BLOGS WEBSITE

A lot of people introduce the derivative at a point as the slope of the tangent at that point, which to me is quite confusing. It seems to me that the reason we want the derivative is that it is a measure of the slope of our actual function at that point, not the slope of a completely different thing. To me, the thing is that the function itself is pretty much straight if we are close enough to it, so when we’re looking really close, saying it has a slope at this point is a meaningful thing to say.

For years I got at this idea by drawing a little magnifying glass on my function, and a big version nearby to show what you could see through the magnifying glass. But last year I decided to get technology to help me do this dynamically and I made a Desmos graph with a zooming view window that will show you the view on a tiny circle around a point on a curve. (Some of the bells and whistles here were provided with a little help from Andrew Knauft.)

Here’s what the graph looks like, and a link to the graph so you can play with it yourself: https://www.desmos.com/calculator/pa1cudpc07

I’ve used this to help students see that the curve itself really does look straight when you’re very close, and so treating it like it is straight there and saying it has a slope is a reasonable thing to do. Students are usually most impressed and love to play with it. It’s also interesting to put in a function with a kink in it like  |x2-1| to show that the kink never goes away no matter how closely you view the function, so having a single slope there isn’t really reasonable.

Every time I’ve had to search my own twitter account to find the tweet where I shared it, and I couldn’t keep doing that, so here it is in a quick blog post for posterity.

Posted in Isn't maths cool?, Thoughts about maths thinking | Tagged ,
Leave a comment

I created the Number Dress-Up Party puzzle way back in 2017 and every so often I stumble across it again when searching Twitter for other stuff. When I stumbled across it today, I decided it was time to write it up in a blog post.

The puzzle goes like this:

The Number Dress-Up Party

All the numbers have come to a dress-up party in full costume. They all know themselves which costume everyone else is wearing, but you don’t know.

If you pick any two of them and ask them to combine with +, -, × or ÷, they will point out which costume is the correct answer, and they’ll happily do it as often as you want. For example, you might ask for hamburger + bear and they will point to unicorn. (If the answer isn’t at the party, they’ll tell you that too.)

How do you correctly identify the numbers 0, 1, 2 and 3? How do you do it in as few steps as possible?

(Photo from http://www.worldrecordacademy.com/mass/most_mascots_to_do_the_same_dance_Japan_breaks_Guinness_world_record_213225.html)

It is worth clarifying now that when I say “all” numbers I originally meant it to be all the real numbers. (But it is very interesting to think about how the problem is different or even possible if it means all the rational numbers or all the integers or all the natural numbers or some other set of numbers entirely.) It’s also worth pointing out that it is actually possible for you to guarantee that you actually find these numbers — you shouldn’t have the possibility of having to go through all the infinitely many costumes to be sure of finding 0, for example.

It’s also worth clarifying that the rules say you have to ask two different costumes to combine with an operation. If you can see how using two of the same costume might help you identify actual numbers, then you are thinking along some helpful lines. However, the puzzle is much harder and much more interesting if you have to use two different costumes every time.

I love this puzzle so much! The reason I love it is that it forces you to think about numbers and algebra in a completely different way to any other puzzle or problem I have seen. You really need to think about how numbers are related to each other and how they behave under operations in order to figure out a way to correctly identify these numbers from the way the costumes interact.

Also, in order to tell someone about your solution, or even figure it out in the first place, you need to find a way of talking about or writing about this, which is a lot more difficult than it might seem at first glance. I find it really interesting to see how people attack the problem of describing what they are doing in this problem.

The feel of this puzzle to me is the feel of an abstract pure maths course like abstract algebra or number theory or real analysis, where you are digging deep into how numbers work without reference to specific numbers per se. I would love to go into such a course and use this in the first lecture/tute to get students in the right sort of mindset to attack the rest of the course. I’d also love to do an extension to this as an investigation into how the Euclidean Algorithm for natural number division works. To all those people who haven’t had that sort of training I say you are doing what a pure mathematician does when you think about this problem! You never thought it would be so much fun, did you?

Anyway, there is the Number Dress-Up Party puzzle for posterity. There are several different solutions and they are all lovely. Have fun!

PS: If you feel like seeing how people have attacked this problem, and are ok with spoilers, then check out the replies to this tweet.

 

Posted in One Hundred Factorial, Thoughts about maths thinking | Tagged ,
2 Comments

This post was going to be part of the Virtual Conference of Mathematical Flavours, which you can see all the keynote speakers and presentations here: https://samjshah.com/mathematical-flavors-convention-center/. The prompt for all the blog posts that are part of this conference is this: “How does your class move the needle on what your kids think about the doing of math, or what counts as math, or what math feels like, or who can do math?” In the end, it didn’t end up being there, because my computer started dying painfully at the critical time, but I still want to highlight the Virtual Conference anyway because it was a great idea.

There are many things I could have written about this, but I think I will choose one thing that is about my approach in the MLC to student questions. In the MLC everyone is worthy to ask both stupid and smart questions.

My Maths Learning Centre is a place where any student doing coursework at the Uni of Adelaide can visit to talk about their maths learning with a tutor (often me). People come to talk about all aspects of their maths learning in all sorts of places where maths appears, from dividing whole numbers by hand to understanding proofs about continuity of functions between abstract metric spaces. My point here today is that people from both ends of that spectrum and everywhere in between are allowed to ask questions that are about basics and questions that are about deep connections.

