8-year-old, a 5-year-old, and a 2-year-old. And shapes, numbers, sorting, more, less, etc. are all things that I try to talk about with them when I can. Mostly because it is interesting to me, as a former math teacher.

Recently, I recorded one such conversation with my 5-year-old as we prepared breakfast (listen for the crackling of delicious bacon in the background.) I am submitting it as a model of how these types of conversations can look and feel.

What do you do to talk math with your kids?

This story begins with a tweet that I read.

This tweet poses a nice engaging situation where addition of fractions would be a very useful tools. But, addition of fractions involves common denominators. And, then I began to remember my students attitudes toward fractions, which can be summed up by the following…

… clearly fractions are so difficult that it requires someone with the reputation of Chuck Norris to be able to deal with them effectively.

Except, they aren’t. Or maybe they are, but they certainly don’t need to be. The logic that says that 2 min + 31 sec doesn’t equal 33 of anything is perfectly understandable to most. It’s the exact same premise as requiring common denominators to complete a fraction addition problem. And THAT is confounding to many. It seems like an arbitrary rule that math teachers invented to trick students.

And the teaching of it carries with it some strong opinions, too. I remember during my undergrad, one of my professors asked this:

One of my classmates changed his major that day. He got so angry that it we would be discussing the possibility that a student could write that equation and could be thinking something mathematically accurate. Dude literally stormed out of class and I never saw him again.

It is possible, by the way:

About the same time I was reading the IES Practice Guide for teaching Fractions. Are you familiar with the IES Practice Guides for mathematics? The Institute for Educational Studies gathers high quality research studies on educational and catalogs them in the What Works Clearinghouse.

The Practice Guides are documents that synthesize the multiple research studies that exists on a certain subject and operationalize the findings. Recently, I explored the IES Practice Guide for Fraction Instruction K-8.

I’d encourage you to check it out. To summarize, making fractions and conversations about portioning and sharing things a common part of math conversation from the beginning can help take the natural understanding that kids have and build fractions into that context. That will give us a chance to use math talk as a tool for students to need more exact language. My preschool son right now uses “half” extremely loosely at the moment. (I’ve drank “half” my water could really mean anything quantitatively.) In order for him to effectively communicate, he’s going to need to develop a more precise definition of “half”. That will require him adding additional fraction vocab to his toolbox.

As teachers, this gives us a chance to build in some more effective language, clearly defining the fractions as numbers. As such, encouraging a lot of conceptual sense-making about the different operational quirks that are required to effectively compute when fractions are involved. (If fractions aren’t numbers, but instead are just made-up, goofy ways of writing numbers, then the rules for computing them are goofy and made-up, too.)

The practice guide provides some tangible steps to achieve this. I’d encourage you to check it out. Lots of steps forward to take in the area of student comfort and effectiveness with fractions.

# Physics, a helicopter and cameras

First watch this (and be amazed… well, if you’re anything like I am.)

So, when the students can get past the idea that there is some foul play involved, then it becomes a wonderful opportunities to discuss the idea of frequency.

Frequency is an odd discussion because it’s got a strange unit. The “per time” can be a little challenging for students to wrap their heads around.

And the opportunity that this video provides is that here, we don’t need to immediately concern ourselves with the quantitative value of the frequency (maybe 300 RPM for the helicopter rotor, for example, or 5 frames per second on the camera), but we can begin with the qualitative value of the frequency (that the frequencies, whatever they are, are the same.)

And then it opens the door for them discussing some quantitative issues. For example, the fact that the standard unit of frequency (the “per unit time”), obviously isn’t constant. So, the helicopter rotor is RPM and the camera shudder is typically in frames per second (at least, I think. Not a photographer…) So, you’ve got some nice dimensional analysis opportunities.

Where could you take this next?

One thing’s for sure, I’d hate to waste a video like this. Fully captivating, and it only costs your 30 seconds of class time.

# Rotational Motion… or tangent lines.

All right team, let’s do something with this:

Obvious choices are rotational motion, tangent lines, centripetal force.

I just love the authentic demonstration, particularly when the sliders let go. Tracing their motion (a straight line tangent to the circle at the point they let go…)

This is just too good to ignore. Enjoy it!

# Perplexity and how it appears…

Here’s a video (by Derek Alexander Muller) I think you should watch.

