1. Introduction
2. Lesson 2 Part 1 -- Object-Oriented Programming in Java
3. Update on Downloading Java
4. My Most Popular Post of the Last 12 Months
5. Another Rapoport Math Problem
6. Barry Garelick -- Dueling Distance Learning Posts
7. Grading in California Districts
8. Grading at the Old Charter School
9. Reblogging for Today
10. Conclusion
Introduction
Today is May 5th, also known as Cinco de Mayo. It commemorates the Battle of Puebla in 1862, when the Mexican forces defeated the invading French army. The holiday falls on a Tuesday this year, which is perfect timing for Taco Tuesday. And I am celebrating both this year with some tacos.
This is also Teacher Appreciation Week. It's always the first full week of May, with the Tuesday of that week -- today -- being Teacher Appreciation Day. The week was chosen to be just before the last day of school, in order to appreciate teachers for their work during school year that's about to end.
It's always been one of my favorite weeks of the year to sub -- indeed, I recall that last year, one school I subbed at served a special meal in the teacher's lounge everyday that week. Oh, and the local MLB teams would have discounted tickets for school employees.
But of course, all that's different this year -- due to the coronavirus, the end of the school year is wiped out well before we make it to Teacher Appreciation Week, and of course no sports are being played in front of any fans at all, much less any teachers. Still, there was a Google Doodle yesterday to celebrate the special week, so we haven't been completely forgotten.
There's yet another thing going on today -- the so-called "Giving Tuesday." The real Giving Tuesday is the day after Cyber Monday, and is the culmination of the week where nearly everyday has a name (starting with Black/Drinks Wednesday and Thanksgiving/Gray Thursday). But suddenly, a second Giving Tuesday has been declared -- likely because of the virus, so much more giving to charity is needed now.
I have plenty of things to discuss in today's post. At the end of my last post, I announced what my new district will be doing about grades due to the coronavirus closure. And so this is as good a time as any to have another traditionalists' post, since the traditionalists have much to say about distance learning and grades.
But of course, we'll also be proceeding with Lesson 2 of our study of Java. Let's dive straight into coding, since that's the most important thing I'm doing right now.
Lesson 2 Part 1 -- Object-Oriented Programming in Java
Here is the link to today's lesson:
http://101.lv/learn/Java/ch2.htm
Lesson 2 of Laura Lemay's Teach Yourself Java in 21 Days! is called "Object-Oriented Programming in Java." Here's how it begins:
Object-oriented programming (OOP) is one of the biggest programming ideas of recent years, and you might worry that you must spend years learning all about object-oriented programming methodologies and how they can make your life easier than The Old Way of programming. It all comes down to organizing your programs in ways that echo how things are put together in the real world.
Lemay tells us that if we're already familiar with object-oriented programming -- which I am, of course -- most of this will be "old hat" to me. So I will skip over large parts of this lesson -- but if you need to know more about object-oriented programming, you can read her directly at the about link.
I will post her analogy of object-oriented programming being like Legos:
Consider, if you will, Legos. Legos, for those who do not spend much time with children, are small plastic building blocks in various colors and sizes. They have small round bits on one side that fit into small round holes on other Legos so that they fit together snugly to create larger shapes. With different Lego parts (Lego wheels, Lego engines, Lego hinges, Lego pulleys), you can put together castles, automobiles, giant robots that swallow cities, or just about anything else you can imagine. Each Lego part is a small object that fits together with other small objects in predefined ways to create other larger objects. That is roughly how object-oriented programming works: putting together smaller elements to build larger ones.
Two key vocabulary terms are defined here -- classes and objects:
When you write a program in an object-oriented language, you don't define actual objects. You define classes of objects, where a class is a template for multiple objects with similar features. Classes embody all the features of a particular set of objects. For example, you might have a Tree class that describes the features of all trees (has leaves and roots, grows, creates chlorophyll). The Tree class serves as an abstract model for the concept of a tree-to reach out and grab, or interact with, or cut down a tree you have to have a concrete instance of that tree. Of course, once you have a tree class, you can create lots of different instances of that tree, and each different tree instance can have different features (short, tall, bushy, drops leaves in autumn), while still behaving like and being immediately recognizable as a tree (see Figure 2.1).
No, I'm not posting "Figure 2.1" here -- you'll have to click on the link to see the figure.
Notice that Lemay includes the following "tip" here:
If you're used to programming in C, you can think of a class as sort of creating a new composite data type by using struct and typedef. Classes, however, can provide much more than just a collection of data, as you'll discover in the rest of today's lesson.
The language that I learned at UCLA is C++, not C. As its name implies, C++ is related to C -- it's considered to be an extension of C. In fact, C is not considered to be an object-oriented language, while C++ is. C++ has full classes, not just "struct" (structures) and "typedef" (defined types).
Let's continue:
Every class you write in Java has two basic features: attributes and behavior. In this section you'll learn about each one as it applies to a theoretical simple class called Motorcycle. To finish up this section, you'll create the Java code to implement a representation of a motorcycle.
I notice that Lemay makes another reference to C++ here:
To define an object's behavior, you create methods, a set of Java statements that accomplish some task. Methods look and behave just like functions in other languages but are defined and accessible solely inside a class. Java does not have functions defined outside classes (as C++ does).
Oh, so that explains why I was so confused with the Hello World program from last week. In Java, all functions must be defined in a class, even the main function. On the other hand, in the C++ version of Hello World, main is not the member of any class.
Also, we see that what Java calls a "method" is equivalent to what C++ calls a "function," BlooP calls a "procedure," and Pascal calls either a function or a procedure.
Here's the first listing in this lesson:
By the way, I notice that just like C++, there's a difference between == and =. I might as well explain it here for those who don't know. The double == means "equality test" and the single = means "assignment to a variable." So the method says, if engineState equals true, then print that the engine is already on, otherwise assign true to engineState and print that it's now on.
In Pascal, the single = is equality and the symbol := means assignment. BlooP and TI-BASIC are similar in that = also means equality and an arrow is used for assignment. In Mocha BASIC the = sign is confusingly used for equality and assignment -- in theory, the word LET should be used before an assignment, but in reality the word isn't needed.
Update on Downloading Java
Another Rapoport Math Problem
There's not much Geometry on the Rapoport calendar this week. But let's look at today's problem anyway, a nice segue from the Java/internet part of my post to the math part.
Today on her Daily Epsilon of Math 2020, Rebecca Rapoport writes:
The maximum x such that 5^x divides 400,000
To solve this problem, let's just find the prime factorization of the number in question:
400,000 = 4 * 100,000
= 2^2 * 10^5
= 2^2 * 2^5 * 5^5
= 2^7 * 5^5
Therefore the desired exponent of five is 5 -- and of course, today's date is the fifth. Indeed, the factor 5^5 almost looks like the date 5/5, Cinco de Mayo.
This problem is so short that I almost want to do another one in today's post. But I won't -- let's keep this section of the post short, since the Java and traditionalists' sections are so long.
Barry Garelick -- Dueling Distance Learning Posts
Our main traditionalist, Barry Garelick, posted twice last week -- and he seems to contradict himself in the two posts. In his April 26th post, he claims that online learning is inferior to in-person learning:
https://traditionalmath.wordpress.com/2020/04/26/nothing-to-see-here-dept-3/
But in his April 30th post, Garelick claims that distance learning is superior:
https://traditionalmath.wordpress.com/2020/04/30/the-truth-and-the-excuse-dept/
Do the other traditionalists believe that distance learning causes math to be taught more traditionally, or less so? We can guess just by checking which comment thread they're posting in. On the side of "online = less traditional" are Chester Draws and Wayne Bishop.
Chester Draws:
Draws also mentions operations, as in surgery -- it's clearly better for surgeons to have actual background knowledge in medicine than be forced to rely on Google. The problem here is that it's not as obvious that what's true for medicine holds for mathematics -- especially secondary-level math beyond arithmetic. Many people believe that no one needs to know any math beyond arithmetic, while those same people admit that surgeons need to know medicine. It then follows that surgery should be taught traditionally so that students gain knowledge, while math beyond arithmetic shouldn't be taught traditionally since knowledge of it isn't as important.
