Sunday, 8 April 2018

Number of the Day

How to encourage agency in mathematics learning?

I would say:
  • Connect to play, inquiry, choice
  • Have materials available that give lots of options and connect with mathematical structure
  • Activities that encourage thinking and talk
  • Students writing to express their mathematical ideas
I'm impressed by how Madeleine Goutard got her students writing maths. It was important to her that her students had agency, had their own thoughts and mathematical experiences, which they wanted to express.

On Twitter I saw classes celebrating their hundredth day. I'd never done that, but it comes about the right time of the year for my 5 and 6 year olds; just as lots of them are really ready to think about numbers around 100. We celebrated last year, and it was good. 

I'd also heard of people doing a kind of number of the day thing, where every day the students got to say something about that number. I had mixed feelings about it. I didn't want the students who were still not sure of their teens numbers to feel out of their depth or not contribute when we got to the bigger numbers. But, on balance, I thought it would give the students lots of experience with gradually increasing numbers, giving them a predictable format, and a supportive context for writing their own equations, scribed by me. I would try not to 'steer' them too much, just watching what developed. We'd give about ten minutes to it each day, more if we did some practical work linked to it.

So we began with 1. I wrote what they said on the whiteboard and usually tweeted it and kept it.

I added the subsequent days to that thread. It's hard to follow on Twitter because it's branched. The days are also here in this album. A vital tool in all this was our magnetic hundred square, which we gradually filled with the numbers, swapping the blue-red sides as we discussed different aspects.
At the beginning there were a lot of 'it looks like'-type observations. After a few weeks of them, it was getting a bit repetitive, and I wanted to see more of those equations and I gently discouraged them. We also had a lot of inequalities, bigger than, smaller than. I wrote this out at in words at first, and then thought, actually, > and < is easier for the students to read than the words. It's funny, inequalities hardly came up at all with my class last year. This year they like them. I didn't manage to scribe everything. For instance, for 9, SB said he knew 4+5=9 because 8 is 4+4. (Why didn't I make more of that?!)

I made an effort to write equations with the sum at the beginning sometimes. Students often get the idea that = means "and here comes the answer", like when you press equals on a calculator. Sometimes I'd say "is the same as" instead of "equals" too.

I added in manipulatives at various points, to keep it different, to make connections with other knowledge, and to provoke different ways of looking at the number. At eighteen, we arranged eighteen pegs on pegboards
and I asked how they had arranged them:
At 19, a little number-writing practice. I didn't call it that. We looked at different ways we could number these hexagons.
Some people did it in various spirals, some in lines.

For ten and twenty, we got the ten frames out first:
For twenty-four, we first counted out twenty-four pattern blocks.
You can see a thing starting to develop here. Perhaps it was the materials and the counting in tens, but the students began to express the numbers as a number of tens plus a single-digit number. I wasn't asking for this particularly, but, despite the reduction in variety, I was pleased because that way of seeing numbers reflects our place value system and helps to make sense of what we say and write.

For twenty-five we gave them homework over the weekend (we don't give this often): to number the square tiles any way they liked.
It seemed to help to tune in to equations. (Now, looking at AF's response, I wonder why I didn't make more of that!)

For twenty-nine and thirty, I threw in a tray of eggs. The students were starting to see numbers in different kinds of groups now.

I think I added in that 30-1=29. We hadn't seen any subtraction yet, and I wanted to open up that possibility.

On day 30 there was a flood of ways of seeing:
(Here X arrives. SB said it and explained it both ways, so I introduced the sign. Early I know, but it turned out to be useful. I was conscious, as we progressed, that there would be children who wouldn't grasp this, so I often paraphrased it as "lots of" and gave the choice of writing it either as repeated addition or as a multiplication.)


This was hotting up! I quickly printed out an empty tray of eggs and got everyone to write their way of grouping the eggs as an equation.

We sometimes counted our numbers. (I'd do that thing we do where they had to follow my finger which would trick them sometimes by going  backwards.)
At thirty-six, a good opportunity to count in twos came up:
At day 44, AA and EV both said an equation that had a subtraction in it. I highlighted them:
Most days there was something to remark on. Look at this lovely series:
HA enjoyed the tautology 45=45. MM was enjoying big numbers, something that was to continue, and spread. Infinity!
We often got the little whiteboards out first, so that everyone was writing now.
(Look at that 47 <>47 at the top. Inventive.)

