# Contemplate then Calculate

I’m taking a Structured Inquiry course this summer offered by New Visions for Public Schools. As part of the course, we are required to design a Contemplate then Calculate instructional routine and rehearse it with the class. David Wees and Kaitlin Ruggiero have both done some inspiring work with #CthenC routines and much of my motivation comes from them.

If you’re unaware of Contemplate then Calculate, the goal is to get students thinking about mathematical structure. The routine leverages student observations, honors their approaches, and highlights reflections on their own thinking. There is a public collection already created by David, Kaitlin, and the New Visions team.

Reflections:

• I initially planned for this to come at the end of an exponentials unit, but after some discussion, I think it would fit much better at the beginning of the unit – or at least before we discuss exponential equations. One thing I’m great at is having students get overly consumed with procedures, so my hope is to get them thinking instead about the structure of the equation and the relationships that exist within it before any mention of the term “exponential equation.” I want their mathematical insights to drive how we solve these equations…and the entire curriculum.
• To this end, I thought of four strategies that students may use, ranging from guess and check to equating exponents (excluding the one involving logarithms since the task would be presented before they appear). Interestingly, guess and check was not an approach that was adopted much during rehearsal (possibly because they were all math teachers).
• Since my phrasing of the number of solutions was ambiguous, Robin mentioned that students could use a graphical representation to address this. They could reason that only one solution exists because f(x) = 10^(x+5) -1 is one-to-one.
• I also considered how to represent the equation. Specifically, I thought about 100 = 10^(x-5),  10^(x-5) = 100, 100 – 10^(x-5) = 0, or using any other set of constants in place of 99 and 1. All of these alternatives have consequences for how students may approach the problem.
• During the rehearsal, I did a fairly poor job at annotating, which is a critical aspect of the activity because it models student thinking for the rest of the class. Although I anticipated all the strategies while planning, I rushed myself during the process and the result was unclear and unorganized.
• The reflection prompts should be tailored to the goals of the activity. The more specific they are, the more beneficial the reflection.
• I should omit the question (e.g. “find all values of x”) during the flash of the task. This move opens things up for more diverse observations and student thinking.
• An interesting extension was asking what if the 1 wasn’t there? How would this impact our strategy? This is a nice prelude to logarithms.
• Designing this activity made me think about mathematical structure like I never have before. Often times I take student thinking related to structure for granted. This activity helped me better value student understandings of mathematical structure – and how to leverage those understandings to enhance learning.
• One of the most beautiful aspects of this routine is that it goes beyond mere discovery learning. The goal isn’t for students to end up at the same strategy. The idea is to develop fluency and flexibility in their numeracy. It echoes the theme from my current book, Building Powerful Numeracy for Middle and High School Students by Pam Weber Harris.
• All of my planning materials can be found here, which include the anticipated strategies students will use, my planned annotations, the annotations I actually did during the rehearsal, and the slides.

bp

# Summation notation, but way more

I’ve been rethinking all of my lessons this year. My hope has been to get my students to reason more. To think independently. To not be sponges. I’d like to think it’s been working. Here’s a recent lesson on summation notation that showcases this shift.

To open things up, I gave them this.

Super accessible and relevant to summation notation. In the past, I would have chosen a bell ringer that was closely connected to a prior lesson (i.e. review) than the current one. I wanted to provide remediation. I’ve learned this year that a relevant bell ringer is pivotal to any lesson.

Here’s what came next.

Again, very accessible. Last year Jennifer Preissel mentioned the “Stop & Jot” idea as a simple way of getting kids to write and reflect more during a lesson. Here, I gave them five minutes to express, on their own, what they wondered and noticed about the expression. After, they shared with their groups and we discussed as a class. By including “left side” and “right side,” I wanted to focus student responses. There were comments like “the +2 happens in every parenthesis” and “the number next to the +2 is going up by one.” Their observations led us to the brink of directly relating sigma notation to its expanded sum. In the past, I would jump right into defining sigma, the upper and lower limits, argument, etc. There would have been no exploring or thinking on their own.

Next, I ask them to move on to another example with the hope of finding a relationship.

It worked like magic. They see the same pattern from the Stop & Jot and they start to generalize. They have no idea what the “E thing” is, but it’s beginning to settle in how the left and right sides relate to one another. They discuss all of this in their groups. I float around. Observing. Listening. In the past, I would show them how to find this sum and answer their questions. Again, no self-exploration and making meaning of what they see.

Now they are to dissect and interpret.

This lacks clarity. Some students knew to write their interpretation next to the arrows, but many did not. As a checkpoint, we came back together and discussed.

Next: remove the right side.

Things are flowing now. The scaffolds are working. They know the relationship and successfully express the sum. In the past: The students would probably be completing this problem, but instead of using their own insight to drive the work, they’d be following what I said was the correct procedure.

Finish it off.

We come back together one more time to debrief and to address any questions the groups haven’t already. To bring things full circle, I mention the task from the bell ringer. “Ohhh!”

Lastly, on the next page, the proper names are reveled.

We then have just enough time for an exit slip.

This lesson is heavy on notation and I didn’t want to bog them down with symbols. The goal was to find meaning first, then discuss representation. It succeeded. What I miss out on is working in reverse. Namely, using sigma notation to represent a given sum.

What I love most about this lesson has little to do with summation notation. It’s much bigger. It stems from the approach. Bottom up. Using their own insights to help them find meaning. Doing less and allowing them to put the pieces of the puzzle together. This lesson is a microcosm of how I try to teach nowadays, which is much different than in the past. It symbolizes my growth as a teacher, as a learner.

bp