Imagine a student who has always been good at maths, who finds things easy and quickly grasps abstract definitions. It is natural for such a student to fold their goodness at maths into their identity, which often means they become extremely embarrassed to show any sign of struggling. They’re supposed to be the smart student and this simple stuff is supposed to be obvious for them. So if they have a question about the basics, they hide it and hope it will come clear eventually.

The thing is, having a question about something simple doesn’t make you stupid, and it doesn’t even make you not smart. Having a question about how to get from line 3 to line 4 is at the very least a sign that you’re paying close enough attention to wonder about that step; having a question about the definition is a sign that you know definitions are important; and having a question about some random bit of algebra or notation you happen to have never seen just shows you want to learn. In my Maths Learning Centre, I try to make it a place where everyone can ask a “stupid” question. Where stupid questions are treated with respect and answered clearly, with encouragement to make sense of what is happening.

Now imagine a student who has always struggled with maths, who just never seems to understand the explanation the teacher is giving the first time, and who struggles to get through the first few of the exercises. It is natural for such a student to fold their badness at maths into their identity, which often means they don’t even try to understand things and just look for some step-by-step instructions they can follow so it will be over with as quickly as possible.

The irony is, they never finish their exercises, so they never get to be part of that part of a maths class where the early finishers ask the deep and involved questions about theory and beyond-curriculum interesting stuff — the very stuff that can make maths a lot more fun. I know for a fact that students who feel they are bad at maths are intelligent people capable of logical and creative thought, and they deserve to ask their deep questions. So in my Maths Learning Centre, I try to make it a place where everyone can ask a “smart” question. If a student who is struggling asks about infinity or quaternions or what my PhD was about, I will damn well discuss it with them. If they look at the work they’re doing and ask how it is connected to some other bit of maths, we’ll explore that together. That curiosity is a treasure to be prized and I will not squash it by saying we have to get on with the assignment now.

And you know what, it turns out that many a basic question is actually a deep and clever question after all. Recently a student who was struggling asked why it was ok to add two equations together. Not one student in my ten years of working at the MLC has ever asked that question! There must be something really special about the person who asks this question, right? And it’s a really deep question about the nature of equality. I want my Maths Learning Centre to be a place were it is okay for everyone to ask a question that is simultaneously stupid and clever.

That’s all I have to say. I believe everyone deserves the chance to ask stupid questions and to ask clever questions and to ask questions that are simultaneously both. They are worthy to have their questions taken seriously and the answers discussed with respect for the humanity and intelligence of the asker. I have to always remind myself to give students the chance to ask these questions when I’m with them, especially students who are struggling to articulate the questions for whatever reason. And maybe if they’re not asking, I’ll sometimes ask the questions for them and we’ll answer them together.

How will you welcome all people in your learning spaces to ask all kinds of questions?

Posted in Being a good teacher, Thoughts about maths thinking | Tagged ,
Leave a comment

Since 2013, the MLC and Writing Centre have been doing a game called Letters and Numbers at Orientation Weeks and Open Days to create interaction with people. I tweeted a photo of one of our sessions during Open Day yesterday and it has attracted a lot of attention, so I thought I might record some […]

Posted in One Hundred Factorial, Other MLC stuff | Tagged
4 Comments

On the 23rd of July 2008, I started my first day as coordinator of the Maths Learning Centre at the University of Adelaide. Today is the 23rd of July 2018 — the ten year anniversary of that first day. (Well, it was the 23rd of July when I started writing this post!)
So much has happened in […]

Posted in Being a good teacher, How people learn (or don't), Isn't maths cool?, Other MLC stuff | Tagged , ,
Leave a comment

I think this will be my last post about Twitter Math Camp (TMC), getting in just before the TMC18 officially starts (though a lot of people are already there tweeting their TMC-eve adventures even as I write).
TMC is a truly remarkable conference, as I have described before, both in 2016 when I wasn’t there, and […]

Posted in Other MLC stuff | Tagged
2 Comments

Here is another blog post in my series of only-a-year-late posts about Twitter Math Camp 2017 (TMC17). In this one I want to talk about the Crochet Coral workshops Megan and I did, but I don’t want to actually talk about the crochet coral. Instead I want to talk about the quietness.
TMC was a wild wild […]

Posted in Education reading, Thoughts about maths thinking | Tagged ,
Leave a comment

A year ago, I went to Twitter Math Camp (TMC) and it was a wonderful experience. TMC is a great conference full of all sorts of opportunities for maths teachers to learn from each other in many ways. The one way I like the best out of all the possibilities is “My Favourite”.
My Favourite is […]

Posted in Being a good teacher | Tagged ,
Leave a comment

Fairy bread, in case you don’t know, is an Australian children’s party food.

Here’s how to make fairy bread: take white bread, spread it with margarine, and sprinkle with hundreds and thousands. Now cut into triangles and serve.
Notes:

It has to be white bread. If you try to make fairy bread with wholemeal bread, or multigrain bread, […]

Posted in One Hundred Factorial, Other MLC stuff | Tagged ,
1 Comment

Last week we were booked in to do Human Markov Chains with several groups of school students, but it turned out there would be a lot fewer of them than we expected, and I didn’t think Human Markov Chains would work very well with under 20 students. I still dearly wanted to do a moving […]

Posted in Being a good teacher, Isn't maths cool? | Tagged ,
Leave a comment