By fifty-six, the equations were starting to get a little unwieldy.
and the next day, I asked if I could just write 5x10 to say 5 lots of ten. 

I wanted to make sure this tens and ones thing was making sense to everyone. We used the rekenrek to represent numbers a few times:
 And also the Dienes tens and ones inside a 100 square:
At sixty-three we shook it up a bit, using Cuisenaire rods:
We looked at how the ones, threes and sevens fitted exactly:
 The next day, sixty-four, I asked if the blacks would fit exactly again:
 And what about green?
Seventy-five came, and MC was on fire, first of all talking about patterns in the hundred square:
 then counting the empty green squares at the top:
Students were very particular about it being an equation, not just an expression. But they were cool about whether the = came near the end or near the beginning.
We had to take numbers off our hundred square to keep track of TT's meandering. Putting them back on is always interesting:
The excitement at approaching one hundred was building.

We arranged a hundred things. For homework over the holidays, we asked students to arrange a hundred things at home. We were getting books ready for the big day too, and beginning to read them.

We weren't going to fit this all in in one day - there would have to be at least a week of celebrations and investigatins!

One is a Snail, Ten is a Crab is a great book - all about seeing numbers in different ways. We made some more ourselves, finding ways to make ten with just the animals in the book:
We counted to twenty using Cuisenaire rods to represent the animals:
and then made one hundred, using Cuisenaire rods:
We did similar things with the wonderful All the Little Ones and a Half.
'It's day one hundred!"
It's been a joyful ride. And I've been able to see my students develop in their thinking and inventiveness. Of course we went a little beyond 100. But that's another story. There's lots I've left out and it's already a long post. (See the album if you want to see all the days.)

You must have a certain endurance if you've made it this far in the blog post. As always, I'm interested in your thoughts. Just writing this, I've seen things I might have done differently. Maybe there's something you don't agree with - I'd be interested in that too! 

Sunday, 11 March 2018

Variation

I'm thinking about variation.

In Mr Barton's podcast of his conversation with John Mason and Anne Watson, Anne Watson says:
"Comparison is a hugely important idea throughout mathematics. When you have something to compare, you don't focus on the thing itself, you focus on connections, same, difference, relationships between the things, relationships within the things."
I like the way she keeps it simple:
"Sadly, I think variation has become Variation, with a capital V, and some teachers think there's a right way to do it and a wrong way to do it. There isn't: it's actually embedded in mathematics."
Back in 2006, Anne Watson and John Mason wrote a short article, Variation and Mathematical Structure in the Mathematics Teaching Journal.
It seems to me, beginning to think about this, that considering variation is useful right from the start of education.

When we present the classic shapes poster to 3 year olds, we start doing things with variation.
Children get the message, whether we intended it or not, that shapes with straight sides 'sit' with their sides, not their corners, at the bottom. Unless they're 'diamonds'! That rectangles and squares are different things. That triangles and pentagons and octagons are regular. It seems innocent enough, but teachers have some lessons later on undoing these impressions. This is why Christopher Danielson's Which One Doesn't Belong?s are so good. They consider the possible variation, including counter-examples, to help students think about the categories for themselves.
David Butler also has some great quadrilateral posters which reflect the real range of possibilities.
Similarly, when we always write 2+3=5, with the sum on the right, we're not doing justice to the possibilities with this notation. We should  sprinkle in some 5=3+2 versions too.

Often a series of examples leads to the possibility of certain generalisations. For instance, back in this post, I talked about how a set of differences can lead to  noticing about subtraction.
Indeed, it did lead to a conjecture:


The other day I saw this tweet from Duane Habecker:
Putting this series of subtractions next to each other invites noticing - oh look, you can carry on to negative numbers! - and - look! - when you subtract -1, it's just like adding 1. I wonder if it always works like that...?

You could see a 'number string' routine as a way of presenting examples to show the range of  possibilities and asking students to make links and comparisons between them. Take this number string in a 1st Grade (Year 2) lesson with Kristin Gray.
The number of examples is limited; the focus on responding to an unknown in different places in the equation. There's a lot of thought that goes into how the different examples relate to each other.