The same applies when Draws mentions "grit and creativity and sustained focus." It's OK to give students hard work if it's in English or science or medicine that people use in the real world, but it's not OK if it's math beyond arithmetic that no one uses in the real world. (And before you say that higher math is indeed used in the real world, what matters is what the students believe -- specifically the ones who leave traditionalist math assignments blank.)
The other commenter, Wayne Bishop, writes:
Wayne Bishop:
Beautiful Sunshine (BS) has so many forms. James Tranton has been pushing this one for a long time.
The name "Beautiful Sunshine" is clearly sarcastic -- those initials give it away. Bishop disagrees with Tranton, the author of the article linked above, because Bishop is a traditionalist and Tranton clearly isn't. Suffice it to say that Bishop agrees with Draws above.
Meanwhile, in the pro-distance learning thread is Garelick's main commenter, SteveH:
SteveH:
This seems to be the fuzzy educator goal all along – for parents/tutors/internet to do the dirty work that let’s them do the fun, creative stuff. It’s not like they don’t value skills. It’s just that they don’t want to do it themselves. Also, more is more and they can take credit for all of the home help, but claim that it was their work that added the real understanding.
Here SteveH lumps "internet" with "tutors" as sources of effective traditionalist instruction. Notice that Garelick mentions "group work/collaboration" as examples of anti-traditionalist teaching, and I must admit that to the extent that less group work is possible in an online class, the online classes are that much more traditionalist.
So whose side am I on -- Draws/Bishop or SteveH? Well, their point of contention is whether online or in-person is more effective at providing traditionalist instruction. Since I'm not a traditionalist, I won't use traditionalism to decide which mode of instruction is superior. (Of course I'm biased -- as a substitute teacher I'm paid for in-person instruction, but not for online instruction. Therefore I'm in favor of in-person instruction.)
I have plenty of things to discuss in today's post. At the end of my last post, I announced what my new district will be doing about grades due to the coronavirus closure. And so this is as good a time as any to have another traditionalists' post, since the traditionalists have much to say about distance learning and grades.
But of course, we'll also be proceeding with Lesson 2 of our study of Java. Let's dive straight into coding, since that's the most important thing I'm doing right now.
Lesson 2 Part 1 -- Object-Oriented Programming in Java
Here is the link to today's lesson:
http://101.lv/learn/Java/ch2.htm
Lesson 2 of Laura Lemay's Teach Yourself Java in 21 Days! is called "Object-Oriented Programming in Java." Here's how it begins:
Object-oriented programming (OOP) is one of the biggest programming ideas of recent years, and you might worry that you must spend years learning all about object-oriented programming methodologies and how they can make your life easier than The Old Way of programming. It all comes down to organizing your programs in ways that echo how things are put together in the real world.
Lemay tells us that if we're already familiar with object-oriented programming -- which I am, of course -- most of this will be "old hat" to me. So I will skip over large parts of this lesson -- but if you need to know more about object-oriented programming, you can read her directly at the about link.
I will post her analogy of object-oriented programming being like Legos:
Consider, if you will, Legos. Legos, for those who do not spend much time with children, are small plastic building blocks in various colors and sizes. They have small round bits on one side that fit into small round holes on other Legos so that they fit together snugly to create larger shapes. With different Lego parts (Lego wheels, Lego engines, Lego hinges, Lego pulleys), you can put together castles, automobiles, giant robots that swallow cities, or just about anything else you can imagine. Each Lego part is a small object that fits together with other small objects in predefined ways to create other larger objects. That is roughly how object-oriented programming works: putting together smaller elements to build larger ones.
Two key vocabulary terms are defined here -- classes and objects:
When you write a program in an object-oriented language, you don't define actual objects. You define classes of objects, where a class is a template for multiple objects with similar features. Classes embody all the features of a particular set of objects. For example, you might have a Tree class that describes the features of all trees (has leaves and roots, grows, creates chlorophyll). The Tree class serves as an abstract model for the concept of a tree-to reach out and grab, or interact with, or cut down a tree you have to have a concrete instance of that tree. Of course, once you have a tree class, you can create lots of different instances of that tree, and each different tree instance can have different features (short, tall, bushy, drops leaves in autumn), while still behaving like and being immediately recognizable as a tree (see Figure 2.1).
No, I'm not posting "Figure 2.1" here -- you'll have to click on the link to see the figure.
Notice that Lemay includes the following "tip" here:
If you're used to programming in C, you can think of a class as sort of creating a new composite data type by using struct and typedef. Classes, however, can provide much more than just a collection of data, as you'll discover in the rest of today's lesson.
The language that I learned at UCLA is C++, not C. As its name implies, C++ is related to C -- it's considered to be an extension of C. In fact, C is not considered to be an object-oriented language, while C++ is. C++ has full classes, not just "struct" (structures) and "typedef" (defined types).
Let's continue:
Every class you write in Java has two basic features: attributes and behavior. In this section you'll learn about each one as it applies to a theoretical simple class called Motorcycle. To finish up this section, you'll create the Java code to implement a representation of a motorcycle.
I notice that Lemay makes another reference to C++ here:
To define an object's behavior, you create methods, a set of Java statements that accomplish some task. Methods look and behave just like functions in other languages but are defined and accessible solely inside a class. Java does not have functions defined outside classes (as C++ does).
Oh, so that explains why I was so confused with the Hello World program from last week. In Java, all functions must be defined in a class, even the main function. On the other hand, in the C++ version of Hello World, main is not the member of any class.
Also, we see that what Java calls a "method" is equivalent to what C++ calls a "function," BlooP calls a "procedure," and Pascal calls either a function or a procedure.
Here's the first listing in this lesson:
Listing 2.1. The Motorcycle.java file.
1:class Motorcycle {
2:
3: String make;
4: String color;
5: boolean engineState = false;
6:
7: void startEngine() {
8: if (engineState == true)
9: System.out.println("The engine is already on.");
10: else {
11: engineState = true;
12: System.out.println("The engine is now on.");
13: }
14: }
15:}
We learn that this class contains three attributes represented by the member variables -- make and color, which are Strings, and the engineState, which is a Boolean. And for behavior, there is one method called startEngine.By the way, I notice that just like C++, there's a difference between == and =. I might as well explain it here for those who don't know. The double == means "equality test" and the single = means "assignment to a variable." So the method says, if engineState equals true, then print that the engine is already on, otherwise assign true to engineState and print that it's now on.
In Pascal, the single = is equality and the symbol := means assignment. BlooP and TI-BASIC are similar in that = also means equality and an arrow is used for assignment. In Mocha BASIC the = sign is confusingly used for equality and assignment -- in theory, the word LET should be used before an assignment, but in reality the word isn't needed.
In the next listing, the main method is added:
Listing 2.2. The main() method for Motorcycle.java.
1: public static void main (String args[]) {
2: Motorcycle m = new Motorcycle();
3: m.make = "Yamaha RZ350";
4: m.color = "yellow";
5: System.out.println("Calling showAtts...");
6: m.showAtts();
7: System.out.println("--------");
8: System.out.println("Starting engine...");
9: m.startEngine();
10: System.out.println("--------");
11: System.out.println("Calling showAtts...");
12: m.showAtts();
13: System.out.println("--------");
14: System.out.println("Starting engine...");
15: m.startEngine();
16:}Let's end Part One of this lesson with the final listing for the Motorcycle class:
Listing 2.3. The final version of Motorcycle.java.
