There are numerous aspects of this article that I find very
convincing. First, students should create and use representations to organize,
record, and communicate math because representations are a fundamental way of understanding,
modeling, solving, and communicating complex ideas. Furthermore,
representations should be a vehicle for exploration and a tool for
understanding, explaining and justifying. Representations should not be a goal
or final product.
Second, representations improve mathematical learning, thinking,
and ability because brains work better with representational patterns. The
article’s example about memorizing the Fibonacci sequence visibly demonstrates
this idea. It is almost impossible to memorize this sequence before recognizing
the pattern but is very possible, even easy, afterwards.
Third, I agree that multiple representations make learning
easier because in my work as a math tutor, I regularly have students that require
alternative explanations in order to grasp a concept. Explaining an idea using
a different or non-standard approach is often effective when the initial
explanation has failed. Similarly, math is better understood with
representations that are concrete, tangible manifestations. This is especially
true when introducing a new, mathematical idea because this allows for building
on top of what is already understood and makes connections explicit.
Fourth, I agree that mathematical learning benefits from
social interaction with peers and teachers in order to solve problems. This matches
the conclusions drawn from the classroom videos we saw contrasting passive math
learning and interactive, assertive math learning.
One mathematical representation that was not mentioned in this
article is the representation of perfect squares and their visualization or
representation as surface areas. This representation can be both conceptual and
concrete. It is a valuable tool for understanding the connection between
perfect square numbers, which can be externally seen using tiles aligned to
make a square, and surface area. This idea can be extended to multiplying a variety
of lengths and widths to extend the application to surface areas of rectangles
and then other more complicated shapes like circles and triangles and then
possibly volumes as well.
I would teach this idea with tiny squares that can be put together to make bigger squares and extend this idea to the real world with concepts like the square footage of a room or house. Then, we could use more abstract mathematical ideas to determine the real world value of square footage in different neighborhoods. We could determine how the value of square footage varies from place to place. This exercise would also be valuable to students interested in real estate work, which can be very profitable. It also has value when comparing two homes for purchasing considerations.
So many interesting ideas here! I am very interested in the ways that our minds prefer sensory patterns (visual, but also sonic, movement-oriented, play-based -- using all the senses) to make sense of mathematical patterning. In fact, I am pretty sure that mathematical patterns originate in sensory patterns, and then get extended beyond these through our methods of mathematical thinking, holding some things invariant and varying others. The square numbers/ squares example is a very good one, and you might want to try this out in your own teaching. It is astounding how many people never actually learn that numbers raised to the power two have anything to do with actual squares (or numbers ^3 with cubes, for that matter!) And then there are triangular numbers, with their own beauty...
ReplyDelete