Education ∪ Math ∪ Technology

Year: 2012 (page 9 of 14)

PISA results from 2000 to 2009 for Canada

I noticed through this blog, that the CBC had published the PISA results for Manitoba (released as charts) for 2000, 2003, 2006, and 2009. I wanted to verify the results they had posted, especially the mathematics data, so I went and looked up the data for myself on the Stats Canada website (which you can access yourself here, here, here, and here). Using this data, I created th graph below, which shows the scores in math for Canada and for each province (get the raw data here).

I’m not sure what this data shows, although I can see some trends. Of course, if I change the scale, the overall trend seems more clear.

It looks to me like overall the results have been somewhat stable, at least at this scale. While the trend in Manitoba definitely looks like a downward turn for the last few years, and this trend is probably statistically significant, overall for Canada, it looks like the results have moved somewhat randomly, as one would expect from year to year.

Culture and counting

Not convinced that there are cultural nuances in how we understand and define math? Watch the following short video (see http://www.culturecognition.com/ for the source) in which a child explains the number system his culture uses to another child.

 

 

There are other areas in which we understand mathematical concepts differently depending on our culture. For example, this recent study suggests that something like ‘numbers come in a certain order’ may be a cultural representation, and not one of which most of us are aware.

One wonders, if we can see such dramatic differences between different cultures in terms of understanding something fundamental like number, how likely is it that there are other differences within our own culture?

My wife, for example, tends to rely on landmarks for navigation, but I tend to rely on an internal map based on the names and numbers of the roads. She and I therefore have a different understanding of how one should navigate. I can remember meeting people who could not read a map (but who were otherwise able to navigate with ease) suggesting that our representations of geographical information may differ greatly between different people.

How does this influence how we should teach?

We didn’t do any math yesterday

Practice makes perfect comic

 

Yesterday, I was covering a colleague’s math class at the last minute, and he had made photocopies of a chapter 1 to 7 review. I looked at the review sheets, and the grade 10 students in front of me, and decided that it was unlikely that the review sheets were going to be useful. I handed them out, and then started putting puzzles up on the board.

 

Seven Bridges problem

The first puzzle I put up was the Seven Bridges of Königsberg problem. Within  a couple of minutes, every student was trying to figure out the path across the 7 bridges that doesn’t cross any of the bridges more than once. Before the students got completely frustrated with this problem (since it is deceptively simple to state, but "difficult" to solve), I put up a couple more problems, including a gem from Dr. Gordon Hamilton. I added the frog hopping problem to the board, and taught two students the game of Nim.

Each problem had some students who were working on it intensely. Every student found some problem which was interesting to them, and almost all students were working in small groups on the problems and puzzles. Eventually, a small group of students gave up on all of the puzzles and worked on the review sheets while the rest of the students continued to work on the puzzles until the end of class.

Some students asked for a hint on the bridge problem, and I led them (through questioning) to Euler’s formulation of graph theory. From this, we discussed that there could be at most one starting spot, and one ending spot, and that only a starting and ending spot could have an odd number of paths leading in and out of it. I then put up the 5 rooms puzzle, which one of the girls said within seconds was unsolveable by applying Euler’s analysis to the graph.

A group of boys worked on the frog problem, and went from struggling to even find a single solution to the 3 frog problem to being able to generalize a solution for n-frogs on either side (and a formula for determining the number of moves for each frog puzzle).

The next day, I spoke to my colleague, and asked him if he was okay that I had not done the worksheet with the students. As expected, he was fine with it. I asked him what the students said. He said that students said that they enjoyed the day before, but one student had said, "We didn’t even do any math yesterday."

I’m not sure I agree with that student, and I’m slightly distressed that he didn’t see the problem solving activities we did as being part of math. What do you think? Are problems like these important in mathematics? If so, why aren’t more of them in our curriculum?

Interesting ways to use Google Apps in the math classroom

I just found this presentation from more than a year ago on some interesting ways to use Google Apps in a mathematics classroom. I noticed that it had been edited slightly, so I did some more edits and thought I would share it here.

You can help edit and curate it here. I could imagine that Google+ would be useful, and that some of the file sharing options through Google Drive have improved, neither of which has made it into this presentation yet.

 

On motivating mathematics education

Here is a funny comic from the Fake Science blog.

Fake science - Use a ruler to find the third side of a triangle

 

The problem is, there is a kernel of truth in this satirical comic. Given most problems we will encounter in life, we would use a ruler to find the third side of a triangle. Obviously I think that there are good reasons to learn the Pythagorean theorem, but for most real life applications, one could draw a careful scale diagram (an incredibly useful skill in itself) and apply ratios to your measurements of your diagrams to find the missing length.

So why do we teach the Pythagorean theorem? Is it because of the power this abstract idea has? Are there other abstract ideas which have equal value? Could you imagine a mathematics curriculum which includes lots of rich abstract ideas, but happens to not include this theorem? How important is this theorem anyway?

 

Unidirectional instructional mediums

 

Derek Muller has done research on the effectiveness of science videos. To summarize his research in brief – when you present only the correct information in a science video without the possible misconceptions that students may have, students learn less (but feel better about the experience) than if you present information in a science video and include the misconceptions.