1: class Motorcycle {
2:
3: String make;
4: String color;
5: boolean engineState;
6:
7: void startEngine() {
8: if (engineState == true)
9: System.out.println("The engine is already on.");
10: else {
11: engineState = true;
12: System.out.println("The engine is now on.");
13: }
14: }
15:
16: void showAtts() {
17: System.out.println("This motorcycle is a "
18: + color + " " + make);
19: if (engineState == true)
20: System.out.println("The engine is on.");
21: else System.out.println("The engine is off.");
22: }
23:
24: public static void main (String args[]) {
25: Motorcycle m = new Motorcycle();
26: m.make = "Yamaha RZ350";
27: m.color = "yellow";
28: System.out.println("Calling showAtts...");
29: m.showAtts();
30: System.out.println("------");
31: System.out.println("Starting engine...");
32: m.startEngine();
33: System.out.println("------");
34: System.out.println("Calling showAtts...");
35: m.showAtts();
36: System.out.println("------");
37: System.out.println("Starting engine...");
38: m.startEngine();
39: }
40:}Let's follow along main to see what it does. First, we define a new Motorcycle object, a yellow Yamaha RZ350. We show its attributes. Then we start the engine and show its attributes again. Finally, we try starting the engine again, only to find that it's already on. This main method is often called a "driver" -- no pun intended. It's called a "driver" even if it has nothing to do with Motorcycles.
I notice that in Listing 2.1, engineState starts out as false (default value). But in Listing 2.3, it's not given a value. Thus I wonder whether the engine is on or off when showAtts is called for the first time.
But now you might ask, have I downloaded Java yet so that I can implement this Motorcycle class for real?
Unfortunately, I haven't. Recall what Lemay wrote in the last lesson -- I must download both a Java interpreter and a Java compiler. I linked to a website that suggested several places to download compilers from, but the interpreter must be downloaded from the Java website itself. Oh, as I found out, as for interpreters, there exist both Java Development Kits (JDK) and Java Runtime Environments (JRE). It appears that if I've used Java on my system before then a JRE is sufficient -- otherwise I must download a full JDK.
When I try downloading a JDK, I just end up with a bunch of folders that I can't figure out. And I can't download a compiler yet, because I must download the JDK first. If the folders of the JDK aren't correct, then the compiler download will keep giving me errors.
And I still think that part of the problem is the age of my computer -- after four years, the computer is officially old. Recall that this week, the Google Fischinger player ran slow. So far, all of the other Doodle games run well on my system, including the other musical one, the theremin -- perhaps instead of Fischinger music, I should post theremin music for this Doodle. Also, today's Loteria Doodle runs well -- the Mexican bingo game was first posted on December 9th, its 100th anniversary. It makes its grand return to Google just in time for Cinco de Mayo.
But there's one more Google app that runs extremely slowly on my old system -- the new Blogger interface. Last night, the new interface kicked in -- and it takes forever for me to write today's post! For my next post I'm returning to the "classic Blogger" interface so I can type more quickly.
And so even though I'm starting to figure out Java syntax and distinguish it from C++, it's not enough unless I figure out how to download all the software I need so I can write some actual code.
My Most Popular Post of the Last 12 Months
My Most Popular Post of the Last 12 Months
If the schools had still been open, yesterday would have been the Chapter 15 Test. Thus today is the day to revisit my post with the most hits.
Last year, I announced that my most popular was an SBAC Prep post. This year, the post with the most hits by far is -- once again, an SBAC Prep post, just a few weeks after last year's announcement post:
SBAC Practice Test Questions 27-28
I'm not sure why this post is so popular. I assume it's because many teachers are searching for SBAC review material, but why these particular questions?
This post has as many hits as the next three combined:
I'm not sure why this post is so popular. I assume it's because many teachers are searching for SBAC review material, but why these particular questions?
This post has as many hits as the next three combined:
In fact, the top seven posts are all SBAC Prep. This year I'm not posting my SBAC Prep posts, especially with the state tests cancelled. (Now I'm curious as to which posts will get the next posts next year, now that SBAC Prep is out of the picture.)
Rounding out the top ten are three summer posts -- my first three posts on "natural geometry. This is my attempt to unify Euclidean and spherical geometry. I'm glad that spherical geometry is still drawing some interest.
Meanwhile, here is my top Geometry post:
It's odd that a chapter test would draw the most hits. Perhaps some teachers decided to give my Chapter 5 Test in class. I also wrote about a chapter from one of Ian Stewart's books (on logic and set theory) as well as the traditionalists' debate, and so it might have been one of these topics that drew eyeballs.
The next two Geometry posts were both in February -- Lessons 11-2 and 12-1. Both of these included activities that require graph paper, which is why they drew hits. The Lesson 12-1 activity on dilations first came from another teacher's website, so we can see why that type of activity may be popular.
Normally I like to reblog my most popular post -- and I will, even though it's about the now-cancelled SBAC. This is what I wrote last year about Questions 27-28 on the SBAC Practice Test:
Question 27 of the SBAC Practice Exam is on quadrilaterals:
In the given figure, quadrilateral ABCD is a rectangle, and quadrilateral ACED is a parallelogram.
Ted claims that the two shaded triangles [ABC and DCE] are congruent. Is Ted's claim correct? Include all work and/or reasoning necessary to either prove the two triangles congruent or to disprove Ted's claim.
This is a Geometry question. Let's try to come up with a two-column proof of Ted's claim:
Given: Quadrilateral ABCD is a rectangle, and quadrilateral ACED is a parallelogram.
Prove: Triangle ABC = DCE.
Proof:
Statements Reasons
1. bla, bla, bla 1. Given
2. ABCD is a pgram. 2. A rectangle is a parallelogram.
3. AB = DC, AC = DE 3. Opposite sides of a pgram are congruent.
4.AB | | DC, AC | | DE 4. Opposite sides of a pgram are parallel.
5. Angle BAC = ACD, 5. Alternate Interior Angles (parallel line consequences)
Angle ACD = CDE
6. Angle BAC = CDE 6. Transitive Property of Congruence
7. Triangle ABC = DCE 7. SAS Congruence Theorem [steps 3,6,3]
This proof is sound, but it's tricky to enter a two-column proof into the SBAC. Most likely, the SBAC expects students to enter a paragraph proof into the box. We might try the following:
Paragraph Proof:
Since ABCD is a rectangle, it's also a parallelogram. Since opposite sides of a parallelogram are congruent, we have AB = DC and AC = DE. Since opposite sides of a parallelogram are also parallel by definition,AB | | DC and AC | | DE. This implies that alternate interior angles BAC and ACD are congruent, as are ACD and CDE. By the Transitive Property of Congruence, BAC = CDE. Therefore,
Triangles ABC and DCE are congruent by SAS. QED
It's interesting to think of this problem in terms of transformations. Notice that if a diagonal divides a parallelogram into two triangles, then a 180-degree rotation about the midpoint of the diagonal maps one triangle to the other. Thus a 180-degree rotation about the midpoint ofAC maps Triangle ABC to CDA, and likewise a half-turn about the midpoint of CD maps CDA to DCE. So the composite of two isometries (itself an isometry) maps ABC to DCE, therefore these triangles are congruent. (The composite of two half-turns is always a translation.) Even though the Common Core is all about isometries, using this to answer the SBAC question is definitely not recommended.
Unfortunately, neither the girl nor the guy from the Pre-Calc class supplies the correct proof. The girl marks the congruence relations AD = BC and AB = DC on her paper, then proclaims "Yes correct." The guy doesn't even attempt this problem.
Both of these are Pre-Calc juniors. Neither has sat in a Geometry classroom in two years, since the end of their freshman year. So it's likely that both have forgotten how to write two-column proofs. These students need a refresher on Geometry proofs in order to be successful.
The marks on the girl's paper, by the way, suggests another valid proof based on SSS. If she had drawn in the congruence relations on the sides of parallelogram ACED, she would have had enough information to prove the triangles congruent:
Proof:
Statements Reasons
1. bla, bla, bla 1. Given
2. ABCD is a pgram. 2. A rectangle is a parallelogram.
3. AB = DC, AC = DE, 3. Opposite sides of a pgram are congruent.
BC = AD, AD = CE
4. BC = CE 4. Transitive Property of Congruence
5. Triangle ABC = DCE 5. SSS Congruence Property [steps 3,3,4]
This might be a better proof to show Algebra II or Pre-Calc juniors before the SBAC, since we don't have to remind them what Alternate Interior Angles are. On the other hand, my original proof is excellent for Geometry students before the final, since we want to remind them what Alternate Interior Angles are.