The critique of #flipclass aside, I’m intrigued by the way the narrator describes the value of “bringing up the misconception”. It’s almost like a thorn that creates some discomfort that only learning will relieve. This gets close to Dan Meyer’s use of the word “perplexity”.

From Dr. Meyer: “Perplexity comes along once in a while. What is it? It’s when a kid doesn’t know something, wants to know that thing, and believes that knowing that thing is within her power. That right there is some of the most powerful learning moments I’ve ever seen – so powerful that it’s really hard for me as a teacher to mess those up.”

There’s power in perplexity. I’ve seen this in my classroom on multiple occasions. It’s important to remember that there’s three distinct parts to creating what Dr. Meyer is describing. First, there needs to be something worth knowing. Second, you have to create the want. And finally, we need to empower the students so they feel enabled to know that thing. What Dr. Alexander suggests is that becoming aware of your misconception seems unsettling (leading to claims that videos were confusing), but also leads to more learning. The discomfort fed a drive to resolve the discomfort.

The tricky thing is that misconceptions are a tool you can use when they are available. Science provides a particularly fertile ground for misconceptions because so much of it is drawn from experiences many of us have regularly. Alexander uses the model of a ball flying through the air. This video uses the phases of the moon and the seasons.

The potential for misconceptions is necessarily lightened when there’s no misconceptions, so the quest for perplexity in math needs to take on a different look, proper planning and timing, and different strategies for when perplexity isn’t an available option. (Preconceived notions are just as good at times. After all, we ALL think we know something about squares!)

It’s like Dr. Meyer says, those wonderful perplexing moments only come along once in a while. We foster those moments when we have them, try to create as many as we can and we do our best every other time.

# Math Talk by Necessity: a 4-year-old’s story

My 4-year-old is chatty. And while he will occasionally talk to himself, he’d much rather talk to you. And to him nothing is more frustrating than not being understood.

So, he’s realized that he needs detail. Words like “lots” or “just a little” or “soon” are easily misunderstood. Like when Dad says, “Hang on, dinner will be ready soon.” He’d prefer to have a better understanding of whether you mean 30-seconds soon or 10-minutes soon.

The math teachers among us see this as adding units to your answer. We ask our students, “What was the final speed of the car?” We don’t expect them to say, “fast.” We’d prefer something like “54 m/s”. So would my 4-year-old. “Soon” is too loose a word.

Except, most of the typical units don’t mean anything to him because he is still developing his understanding of what “a mile” is. First, that it’s a unit of distance. Second, how far is one of those. These two things are essential to making meaning out of a statement like, “Well, the store is 6 miles from here.” Without those, statements like “This box is heavy. It’s, like, 6 miles!” are not uncommon around my house right now.

But yesterday, something new happened. Together, he and I made Alton Brown’s Hot Cocoa Mix . To go from ingredients to a drink, you have four units of measure. (cups, teaspoons, tablespoons, and ounces)

So, midway through as we were chatting about this and that… together making the distinction between teaspoons and tablespoons… why two cups of one ingredient looks so much different than two teaspoons of another… stuff like that. Then, we came to the part where we needed to scoop the mix into the mug and I handed him a “scooper” and he says, “I need two… two… of THESE, but I don’t know what it’s NAME is? Dad… what’s this one’s name?”

Did you catch that? There was a step forward in that.

He knew the number wasn’t enough. “Put two in there” is really easily misunderstood. That would be a problem. Two of what?

He also knew that it totally mattered what “name” he gave the scooper. If he called it “a cup”, he risked calling it the wrong thing. Two cups of mix makes a totally different amount of hot cocoa that two tablespoons. And both could be called “a scoop”. (Two scoops from the coffee can is different that the two scoops of raisins on the cereal box.)

Finally, he figured out that this thing had a name. That I knew it. That he needed to know it and that it wouldn’t work to make it up. If he is going to communicate this amount to others, he needed to know the ACTUAL name of this scooper. Not his preferred name.

There you have it. Math talk by necessity. Lends credence to the notion that if you put students in rich enough environments, you won’t have to mandate good math talk. They simply won’t be able to communicate effectively without it.

Now, we just have to deal with the fact that when Chef Alton says “two tablespoons”, Dad tries to measure accurately while the 4-year-old would prefer that mean “the maximum possible amount of hot cocoa mix that the tablespoon will transfer to the mug.”