Of course, we should recognize that this effect probably does not depend on the medium of instruction, only on the nature of the medium. Videos are a unidirectional medium because they present information without the ability of the learner to ask questions. One might guess that any unidirectional medium may have the same effect. So textbooks, lectures, and other unidirectional mediums may suffer from this same deficit; without common misconceptions addressed in these mediums, the learners learn much less than if those misconceptions are addressed.

 

 

Dr. Eric Mazur shares essentially the same message – unidirectional instruction (in his case lecture) – has flaws. He relies on peer instruction and student response devices (clickers) to change the nature of the instruction so that it is more bidirectional (from each student’s perspective). The key here is that he has embedded more opportunities for feedback to reduce the chance that students incorporate the new information they are receiving into their existing misconceptions.

Textbooks (another unidirectional instructional tool) rarely present misconceptions and address them. Most students rarely use their textbooks as a learning resource (at least in k – 12), prefering to rely on the bidirectional instruction their teacher (or parent) provides. This means that the vast majority of information presented in a textbook goes unused. There are some changes to the textbook I’d like to see, which would allow for them to be a more bidirectional learning tool.

While it is clear that the medium of instruction influences the type of cognition that occurs, as Marshall McLuhan has pointed out, it should also be clear that different mediums have similarities in how they affect cognition or learning. If we find out that failing to address misconceptions in video instruction results in poor learning of the concepts, we may be able to transfer this finding to other modes of instruction. If that is the case, then we need to look at our instruction carefully, and ask ourselves, how much opportunity do we give students to address their existing models and resolve conflicts between their misconceptions, and the models we suggest?

Not a math person

Original blueprint

 

Someone I know produced the diagram above in her planning steps to produce the shelves seen below.

 

Finished shelves

 

This person describes herself as "not a math person." What do you think? Is she a math person or not? It worries me that we have all these people walking around thinking they aren’t "math people" when in fact, they quite obviously are. We need to do a better job of explaining the difference between every day mathematical reasoning, which quite a lot of people are good at, and the formal systems of mathematics that have taken generations to develop. 
 

I did professional development all wrong

Last year, I presented a lot on the need to improve mathematics instruction. I had pictures, I had questions, I had effective arguments, and my audience was engaged. I could present like the best of them on some of the ways that we can improve mathematics instruction. What I did not have was effective teaching.

The role of someone involved in professional development for teachers is to help the audience, teachers, improve their practice. It may be that they take part of what you do and use it, and it may be that they attempt to copy your method exactly. The problem is that the typical presentation does little to improve someone’s practice. It may inspire them, it may anger them (I’ve done both), and it may provide some helpful tips, but effective change in practice does not come from someone presenting on their practice. The best you can hope for from a presentation is small, temporary, surface level changes.

Improving one’s practice requires thinking. It requires time spent looking at the context of one’s school, on the way that one approaches one’s own teaching, and on what other practices one can incorporate into one’s own pedagogy. It requires discussion so that the learner can take the ideas they are assimilating and seek clarification and direction.

So instead of spending the entire time I present talking, I give participants much more opportunity to talk. Instead of participants sitting around listening, I give them opportunities to do. The last few workshops I’ve done have been more about conversations. They’ve involved rich, mathematical problem solving activities. They’ve involved teachers having insights, and sharing those insights, often things that never would have occurred to me. I’ve learned much more from my workshop participants than when I was a presenter.

I spent an afternoon talking with my colleagues about computational thinking, how computational thinking really is mathematical thinking, and how if our students get opportunities to program, then they are doing mathematics. My colleagues were working on a particularly challenging problem, and one of them stopped and said, "Okay, I get it. Solving problems is hard. I can see why the kids struggle with this stuff." This kind of insight, not directly related to my objectives, was probably the most valuable insight to come out of that workshop. It never would have happened had I not given participants a chance to think and to do.

The Math Emporium – The Walmart of Higher Education

Does it work? Who cares, as long as it is cheaper!
I recently learned of a massive project at Virginia Tech called the Math Emporium. Here’s a quote from the original article.

The Emporium is the Wal-Mart of higher education, a triumph in economy of scale and a glimpse at a possible future of computer-led learning. Eight thousand students a year take introductory math in a space that once housed a discount department store. Four math instructors, none of them professors, lead seven courses with enrollments of 200 to 2,000. Students walk to class through a shopping mall, past a health club and a tanning salon, as ambient Muzak plays. – Daniel de Vise

Students sit down at computer terminals and read mathematics lessons, and then take quizzes based on those lessons. The idea is compelling for those wishing to reduce the cost of higher education, because if you can successful replace people with computers to teach the classes, you don’t have to worry about benefits, salaries, and other major expenses of a university. According to the article graduation rates for the introductory courses are up, and costs are way down, as the Emporium is almost 1/3 cheaper than the previous model used at Virginia Tech.

So what do the students think? I was recently given a link to a public Facebook page where Virginia Tech staff had linked to the story.I took some screenshots of what a (probably biased) sample of the students think of the Math Emporium, just in case Virginia Tech ever decides to remove the public feedback they got on their Emporium. Here are some quotes from that page.