Question 28 of the SBAC Practice Exam is on nonlinear functions:
Choose the domain for which each function is defined.
[The four functions are f (x) = (x + 4)/x, f (x) = x/(x + 4), f (x) = x(x + 4), 4/(x^2 + 8x + 16). The possible domains are all real numbers, x != 0, x != 4, x != -4. Here the "!=" means "does not equal" in ASCII and several computer languages.]
These functions are not linear. It will be hard-pressed to consider this an Algebra I question -- even though many texts (such as the Glencoe Algebra I text) contains a lesson on rational functions (Lesson 11-2), many teachers (including those in our district) skip Chapter 11 altogether. Thus even though students don't have to graph anything, this is mostly likely considered an Algebra II problem.
The first function has x in the denominator, so its domain is x != 0.
The second function has x + 4 in the denominator, so its domain is x != -4.
The third function has 1 in the denominator, so its domain is all real numbers.
The fourth function has (x + 4)^2 in the denominator, so its domain is x != -4.
Today is an activity day. The activity for Question 27 comes from Lesson 7-6 of the U of Chicago Geometry text, since this is the lesson on properties of a parallelogram and congruent triangles. The Exploration Question here is on congruent triangles in a regular pentagon. The activity for Question 28 comes from Lesson 13-4 of the U of Chicago Algebra I text, "Function Language," since this lesson discusses the domain and range of a function -- including rational functions like x/(x + 4). The Exploration Question here is about the range of the absolute value function. It's a great question for Common Core, since it involves translating the function up and down.
The guy from the Pre-Calc correctly answers all parts of this question. But the girl marks two boxes for the first part -- x != 0 and x != -4 -- and none for the second part. It could be that she just marks the answer for the second function in the first line instead. I'm not quite sure what would happen on the SBAC interface if a student tries to mark two answers in the same row -- it could be that each row is a radio button where only one box can be marked at a time. This would protect the girl from making this sort of mistake on the computer.
It's also interesting to see the two students' thought process for the fourth function. The guy factors the denominator as (x + 4)^2, then starts to mark x != 4 before crossing it out. On the other hand, the girl doesn't factor at all and just plugs x = -4 into the denominator instead. The guy's method is considered more sound, since the girl is relying on the multiple choice format. She would have had trouble with this question if she'd been asked to state the domain without multiple choice.
In the given figure, quadrilateral ABCD is a rectangle, and quadrilateral ACED is a parallelogram.
Ted claims that the two shaded triangles [ABC and DCE] are congruent. Is Ted's claim correct? Include all work and/or reasoning necessary to either prove the two triangles congruent or to disprove Ted's claim.
This is a Geometry question. Let's try to come up with a two-column proof of Ted's claim:
Given: Quadrilateral ABCD is a rectangle, and quadrilateral ACED is a parallelogram.
Prove: Triangle ABC = DCE.
Proof:
Statements Reasons
1. bla, bla, bla 1. Given
2. ABCD is a pgram. 2. A rectangle is a parallelogram.
3. AB = DC, AC = DE 3. Opposite sides of a pgram are congruent.
4.
5. Angle BAC = ACD, 5. Alternate Interior Angles (parallel line consequences)
Angle ACD = CDE
6. Angle BAC = CDE 6. Transitive Property of Congruence
7. Triangle ABC = DCE 7. SAS Congruence Theorem [steps 3,6,3]
This proof is sound, but it's tricky to enter a two-column proof into the SBAC. Most likely, the SBAC expects students to enter a paragraph proof into the box. We might try the following:
Paragraph Proof:
Since ABCD is a rectangle, it's also a parallelogram. Since opposite sides of a parallelogram are congruent, we have AB = DC and AC = DE. Since opposite sides of a parallelogram are also parallel by definition,
Triangles ABC and DCE are congruent by SAS. QED
It's interesting to think of this problem in terms of transformations. Notice that if a diagonal divides a parallelogram into two triangles, then a 180-degree rotation about the midpoint of the diagonal maps one triangle to the other. Thus a 180-degree rotation about the midpoint of
Unfortunately, neither the girl nor the guy from the Pre-Calc class supplies the correct proof. The girl marks the congruence relations AD = BC and AB = DC on her paper, then proclaims "Yes correct." The guy doesn't even attempt this problem.
Both of these are Pre-Calc juniors. Neither has sat in a Geometry classroom in two years, since the end of their freshman year. So it's likely that both have forgotten how to write two-column proofs. These students need a refresher on Geometry proofs in order to be successful.
The marks on the girl's paper, by the way, suggests another valid proof based on SSS. If she had drawn in the congruence relations on the sides of parallelogram ACED, she would have had enough information to prove the triangles congruent:
Proof:
Statements Reasons
1. bla, bla, bla 1. Given
2. ABCD is a pgram. 2. A rectangle is a parallelogram.
3. AB = DC, AC = DE, 3. Opposite sides of a pgram are congruent.
BC = AD, AD = CE
4. BC = CE 4. Transitive Property of Congruence
5. Triangle ABC = DCE 5. SSS Congruence Property [steps 3,3,4]
This might be a better proof to show Algebra II or Pre-Calc juniors before the SBAC, since we don't have to remind them what Alternate Interior Angles are. On the other hand, my original proof is excellent for Geometry students before the final, since we want to remind them what Alternate Interior Angles are.
Question 28 of the SBAC Practice Exam is on nonlinear functions:
Choose the domain for which each function is defined.
[The four functions are f (x) = (x + 4)/x, f (x) = x/(x + 4), f (x) = x(x + 4), 4/(x^2 + 8x + 16). The possible domains are all real numbers, x != 0, x != 4, x != -4. Here the "!=" means "does not equal" in ASCII and several computer languages.]
These functions are not linear. It will be hard-pressed to consider this an Algebra I question -- even though many texts (such as the Glencoe Algebra I text) contains a lesson on rational functions (Lesson 11-2), many teachers (including those in our district) skip Chapter 11 altogether. Thus even though students don't have to graph anything, this is mostly likely considered an Algebra II problem.
The first function has x in the denominator, so its domain is x != 0.
The second function has x + 4 in the denominator, so its domain is x != -4.
The third function has 1 in the denominator, so its domain is all real numbers.
The fourth function has (x + 4)^2 in the denominator, so its domain is x != -4.
Today is an activity day. The activity for Question 27 comes from Lesson 7-6 of the U of Chicago Geometry text, since this is the lesson on properties of a parallelogram and congruent triangles. The Exploration Question here is on congruent triangles in a regular pentagon. The activity for Question 28 comes from Lesson 13-4 of the U of Chicago Algebra I text, "Function Language," since this lesson discusses the domain and range of a function -- including rational functions like x/(x + 4). The Exploration Question here is about the range of the absolute value function. It's a great question for Common Core, since it involves translating the function up and down.
The guy from the Pre-Calc correctly answers all parts of this question. But the girl marks two boxes for the first part -- x != 0 and x != -4 -- and none for the second part. It could be that she just marks the answer for the second function in the first line instead. I'm not quite sure what would happen on the SBAC interface if a student tries to mark two answers in the same row -- it could be that each row is a radio button where only one box can be marked at a time. This would protect the girl from making this sort of mistake on the computer.
It's also interesting to see the two students' thought process for the fourth function. The guy factors the denominator as (x + 4)^2, then starts to mark x != 4 before crossing it out. On the other hand, the girl doesn't factor at all and just plugs x = -4 into the denominator instead. The guy's method is considered more sound, since the girl is relying on the multiple choice format. She would have had trouble with this question if she'd been asked to state the domain without multiple choice.
