That’s an awesome clip, I’m totally stealing it when I get to work this fall (more like a week and a half). I love the idea of rotating the paper around and having students pick up where the last one left off. What a way to demonstrate that:
1. There are multiple ways to solve a problem.
2. There is valuable information to be learned from your classmates.
3. Collaborating in a group is a good thing.
4. We value the process and the product at the same time!
Too often I fall into only caring about the product, than the process.
There is nothing isolated about each person in a group trying something different and then coming back to talk about the outcome. Each student has an opportunity to engage in authentic work and see the value in working toward precision. This also seems to potentially support the idea that there is always “choice” and perhaps getting the x values to one side first works well in one problem, but in another it may serve better to move the constant values first. So much to admire in this tiny snippet! Thank you for sharing!
Ms Bryant does a great job engaging the students, giving them a point to start with, but without turning them into miniature Ms. Bryants. She presents the problem and gives a very general statement to initiate using one of the four operations. Then she directs the students to begin and after they have completed an initial step, to share their work with each other and discuss what they did. Ms. Bryant then circulated and engaged each group, she empowers the students be confident in exploring different ways to solve and to discuss the steps they have taken. A very powerful way to help students learn from each other.
When solving equations like these I always ask for alternate ways to do it. i.e. move the varaible terms first, move the numbers first, move the variables to the right , move the variables to the left. We have a discussion about eliminating negative coefficients by moving the smaller variable term first.
My goal is never to mandate a method, but to practice the properties of equatlity and look for ways to reduce mistakes. Generally fewer steps and avoiding negative coefficients are good ways to eliminate mistakes.
I emphasize that as long as you are properly applying the properties of equality, that the problem is never made "wrong". It may not show the solution, but as long as the properties are followed, the equation remains true and can still be solve.
I've even thrown a blocker into solving an equation whose job is to "mess up" the solver by making a mathematically valid step that does nothing toward solving the original equation, i.e. add 3x to both sides.
I love the way she invites the group of 4 to all have different ways to start-- setting up the idea that it would be impressive. I also love that *starting* is the goal in general. I think of all the times I’ve tried to coach stuck kids to just do something to both their and my ultimate frustration! Having this whole class energy around only doing the first step is fun and productive.
Math is so cool because there are literally infinite ways to start here. Some might be more useful than others, but you don't have to twist yourself up thinking about the one. right. move. It doesn't exist.
I love Bryant’s approach, verbalizing how she doesn’t want to make a bunch of little Ms. Bryants. “You’ve got to take a risk.” I remember this video clip, it’s a good one.
What I love about this approach is that it works for the kids who are hesitant about math and doubt their abilities as well as those who might be overconfident. For the former, it can help them develop trust in themselves that their approach can work even if it's not what their table mates did. For the latter, it can help kids, particularly those who always see one way to do things "correctly," that there are many ways to solve problems that can still get you to the correct answer. I think both are important for developing socioemotional competence, something we should be supporting throughout all our lessons.
Use of manipulatives would have been good in this session to aid exploration and discovery. Wondering if pen and paper approach gets more conscious efforts from students compared to manipulative.
It won't be difficult to get AI adopt Bryant's approach in a 1:1 session, but doubt that AI would be successful to achieve it in a group teaching session like Bryant is doing.
I'd like to ask a general question that follows from a 6/19/2024 NYT article. Evelina Feforenko and her MIT colleagues asked if communication played a central role in reasoning, their experiment looked at brain scans taken during solving simple math problems. What does this say about AI and classroom instruction? I must confess I couldn't do mathematics as conversation.
That’s an awesome clip, I’m totally stealing it when I get to work this fall (more like a week and a half). I love the idea of rotating the paper around and having students pick up where the last one left off. What a way to demonstrate that:
1. There are multiple ways to solve a problem.
2. There is valuable information to be learned from your classmates.
3. Collaborating in a group is a good thing.
4. We value the process and the product at the same time!
Too often I fall into only caring about the product, than the process.
Thanks for sharing!!
There is nothing isolated about each person in a group trying something different and then coming back to talk about the outcome. Each student has an opportunity to engage in authentic work and see the value in working toward precision. This also seems to potentially support the idea that there is always “choice” and perhaps getting the x values to one side first works well in one problem, but in another it may serve better to move the constant values first. So much to admire in this tiny snippet! Thank you for sharing!
Ms Bryant does a great job engaging the students, giving them a point to start with, but without turning them into miniature Ms. Bryants. She presents the problem and gives a very general statement to initiate using one of the four operations. Then she directs the students to begin and after they have completed an initial step, to share their work with each other and discuss what they did. Ms. Bryant then circulated and engaged each group, she empowers the students be confident in exploring different ways to solve and to discuss the steps they have taken. A very powerful way to help students learn from each other.
When solving equations like these I always ask for alternate ways to do it. i.e. move the varaible terms first, move the numbers first, move the variables to the right , move the variables to the left. We have a discussion about eliminating negative coefficients by moving the smaller variable term first.
My goal is never to mandate a method, but to practice the properties of equatlity and look for ways to reduce mistakes. Generally fewer steps and avoiding negative coefficients are good ways to eliminate mistakes.
I emphasize that as long as you are properly applying the properties of equality, that the problem is never made "wrong". It may not show the solution, but as long as the properties are followed, the equation remains true and can still be solve.
I've even thrown a blocker into solving an equation whose job is to "mess up" the solver by making a mathematically valid step that does nothing toward solving the original equation, i.e. add 3x to both sides.
I love the way she invites the group of 4 to all have different ways to start-- setting up the idea that it would be impressive. I also love that *starting* is the goal in general. I think of all the times I’ve tried to coach stuck kids to just do something to both their and my ultimate frustration! Having this whole class energy around only doing the first step is fun and productive.
Math is so cool because there are literally infinite ways to start here. Some might be more useful than others, but you don't have to twist yourself up thinking about the one. right. move. It doesn't exist.
I love Bryant’s approach, verbalizing how she doesn’t want to make a bunch of little Ms. Bryants. “You’ve got to take a risk.” I remember this video clip, it’s a good one.
What I love about this approach is that it works for the kids who are hesitant about math and doubt their abilities as well as those who might be overconfident. For the former, it can help them develop trust in themselves that their approach can work even if it's not what their table mates did. For the latter, it can help kids, particularly those who always see one way to do things "correctly," that there are many ways to solve problems that can still get you to the correct answer. I think both are important for developing socioemotional competence, something we should be supporting throughout all our lessons.
Use of manipulatives would have been good in this session to aid exploration and discovery. Wondering if pen and paper approach gets more conscious efforts from students compared to manipulative.
It won't be difficult to get AI adopt Bryant's approach in a 1:1 session, but doubt that AI would be successful to achieve it in a group teaching session like Bryant is doing.
Oof, the Victoria result.
I'd like to ask a general question that follows from a 6/19/2024 NYT article. Evelina Feforenko and her MIT colleagues asked if communication played a central role in reasoning, their experiment looked at brain scans taken during solving simple math problems. What does this say about AI and classroom instruction? I must confess I couldn't do mathematics as conversation.