Monday, November 18, 2013

PME-NA Part II: Tale of Three Great Tasks


One reason I enjoy going to PME-NA is seeing the work of my colleagues on children’s thinking. Inevitably what arises out of these studies are incredibly rich tasks that teachers can use in their teaching. I might add that these tasks are also good for teachers and prospective teachers to explore as they are learning about the ways children think.
Higinio Dominguez at Michigan State is an excellent interviewer of children-- :)Somewhere between Herb Ginsburg and Mister Rogers. He just gets those kids to talk, and does it with very little interference so what the kids say is remarkably close to what they really think. One thing he routinely does is leave off the question that usually ends the typical work problem. So for instance, when introducing this problem: “Joey has 14 cars. He lost some, so now he has 5 cars," and then asking, "How many cars did he lose?” Higinio says he simply asks, "So what so the problem?" The kids say all sorts of things such as, “Joey should really keep better track of his cars,” or “Probably his brother took them,” or “They are probably just under the bed.” Higinio’s point is that is you want kids to bring in their own personal connections (or resources--this is a much deeper construct) and this approach is one way to give them the opportunity to do that. Eventually the child or children will ask, "How many cars did he lose?" Or the teacher/interviewer can ask, "So how many are under the bed?”
Steven Greenstein, from Montclair State University has been investigating young children’s understanding of geometry, specifically the geometric reasoning involved in topology. He has noted that young children can identify important properties of sameness between 3-d objects. His research methodology included the use of a microworld, Configure, he developed to support children’s exploration on 3-D shapes. It is free and it looks like such a great way to get children to talk about their ways of thinking in geometry. The website includes suggestions for teachers who wish to use the program with their students. Here is the link: PLAYWITH SHAPES.com
Last, this idea comes from some researchers at Virginia Tech, Andrew Norton and Steven Boyce. The task is about unitizing, and children use their thinking about multiplication, and units to solve these problems mentally. I was familiar with the candy roll problem used to develop base ten understanding,
but was unfamiliar with this packing scenario:
A chip is worth 2 cents. When they are packed there are 3 chips to a cup, and 5 cups to a box. How many cents is the box worth? OR If you have 12 cents, how many more cents do you need to make a box? With this scenario, you can change the numbers around, and also you can begin the problem with actual chips, cups, and boxes. Eventually, kids begin to re-unitize and can solve them mentally. The problems can also extend to boxes per crate. I can see a relationship with this task to factoring and even prime numbers as well as fractions and folding problems!

Sunday, November 17, 2013

PMENA 2013 in Chicago Part I: Lacking Legos™


I attended the North American Chapter of the international Group for Psychology of Mathematics Education. Thank goodness we just say "PME-NA" for short!
Anyhow, I attended a session about the parents' role in math education. This investigation focused on activities children do at home that could be resources for the development of young children's learning of math. To introduce herself to the parents the researcher planned a home visit to just talk to them in a more casual way before interviewing about what they do with their kids. What she realized after her home visits was that all but one of the 8 families had lots of access to computers, video games, smart phones, and TV (of course). Electronic access was not an issue at all. 
What she did notice was a lack of blocks and other such building and counting toys. When parents have a limited budget, they do not want to spend lots of money on blocks. She said that when parents have choice between spending dollars on these constructing type of toys (which are expensive) or electronics, they invest in electronics because those will be appealing to their kids in a variety of ways and will still be used as the child grows. The presenter of this research made this comment, “Schools should be interested in providing check out materials of these resources. Also, during school time, kids don’t actually need more time on screens.” She added that since her investigation seems to indicate that blocks and other physical materials are what is lacking in these homes, schools need to protect those spaces where children can be actively engaged in working and playing with physical materials. 
I really enjoyed this insight. It makes sense. Better off kids have lots of Legos and K’nex , and tinker toys and building stuff, for the simple fact that these materials are expensive. The kids that have these toys also have the electronic devices and may not play with them much either.  Maybe Lego needs to start a campaign to get these things into classrooms to counteract the heavy marketing of tablets and smart devices that Gates and Apple seem to be pushing in these early childhood classrooms.