Another Rapoport Math Problem
There's not much Geometry on the Rapoport calendar this week. But let's look at today's problem anyway, a nice segue from the Java/internet part of my post to the math part.
Today on her Daily Epsilon of Math 2020, Rebecca Rapoport writes:
The maximum x such that 5^x divides 400,000
To solve this problem, let's just find the prime factorization of the number in question:
400,000 = 4 * 100,000
= 2^2 * 10^5
= 2^2 * 2^5 * 5^5
= 2^7 * 5^5
Therefore the desired exponent of five is 5 -- and of course, today's date is the fifth. Indeed, the factor 5^5 almost looks like the date 5/5, Cinco de Mayo.
This problem is so short that I almost want to do another one in today's post. But I won't -- let's keep this section of the post short, since the Java and traditionalists' sections are so long.
Barry Garelick -- Dueling Distance Learning Posts
Our main traditionalist, Barry Garelick, posted twice last week -- and he seems to contradict himself in the two posts. In his April 26th post, he claims that online learning is inferior to in-person learning:
https://traditionalmath.wordpress.com/2020/04/26/nothing-to-see-here-dept-3/
It was just a matter of time before someone would say “Look, the shut-down schools show there’s a better way to teach math. Kids can just Google things after all, and they do, so let’s make things more interesting and relevant and …” etc etc.
This article does just that, saying that now it’s obvious that traditional math is anachronistic and we need a better approach.
But in his April 30th post, Garelick claims that distance learning is superior:
https://traditionalmath.wordpress.com/2020/04/30/the-truth-and-the-excuse-dept/
The national lock-down has resulted in many teachers resorting to videos, and Zoom meetings. In either case, the principle means of teaching appears to be explicit and whole class instruction.
Students saddled with math curricula that do not have a textbook and rely on group work/collaboration, may actually be enjoying a benefit to the more “traditional” form of instruction. This experience gives us a rare opportunity to see the results of a nationwide forcing of direct/explicit instruction.
Of course, a quick glance at this posts reveals what Garelick believes to be the most effective way of teaching math -- the traditionalists' way. If online education leads to math being taught more traditionally, then Garelick is all for it. But if it leads to more non-traditional projects being taught, then he'd rather have students return to the classroom. It's the traditionalism that matters, not whether classes are held in cyberspace or meatspace.Do the other traditionalists believe that distance learning causes math to be taught more traditionally, or less so? We can guess just by checking which comment thread they're posting in. On the side of "online = less traditional" are Chester Draws and Wayne Bishop.
Chester Draws:
We are meant to teach grit and creativity and sustained focus. But never give them anything hard or unpleasant?
I can’t imagine our writer would want to be operated on by a student of the school of Google. Some knowledge has to learned the hard way.
Most of my students are putting in about two hours a week online. They are finding it very stressful, and would much rather be in school, because there is no-one to explain. The lazy ones are doing nothing at all — at least school makes that almost impossible.
OK, Draws does make a good point here about those who "are doing nothing at all." It's already been established that it's easier for students to escape their "boring" traditionalist lessons when taught by a teacher sitting a few feet away, than a one-on-one tutor sitting a few inches away. How much easier is it, then, for students to escape lessons taught by a teacher sitting a few miles away in online learning?Draws also mentions operations, as in surgery -- it's clearly better for surgeons to have actual background knowledge in medicine than be forced to rely on Google. The problem here is that it's not as obvious that what's true for medicine holds for mathematics -- especially secondary-level math beyond arithmetic. Many people believe that no one needs to know any math beyond arithmetic, while those same people admit that surgeons need to know medicine. It then follows that surgery should be taught traditionally so that students gain knowledge, while math beyond arithmetic shouldn't be taught traditionally since knowledge of it isn't as important.
The same applies when Draws mentions "grit and creativity and sustained focus." It's OK to give students hard work if it's in English or science or medicine that people use in the real world, but it's not OK if it's math beyond arithmetic that no one uses in the real world. (And before you say that higher math is indeed used in the real world, what matters is what the students believe -- specifically the ones who leave traditionalist math assignments blank.)
The other commenter, Wayne Bishop, writes:
Wayne Bishop:
Beautiful Sunshine (BS) has so many forms. James Tranton has been pushing this one for a long time.
The name "Beautiful Sunshine" is clearly sarcastic -- those initials give it away. Bishop disagrees with Tranton, the author of the article linked above, because Bishop is a traditionalist and Tranton clearly isn't. Suffice it to say that Bishop agrees with Draws above.
Meanwhile, in the pro-distance learning thread is Garelick's main commenter, SteveH:
SteveH:
This seems to be the fuzzy educator goal all along – for parents/tutors/internet to do the dirty work that let’s them do the fun, creative stuff. It’s not like they don’t value skills. It’s just that they don’t want to do it themselves. Also, more is more and they can take credit for all of the home help, but claim that it was their work that added the real understanding.
Here SteveH lumps "internet" with "tutors" as sources of effective traditionalist instruction. Notice that Garelick mentions "group work/collaboration" as examples of anti-traditionalist teaching, and I must admit that to the extent that less group work is possible in an online class, the online classes are that much more traditionalist.
So whose side am I on -- Draws/Bishop or SteveH? Well, their point of contention is whether online or in-person is more effective at providing traditionalist instruction. Since I'm not a traditionalist, I won't use traditionalism to decide which mode of instruction is superior. (Of course I'm biased -- as a substitute teacher I'm paid for in-person instruction, but not for online instruction. Therefore I'm in favor of in-person instruction.)
Today, Garelick has made another post. It's new, so it hasn't drawn many comments yet:
In this time of distance teaching and learning, the tropes about traditional teaching:bad and progressive teaching: good are flourishing. This article (in the preciously named “The Conversation” no less) is no exception.
Again, it's about distance learning. Garelick and traditionalists don't care whether it's online or not -- they only care whether math is taught traditionally or not.
Again, it's about distance learning. Garelick and traditionalists don't care whether it's online or not -- they only care whether math is taught traditionally or not.
But there is one current debate where the traditionalists have a strong opinion -- namely, how to grade students during the coronavirus crisis.
Grading in California Districts
Grading in California Districts
There is a wide range of grading policies since the schools closed, even if we restrict it just to the districts right here in California.
Of the two districts where I sub, my old district has the strictest policy. Using the third quarter grades as a baseline, the final semester grades can drop at most one letter from that baseline (and the grade can't drop from a D to an F). Of course, the grades can go as high as possible from that baseline.
In my last post, I mentioned the policy for my new district. Note that the board meeting at which this was determined was on the same night that I blogged, and so I edited my post the next day in order to keep it updated with the latest information. In case you missed that edit though, let me repeat it here:
In my new district, elementary students will not get letter grades at all. In middle and high schools, the grades will be given as "credit/incomplete," but students who want A's, B's, or C's can still opt in to letter grades. (Does this mean that D grades now count as incomplete?) Grades can be no lower than what they were at the time the schools closed.
One thing I was concerned with involves the final three days of subbing, March 11th-13th, just before the schools closed. Recall that some students played around those three days and didn't do much work, and I was worried about those students' grades (especially the seniors). Well, we see that just as in my old district, here they have a chance to raise their grades, so that's no harm no foul, right?
Well, consider the following scenario -- suppose a student in one of those classes had a low C (or C-) as of the last day the regular teacher saw them (that is, March 10th). Then I, the sub, came in and gave them the vocab assignment. Those assignments still count fully in their grades, since they were assigned on March 11th or 12th, when the schools were still wide open. But our student decided not to take the assignment seriously because I'm just a sub, so his grade drops to a high D (or D+) on the day that the schools closed.
The fact that the regular teacher didn't actually return to grade it until after the schools closed is irrelevant -- what matters is the date that it was due, not the date that it was graded. So our student's baseline (below which the grade can't drop) is now a D instead of a C. And if this same student does no online work (perhaps because he has no laptop, or no online assignment can meet his special ed accommodations), that student's final grade is now a D, whereas it would have been a C if only he'd taken the sub seriously.