“How about being taught in actual classrooms… The concept that the Empo improves anything is an outright joke. It’s horrendous that I have to pay exorbitant amounts of money so I can take 30 minute bus rides to this soul-killing place and stare at a computer screen under the guise of “education.” What a load.” ~ Andrew Michael Burns

“[P]aying a lot of money to get no teacher for math. that is what i remember” ~ John Hawley

“None … it was a nightmare & I ended up having to enroll in pre calc & calc at the community college over summer because I couldn’t learn a thing online in math” ~ Amy Domianus

“I remember vividly the obnoxious, intrusive hum of the fluorescent light fixtures; the ‘tutors’ that clearly understood the problem you were asking about, but couldn’t answer your question because they barely spoke English; the feeling of overwhelming despair that seeped into my bones with every second spent glued in front of a screen; the nagging thought that my education was being reduced to an assembly-line process; the vertigo that overtook me as I glanced down the isles and beheld row upon row of workstations stretching into infinity. In my time as a college student, I never experienced anything so degrading, time-wasting, blatantly bureaucratic, and soul-less as the wretched Hell-spawned Math Emporium.” ~ Andrew Lord Wolf

There was one somewhat positive comment on the thread.

“I’m going to go against the crowd and say that I actually really like the math emporium as a place to study. I never took the classes that were solely empo based, but I did take a few that involved having to go and take quizzes. In helping people that have taken empo based classes though, I have realized that the classes aren’t so much about learning calculus as much as it is learning the tricks to the quizzes. There are only a certain number of different types of questions, and most of the questiosn have answer patterns. So basically if you do enough of them, you don’t really even need to know much calculus to be able to do well.

Study wise, I think it’s a great place to get work done. It’s bland enough that you can sit down and do work without too many distractions, and if you take your computer as well as using one of the work stations you have tons of monitor space to use, so you can look through powerpoints and take notes at the same time and such. At the same time though, if you get bored there’s always people there to talk to/take a break with.” ~ Malou Flintsch

I’ve bolded a couple of statements in this quote because they are pretty important. First, Malou never actually took any classes in the Emporium, and she is one of only two positive comments about the experience in the thread. Second, as a tutor for the Emporium, she realized that the classes weren’t about learning calculus as passing quizzes.

I interviewed someone directly who took a number of courses in the Emporium when she was an undergrad at Virginia Tech. Her name is Jessy Irwin, and she works for a technology company that offers online lessons and instructional support for mathematics. She commented that:

  • There was no video explanation, just text on the screen. Often the text on the screen, and the text from her textbook used different terminology, and she would work out the solution to a problem, and then spend 20 minutes figuring which of the multiple choice responses matched her solution.
  • She didn’t feel like part of a community because there was no course community. It was possible, even likely, that the people next to you in the Emporium were working on different courses, or were in a different stage in the same course.
  • Everyone had to be a self-sufficient island. You could put a red cup on top of your monitor, which would tell the roaming assistants that you needed help, but she often had to wait up to 45 minutes for someone to help her, stuck on a single question that she couldn’t skip because of limitations in the software design.
  • She almost hired a tutor to help her through the first year calculus course, which she ended up failing 4 times. She eventually found a math-for-liberal-arts-students course and took and passed it. Notably, no one helped her find this option after her first failure, which suggests a lack of counselling support for this program.
  • She found the Emporium to be the “worst educational experience of her life.”

There are obvious problems with such a program. First, too many students hated the experience, and this is unlikely to have encouraged these students to continue learning mathematics, which is a primary purpose of mathematics courses in university! A second objective of university level mathematics is to help students continue to develop analytical and mathematical reasoning, which it seems unlikely that the Emporium is successful in doing. One does not develop analytical reasoning from guessing which multiple choice answer matches your solution, or learning the tricks to passing the course quizzes. Another purpose of university in general is to help students foster connections with other students, and begin to develop a network of peers that they will carry with them throughout their life. This purpose is not possible when students are isolated from each other so completely.

The two benefits of the Emporium are themselves contestable. Costs may be down for the university, but according to Jessy, many students have paid for private tutoring to get through the Emporium courses, or taken equivalent courses at the local community college instead. This means that some of the students, who are already paying significant tuition fees, are being forced to pay additional fees as a result of this program, which is essentially transfering the cost of instruction from the university to the student. The other benefit – the increased graduation rates – is impossible to compare to the model Virginia Tech used before the Emporium for these courses, since the courses are so different. More important than graduation rates is the amount of mathematical knowledge and reasoning skills gained by the students, for which there appears to be no data.

Unfortunately, the Emporium has spread to about 100 other colleges since it was invented, which suggests that there are hundreds of thousands of students forced to experience it. This kind of reduction of education to what can be easily measured by a computer is dangerous since we could quite possibly end up with many people believing they understand mathematical principles, when in fact they do not.

The worst part of the Emporium? Four of the courses offered in the Math Emporium are required courses for future mathematics educators. Hopefully these educators will be able to see the Emporium for what it is – a poor way to teach mathematics.