Another routine that I've seen and used just a little is What's the same? What's different? with two images; there are lots on Twitter with the #samediffmath hashtag. Here's one:

I've thought about variation lots when designing Which one doesn't belong?s, but not calling it variation. I've just had a piece on them, written with Jim Noble, in Mathematics Teaching. and I've got a folder of them.
The design of them is fascinating: how to elicit the most responses, how to allow particular relationships to be noticed. Here, on this Othello board, my theme is half. That's what's the same about them. I could have introduced one where it wasn't a half. So we're mainly looking to arrangement for the differences. Are the two halves 'the same'? How many are there in total? Which colour is 'on top'? And so on.

I want to become more conscious of how we present examples, how we vary them, how we display new relationships in them. I'm now going to be looking out for how variation crops up in various places, trying to make my awareness of it as a theme more systematic.

Friday, 9 March 2018

Être plutĂŽt qu’avoir ?

After Le MaĂźtre est l'Enfant, Estelle and I watched another French education documentary tonight, ĂŠtre plutĂŽt qu’avoir ? -  'To Be rather than to have?' It was a look at education, especially in France, historically. I found the pictures of school before the 19th-century desks-in-rows era interesting. Like this from Pieter Bruegel The Elder.

And then a look at some of the ways that some educators have enriched education for primary-age children: through circle times, philosophy for children, forest school, Montessori classes. Lots to think about again: good to now and again, or even regularly, challenge the way we teach - how much is a product of the relatively short history of public education, and how much is a conscious approach to real education?







We saw Célestin Freinet working the vegetable patch with his students. And some of his 'pedagogical constants', a kind of manifesto:
  1. The child is of the same nature as us [adults].
  2. Being bigger does not necessarily mean being above others.
  3. A child's academic behavior is a function of his constitution, health, and physiological state.
  4. No one - neither the child nor the adult - likes to be commanded by authority.
  5. No one likes to align oneself, because to align oneself is to obey passively an external order.
  6. No one likes to be forced to do a certain job, even if this work does not displease him or her particularly. It is being forced that is paralyzing.
  7. Everyone likes to choose their job, even if this choice is not advantageous.
  8. No one likes to move mindlessly, to act like a robot, that is to do acts, to bend to thoughts that are prescribed in mechanisms in which he does not participate.
  9. We [the teachers] need to motivate the work.
  10. No more scholasticism.
  11. Everyone wants to succeed. Failure is inhibitory, destructive of progress and enthusiasm.
  12. It is not games that are natural to the child, but work.
  13. The normal path of [knowledge] acquisition is not observation, explanation and demonstration, the essential process of the School, but experimental trial and error, a natural and universal process.
  14. Memorization, which the School deals with in so many cases, is applicable and valuable only when it is truly in service of life.
  15. [Knowledge] acquisition does not take place as one sometimes believes, by the study of rules and laws, but by experience. To study these rules and laws in [language], in art, in mathematics, in science, is to place the cart before the horse.
  16. Intelligence is not, as scholasticism teaches, a specific faculty functioning as a closed circuit, independent of the other vital elements of the individual.
  17. The School only cultivates an abstract form of intelligence, which operates outside living reality, by means of words and ideas implanted by memorization.
  18. The child does not like to listen to an ex cathedra lesson.
  19. The child does not tire of doing work that is in line with his life, work which is, so to speak, functional for him.
  20. No one, neither child nor adult, likes control and punishment, which is always considered an attack on one's dignity, especially when exercised in public.
  21. Grades and rankings are always a mistake.
  22. Speak as little as possible.
  23. The child does not like the work of a herd to which the individual has to fold like a robot. He loves individual work or teamwork in a cooperative community.
  24. Order and discipline are needed in class.
  25. Punishments are always a mistake. They are humiliating for all and never achieve the desired goal. They are at best a last resort.
  26. The new life of the School presupposes school cooperation, that is, the management by its users, including the educator, of life and school work.
  27. Class overcrowding is always a pedagogical error.
  28. The current design of large school complexes results in the anonymity of teachers and pupils; It is, therefore, always an error and a hindrance.
  29. The democracy of tomorrow is being prepared by democracy at the School. An authoritarian regime at the School cannot be formative of democratic citizens.
  30. One can only educate in dignity. Respecting children, who must respect their masters, is one of the first conditions for the redemption of the School.
  31. The opposition of the pedagogical reaction, an element of the social and political reaction, is also a constant, with whom we shall have, alas! to reckon unless we are able to avoid or correct it ourselves.
  32. There is also a constant that justifies all our trial and error and authenticates our action: it is the optimistic hope in life.