Of course, it's a tricky situation to have a sub there the very last three days that work truly counts. In fact, if my assignment causes a borderline student's grade to drop, that student's parents might have grounds to challenge the grade. They can rightly say that my assignment shouldn't count because who knows whether I, the sub, gave the proper accommodations for that special ed student? Of course, I didn't make any accommodations because I didn't know what they were. This was particularly true for the junior class that met after lunch -- there was no aide because her regular scheduled hours ended at lunch. And that was the rowdiest class, where very little work was completed by anyone.
Also, I don't know whether the vocab worksheet was even graded. Many students did the work in their notebooks, which I believe should have been left on the counter in the classroom. But if enough students put the notebooks in their backpacks and took them home with them, then the regular teacher might have just given up and decided not to grade them. (Hey, those students were better than I was -- recall that I left my songbook in the classroom!)
I would have been correct to have the students focus more on making up any missing assignments (which definitely count as they'd been given with proper accommodations) than on doing the vocab worksheet assigned for that particular day. Making up old work might raise the baseline below which the grade can't fall.
(By the way, the reason the regular teacher was out because he was attending his son's Pi Day wedding in Northern California. I wonder whether that wedding -- a large gathering -- would have been cancelled due to the virus. I believe that the couple just barely made it because the state bans didn't start until a few days after schools closed, unless there had been a city ban by March 14th)
In middle schools, the second trimester ended a week before the coronavirus closure. Recall that I subbed in a special ed math class that week, when the students took their trimester finals. And so I wonder whether any students in that class decided not to take those finals seriously and got a lower grade than they would have if the regular teacher had been there (although there was an aide in classes that had finals). For middle schools, the second tri grade is the baseline for third tri. So this is truly a situation where failure to take me, the sub, seriously can ruin their grades for two trimesters (second tri because it was the second tri final, and third tri because it lowered their baseline).
By the way, I'm also thinking about my old district, where I'd subbed on March 10th. These were gen ed classes, not special ed, but once again there were several students who did no work. The freshmen had no excuse, but some seniors had left to sign up for summer classes at the community college (which, of course, will most likely be online if they're held at all). I'm assuming that the regular teacher would have clarified the assignment grades when she returned March 11th-13th.
There's actually one more awkward situation involving grades in my old district (but having nothing to do with any class I subbed for). It's said that the baseline for the final semester grade is the third quarter grade -- but "end of third quarter" isn't synonymous with "when the district closed." When the schools closed, there was still one week left in the third quarter.
Now suppose that a student has a low B (or B-) when the schools closed. During the first week of distance learning (the last week of third quarter), a student doesn't turn in the work, and so his grade drops to a C. Then this C becomes the third quarter baseline -- and in this district, the grade can drop by one letter. So then the student ends up with a semester grade of D -- and now he's left wondering why his grade dropped by two letters when it shouldn't drop by more than one. Well, the school can easily respond, "Your grade dropped from a B at the time of the closure to a C at the end of the third quarter to a D at the end of the semester. Your mistake was in equating 'at the time of the closure' with 'at the end of the third quarter.'"
Such an occurrence would be awkward to explain, especially in light of the fact that there was a calendar change from 2018-19 to the 2019-20 school year. I mentioned on the blog that back in the 2018-19 school year, the third quarter ended a week before spring break. Then in 2019-20, it was changed so that spring break divides the quarters. I wrote that this change was very logical (since after all, winter break divides the semesters), and it would have worked out perfectly had there been no coronavirus. Suddenly, it would have been better if the old 2018-19 calendar had remained, so that the virus closure would have been right at the end of the third quarter.
I say that it's awkward to count against the third quarter baseline work during a week that would have been considered part of the fourth quarter had it not been for this 2019-20 calendar quirk. And so I suspect that teachers wouldn't have counted work during that week against their grade. For all intents and purposes, the students had a two-week spring break this year.
OK, so that's the grading policy for the two districts where I work. My old district is the strictest, and my new district is more lenient. Even more lenient than my new district is LAUSD. In that district, not only can the semester grade not be lower than the third quarter grade, but there can be no F grades at all. The lowest grade any student can see this semester is a D.
I'm not sure whether there's a "last week of the third quarter" trap in LAUSD similar to the one in my old district. There is no day on the LAUSD calendar called "end of the third quarter" -- instead, there are grading windows every five weeks (that is, every quaver). Most LAUSD schools apparently had the ten-week window close one week after the district did. Thus once again, it's theoretically possible that someone could have had a C after nine weeks, miss an assignment in Week 10 (the first week of distance learning) and get a D as the 10-week grade, and then wind up with a D at the semester.
Still, the no-F policy in LAUSD makes this one of the more lenient policies in the state. But there's one more proposal that's even more generous -- and controversial. The plan in San Francisco drew so much backlash that it was dropped before ever being adopted. SFUSD was considering taking LAUSD's no-F policy three steps further -- every single student would automatically get an A.
Instead, SFUSD will do something similar to my new district -- Credit/No Credit. Unlike my new district, I see no proposal where students can opt in to letter grades if they wish.
Now let's bring in the traditionalists. Our main traditionalist, Barry Garelick, hasn't said much about grades during the coronavirus, or what his own school's or district's policy is. But there was an article at the Joanne Jacobs website where several other traditionalists often post. Of course, they're mainly complaining about the (since scrapped) SFUSD straight A's policy:
https://www.joannejacobs.com/2020/04/fake-as-do-harm-to-students/
Giving every student an “A” isn’t caring, loving or kind, writes Erika Sanzi. It’s negligent, patronizing and dishonest.
Let's see what the traditionalists in this thread have to say. Well, since my name is David, let me start with my namesake. (And no, I'm not the "David" in this thread -- unlike me, this David appears to be a hard-core traditionalist.)
David:
Here David refers to "my union," and that he works as a district with a "No Fails policy." He never names his district, which could be in any state. But the "No Fails policy" is what LAUSD has, so it's possible that David works for LAUSD.
Now David responds to a (non-traditionalist) poster, Dennis Ashendorf:
David (quoting Ashendorf):
“As a consequence Pass/No Pass doesn’t work. Some students (which ones?) would be hurt. Therefore, give everyone an “A” to be safe.” So instead of enforcing some grades because a few kids might be hurt, don’t enforce learning at all. That’s a great strategy to get kids to learn.
David:
Obviously, David is strongly opposed to the straight A's policy. Ashendorf also mentions Pass/No Pass (adopted by SFUSD and my new district), but David doesn't respond to it here. But in another post, "therandomtexan" mentions his own policy, and David compares it favorably to Pass/No Pass.
therandomtexan:
One of the pleasant surprises in my newly online asynchronous courses is the interaction with my students. Everyone gets 2 “free” re-dos on their statistics assignments, which I grade several times a day. They chat online, send me mail, and often start discussions tangential to the assignment they’re working on. Everyone’s shooting for a good grade, and working positively towards earning it. Big fun watching them build that A.
David:
That is awesome and shows true learning. If it was just pass/fail, then only some students would show up to get the material. I have also had some good discussions in my Zoom meetings with my students where they have asked good questions. (not as good as yours)
Our next traditionalist is Darren Miller of Right(-Wing) on the Left Coast:
Darren:
Hmm, is Miller calling the SFUSD all A's policy a complete mockery of education, or the policy of some students getting Pass/Fail and others getting letter grades? Anything, this sounds a lot like my new district.
Darren:
Makes me wonder if they can require me to give a letter grade if the *student* wants, while the vast majority get Credit/NoCredit. I’m banking on “no”.
Well, Miller does imply that since students aren't required to attend online classes, it's better just to stick to Pass/Fail then. I wonder whether my new district (as opposed to Miller's) can require teachers to give letter grades while the rest get Credit/Incomplete.
I usually consider the main traditionalist at the Joanne Jacobs site to be Bill, so let's see what he has to say in this thread:
Bill:
Here Bill is still referring to the SFUSD straight-A policy, which wasn't adopted. But still, Bill's post summarizes the traditionalists' position.
