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.

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…)

I’m going to attempt to model this my internalization of a bit of advice that I received recently.

Leadership is about trust. You want your people to trust you?

Speak plainly and keep your word.

By speak plainly, I mean say what you mean in a way that designed to be heard and fully-processed by those who hear it. Trust corrodes when those you are leading feel the need to constantly read between the lines of your statements.

By keep your word, I mean if you commit to doing something, then do it.

The advice I received was from Mark Wilson, but his was directed at goal-setting. Goals should be simple and easily understood. He didn’t mean that they should be low-level goals. But they should be able to be stated simply.

All of our students will be safe in our school.

All of our freshman will successfully complete all of their classes.

All of our new students will get a complete orientation to our school community before they attend a single class.

These are not-simple goals, but they are stated simply. That makes them easier to follow. Easier to implement. Easier to assess.

And it also makes it easier to keep your word. Here’s what I said I would do. Did I do it?

Well, if your goals sound more like this…

“To support the ever-dynamic pressures of a 21st century global economy, we will consistently find new and innovative learning experiences to blend with classical best practices to provide the highest-quality academic pathways for our diverse learners to produce successful work- and college-ready graduates.”

… then it becomes quite a challenge to evaluate whether or not you did what you said you do. This goal is not necessarily more complicated than “All of our freshman will successfully complete all of their classes”, but it is much less likely to become the unifying slogan around which we focus our energy. And isn’t that the point of stating the goal?

To close, all of this talk about speaking plainly has me thinking of this delightful scene from Shrek the Third

Welcome back to another edition of Real or Fake. This one, I would say, is certainly more believable than any of the earlier versions, although, that certainly doesn’t make it real.

In this video, if it is to be believed, soccer legend David Beckham puts three consecutive soccer balls into three different trash cans each located what appear to be 40ish yards away.

Check it out.

Now, I certainly don’t want to say anything to sway your judgement, but I will say really talented folks who have dedicated years to their craft are capable of some pretty remarkable things.

But, that, as with my other observation, does not make this real.

My more recent endeavors have moved me away from exclusively math and allowed me to enter into the world of literacy, particularly elementary literacy. (Math teachers out there, if you haven’t gotten a chance to sit and participate in a conversation among elementary folks talking about kids learning to read, the essential components of curricula and classroom activities, the different types of assessment and support for struggling learners, etc. then do it. Such interesting conversations…)

But my math background led me to look at the new literacy experiences I’ve been having through the lens of the math classroom. Specifically, what are the elements of literacy education in a problem like this:

taken from Holt’s Geometry, 2009 Edition, Page 702 #25

What math content knowledge is this problem asking students to use? Volume of cylinders, volume of rectangular prisms, and simple probability.

But we need to keep in mind that the ability to read is a significant skill to being able to apply math to this problem. Especially when you consider that the typical high school student probably doesn’t read quite as well as we’d like them to. I want to be clear that I’m not saying that this is an excuse for us to eliminate reading as a way to accommodate this potential weakness in our students, but it is important that we recognize that we are asking students to exercise that skill when solving this problem.

When we are asking our students to read as part of a math experience, we should do so deliberately. There are times when one of our stated learning outcomes is helping students learn to read math. There is a lot of value in that skill. There are also times when we are much more interested in helping the students set-up and solve math problems in ways that may not require as much reading.

This requires us to be strategic about what we are expecting our students to be able to do by the end of a lesson. Consider the math problem from earlier in the post. Literacy doesn’t have to be a barrier to that math content.

Using video in your class is one way to provide access to a math problem without having student having to tackle the reading part, which can be a pretty significant barrier to some students. In the past, I certainly haven’t been nearly conscious enough of the literacy demands I was putting on the students when I asked them to explore math content. Here’s a perfect example of a handout from my geometry course. How many students would benefit from a video introduction to this handout? (Especially when you consider how many students aren’t real strong using a protractor…)

It just all goes back to us, as educators, having a clear vision for what we want our students to learn by the end of their time with us and being willing to do what it takes to help them get there.