Let's take a step back for a moment. Suppose I asked you to fill in the following blank:
"The coronavirus is obviously a traumatic event for children. Therefore in order to avoid adding to their trauma, we shouldn't make kids ____________________."
We might fill in the blank with some chore, such as washing dishes or taking out the trash. Then the sentence makes sense. On the other hand, imagine if someone tried filling in the blank with "play video games" or "play on their cell phone." Then the sentence no longer makes sense, since playing those games isn't something we make kids do. Playing games is a treat, not a chore.
Now the big question here is, is going to school and earning grades a chore or a treat? People like SFUSD board member Susan Collin are clearly arguing that school is a chore. It adds to the trauma that children are already feeling due to the virus. By giving them straight A's, we'd be relieving them of that trauma and making the students feel caring and affection.
Of course, David disagrees:
David:
I don’t care about caring/affection. I care about learning. If I didn’t enforce grades, some kids would never do the work; thus they are not learning. Tough love with some of these students is what they need. It doesn’t help anybody if a teacher doesn’t enforce learning.
To traditionalists like David and Bill, education isn't a chore -- it's a treat. Bill implies here that by enforcing strict standards, we're providing them with the treat of making them competitive for employment in a world with so many others looking for jobs.
But the problem is that many students don't think of education as a treat -- they think it's a chore. Yes, Bill, those students are simply wrong. But those wrong beliefs contribute to their trauma -- if they wrongly believe that education is a chore, they'll wonder why, on top of everything going on with the virus, we're still making them go through the chore of education.
And of course, this counts double for a class like math. Many students believe that no math beyond arithmetic is needed in the real world -- that they only have to learn math because something is requiring them to. Math is just jumping through hoops to get to what they really want, a diploma or degree and a well-paying job -- especially if they're going to forget all the math they learned as soon as the final is over. If math is just jumping through hoops, then shouldn't we make them jump through fewer hoops due to the coronavirus?
David mentions that giving everyone an A in Algebra I leaves students unprepared for Algebra II, but many students think that passing Algebra II is just hoop-jumping. He also mentions foreign language, but from the students' perspective, there's a difference. Learning Spanish I and II will help you if you want to go to Mexico to celebrate Cinco de Mayo, but learning Algebra I and II isn't needed in the real world and is just hoop-jumping.
Ironically, they agree with Bill when he says that academia isn't the real world. But they agree for a different reason -- in academia you need to know math, but in the real world you don't.
OK, so that's the traditionalists' stance. My own stance is to take the middle path, which here is best represented by my new district. Let Credit/Incomplete be the default option for students who think education is a chore, and let those who consider it to be a treat earn their letter grades. This idea also helps non-STEM students out -- they might choose to let their A's and B's in English, history, and Spanish appear on their transcript while masking their lower Algebra II grade with a "Credit" mark.
Grading at the Old Charter School
I'd love to say that I've never once considered using the crazy San Francisco straight-A grading system in my own classes. But unfortunately, I did have trouble with grades at one point at the old charter school.
It all started with the music teacher. At the end of the first trimester that year, he was asked to submit grades for all the students. It turns out that he simply gave most students an A. But I do know that there were some seventh graders (recall that only this grade had music in my classroom) who argued with him, and he kicked them out of his classroom for a few weeks. These students got C's, and everyone else got A's. So the music grades were almost like the original San Francisco grading plan.
Now let's move on to the second trimester. My biggest problem was that, about a week or two before the end of the tri, suddenly math and science appeared as separate subjects in PowerSchool. In the first trimester, I was asked to assign a single STEM grade, but now I needed to assign a math grade and a science grade. And we all know why that was a problem -- I hadn't taught much science at all.
I quickly declared a Science Week and had the students create Foldables for a quick unit. But unfortunately, the grades were due before I'd collected the Foldables from them. Thus it's similar to the last class I subbed for in the new district -- work was completed in notebooks/Foldables, but they just sat incomplete in students' backpacks on the day the grades were due.
And so I ended up having to use San Francisco grading. Actually, at the time I'd didn't call it "San Francisco grading" -- I called it "music teacher grading." I decided to give every student an A for their science grade, except for a few seventh graders who were absent that week. (Due to the aforementioned music class, seventh grade saw me one fewer day than the other grades, and so an absence or two that week was more detrimental for seventh graders.) Again, just like the music teacher, I gave C's to those missing students.
It's obvious what I should have done -- I should have taught science effectively to all grades the entire trimester, so that I'm not scrambling to give them a science grade at the end of the tri. (And of course, I described how I should have taught science in previous posts.) But given that I didn't, there's also something I could have done better once I needed to give them grades -- I could have assigned a simple science worksheet due that first day (a Tuesday) so that there would be at least one grade for them in the computer.
Of course, it would be hard to explain an F in science to any parent -- they'd rightly complain that I didn't teach much science, so it wasn't their kids' fault. Since our school (like many local charters) has a no-D policy, I'd need every student to get at least a C (70%) on this worksheet. To accomplish this, I make it so that 70% of the worksheet is just copying down notes, so that it would be impossible not to get 70% on it (unless the student is absent). The other 30% would be earned by answering simple questions based on the science they just learned.
The rest of the week's work could then be done in the Foldables. If by chance I'm able to collect any more work from the students, then I add these grades to the computer as well.
I had other problems with the grades that second trimester as well. In PowerSchool, when we listed each assignment, there's an option to name a standard (Common Core or NGSS) along with each of the assignments. The administrators said not to worry about it during the first tri, but we were required to do it the second tri -- and of course, we weren't told about this until the end of the tri, right around the time that science appeared as a separate subject. And PowerSchool didn't let us simply add a standard to the assignments -- we had to start over reenter the grades one-by-one.
Since I'd given dozens of assignments to each of my 60-70 students, this meant that I suddenly had thousands of grades to enter at the end of the second trimester. I actually wouldn't have minded doing all of this during a holiday break or long weekend -- but of course, the second tri ends right in the middle of the Big March, when every week has five days of school.
Because of having to enter all these grades suddenly, this was my toughest week as a teacher -- and yes, it ultimately contributed to my leaving the school. In the end, I entered each of the math quizzes and tests one-by-one with the respective standards, but lumped things like "classwork," "homework," "participation" (such as weekly Warm-Up sheets and so on) into a single assignment for each, and listed one of the Standards for Mathematical Practices (MP) as their standard. (Just imagine if I had taught science properly and I had another thousand grades to enter that week.)
There were other problems with my second trimester grades. In Grades 6-7, while almost every student had a A in science, almost no student had an A in math. Many students struggled on the tests, and my less-than-perfect classroom management contributed to kids talking instead of staying quiet and paying attention. But eighth grade was different -- there were several A's in that math class, and one or two students even had over 100%.
I can tell you exactly how that happened -- the culprit was the Hidden Figures extra credit. Right after winter break, I gave an extra credit assignment where students would watch the movie over the weekend and answer questions about it. I was expecting maybe one or two students at the most to watch the movie on their own -- until it became a field trip and most of them watched it.
Many of the eighth graders had low grades around 55% or so, and so to get them to work on the extra credit in time for the trimester progress report card (that is, the end of the "hexter"), I made the extra credit be worth enough points for them to get up to 70%. But then the top students in the class also turned in the generous extra credit assignment, and so this inflated their grades. This isn't quite San Francisco-level of grade inflation (since the A's weren't even in the majority), but there were still likely more students getting A's than deserving them.
Fewer students in Grades 6-7 were around 55% -- most were either passing (though not an A) or closer to it, or had a very low grade near the single digits (certain special ed students) for which no reasonable amount of extra credit would get them to passing. This is why the extra credit assignment was a problem for eighth grade only.
But then, that raises the question, why were eighth grade scores so low that they needed lots of extra credit in the first place? It's been a while so I'm not quite sure -- but a simple explanation is that it also goes back to science. Early in the trimester, the math and science grades were still combined, and eighth grade was at the time the only grade I'd attempted to teach science to. Many of the kids struggled on the science lessons.
And also, because math and science were combined, I tried let the students use science to make up missing assignments in math. This was, of course, a terrible idea. And in the end, I let them use math (via Hidden Figures) to make up their science grades.
Thus all the troubles I had with grades that trimester ultimately boil down to science. So there were several things that tri that were beyond my control:
One thing I was concerned with involves the final three days of subbing, March 11th-13th, just before the schools closed. Recall that some students played around those three days and didn't do much work, and I was worried about those students' grades (especially the seniors). Well, we see that just as in my old district, here they have a chance to raise their grades, so that's no harm no foul, right?
Well, consider the following scenario -- suppose a student in one of those classes had a low C (or C-) as of the last day the regular teacher saw them (that is, March 10th). Then I, the sub, came in and gave them the vocab assignment. Those assignments still count fully in their grades, since they were assigned on March 11th or 12th, when the schools were still wide open. But our student decided not to take the assignment seriously because I'm just a sub, so his grade drops to a high D (or D+) on the day that the schools closed.
The fact that the regular teacher didn't actually return to grade it until after the schools closed is irrelevant -- what matters is the date that it was due, not the date that it was graded. So our student's baseline (below which the grade can't drop) is now a D instead of a C. And if this same student does no online work (perhaps because he has no laptop, or no online assignment can meet his special ed accommodations), that student's final grade is now a D, whereas it would have been a C if only he'd taken the sub seriously.
Of course, it's a tricky situation to have a sub there the very last three days that work truly counts. In fact, if my assignment causes a borderline student's grade to drop, that student's parents might have grounds to challenge the grade. They can rightly say that my assignment shouldn't count because who knows whether I, the sub, gave the proper accommodations for that special ed student? Of course, I didn't make any accommodations because I didn't know what they were. This was particularly true for the junior class that met after lunch -- there was no aide because her regular scheduled hours ended at lunch. And that was the rowdiest class, where very little work was completed by anyone.
Also, I don't know whether the vocab worksheet was even graded. Many students did the work in their notebooks, which I believe should have been left on the counter in the classroom. But if enough students put the notebooks in their backpacks and took them home with them, then the regular teacher might have just given up and decided not to grade them. (Hey, those students were better than I was -- recall that I left my songbook in the classroom!)
I would have been correct to have the students focus more on making up any missing assignments (which definitely count as they'd been given with proper accommodations) than on doing the vocab worksheet assigned for that particular day. Making up old work might raise the baseline below which the grade can't fall.
(By the way, the reason the regular teacher was out because he was attending his son's Pi Day wedding in Northern California. I wonder whether that wedding -- a large gathering -- would have been cancelled due to the virus. I believe that the couple just barely made it because the state bans didn't start until a few days after schools closed, unless there had been a city ban by March 14th)
In middle schools, the second trimester ended a week before the coronavirus closure. Recall that I subbed in a special ed math class that week, when the students took their trimester finals. And so I wonder whether any students in that class decided not to take those finals seriously and got a lower grade than they would have if the regular teacher had been there (although there was an aide in classes that had finals). For middle schools, the second tri grade is the baseline for third tri. So this is truly a situation where failure to take me, the sub, seriously can ruin their grades for two trimesters (second tri because it was the second tri final, and third tri because it lowered their baseline).
By the way, I'm also thinking about my old district, where I'd subbed on March 10th. These were gen ed classes, not special ed, but once again there were several students who did no work. The freshmen had no excuse, but some seniors had left to sign up for summer classes at the community college (which, of course, will most likely be online if they're held at all). I'm assuming that the regular teacher would have clarified the assignment grades when she returned March 11th-13th.
There's actually one more awkward situation involving grades in my old district (but having nothing to do with any class I subbed for). It's said that the baseline for the final semester grade is the third quarter grade -- but "end of third quarter" isn't synonymous with "when the district closed." When the schools closed, there was still one week left in the third quarter.
Now suppose that a student has a low B (or B-) when the schools closed. During the first week of distance learning (the last week of third quarter), a student doesn't turn in the work, and so his grade drops to a C. Then this C becomes the third quarter baseline -- and in this district, the grade can drop by one letter. So then the student ends up with a semester grade of D -- and now he's left wondering why his grade dropped by two letters when it shouldn't drop by more than one. Well, the school can easily respond, "Your grade dropped from a B at the time of the closure to a C at the end of the third quarter to a D at the end of the semester. Your mistake was in equating 'at the time of the closure' with 'at the end of the third quarter.'"
Such an occurrence would be awkward to explain, especially in light of the fact that there was a calendar change from 2018-19 to the 2019-20 school year. I mentioned on the blog that back in the 2018-19 school year, the third quarter ended a week before spring break. Then in 2019-20, it was changed so that spring break divides the quarters. I wrote that this change was very logical (since after all, winter break divides the semesters), and it would have worked out perfectly had there been no coronavirus. Suddenly, it would have been better if the old 2018-19 calendar had remained, so that the virus closure would have been right at the end of the third quarter.
I say that it's awkward to count against the third quarter baseline work during a week that would have been considered part of the fourth quarter had it not been for this 2019-20 calendar quirk. And so I suspect that teachers wouldn't have counted work during that week against their grade. For all intents and purposes, the students had a two-week spring break this year.
OK, so that's the grading policy for the two districts where I work. My old district is the strictest, and my new district is more lenient. Even more lenient than my new district is LAUSD. In that district, not only can the semester grade not be lower than the third quarter grade, but there can be no F grades at all. The lowest grade any student can see this semester is a D.
I'm not sure whether there's a "last week of the third quarter" trap in LAUSD similar to the one in my old district. There is no day on the LAUSD calendar called "end of the third quarter" -- instead, there are grading windows every five weeks (that is, every quaver). Most LAUSD schools apparently had the ten-week window close one week after the district did. Thus once again, it's theoretically possible that someone could have had a C after nine weeks, miss an assignment in Week 10 (the first week of distance learning) and get a D as the 10-week grade, and then wind up with a D at the semester.
Still, the no-F policy in LAUSD makes this one of the more lenient policies in the state. But there's one more proposal that's even more generous -- and controversial. The plan in San Francisco drew so much backlash that it was dropped before ever being adopted. SFUSD was considering taking LAUSD's no-F policy three steps further -- every single student would automatically get an A.
Instead, SFUSD will do something similar to my new district -- Credit/No Credit. Unlike my new district, I see no proposal where students can opt in to letter grades if they wish.
Now let's bring in the traditionalists. Our main traditionalist, Barry Garelick, hasn't said much about grades during the coronavirus, or what his own school's or district's policy is. But there was an article at the Joanne Jacobs website where several other traditionalists often post. Of course, they're mainly complaining about the (since scrapped) SFUSD straight A's policy:
https://www.joannejacobs.com/2020/04/fake-as-do-harm-to-students/
Giving every student an “A” isn’t caring, loving or kind, writes Erika Sanzi. It’s negligent, patronizing and dishonest.
Let's see what the traditionalists in this thread have to say. Well, since my name is David, let me start with my namesake. (And no, I'm not the "David" in this thread -- unlike me, this David appears to be a hard-core traditionalist.)
David:
“Teachers support giving students A’s, said Susan Solomon, a union representative, at the meeting. “This should be about doing no harm to our students.””
They didn’t ask the teachers just like my union didn’t ask the teachers about the No Fails policy. This is a huge disservice to the kids most in need.The A/B students will be fine anyway. The D/F students will just say “who gives a shit about the work? I already passed.”
Plus it says to all the students who did work hard “Your grades and hardwork don’t matter.”
Here David refers to "my union," and that he works as a district with a "No Fails policy." He never names his district, which could be in any state. But the "No Fails policy" is what LAUSD has, so it's possible that David works for LAUSD.
Now David responds to a (non-traditionalist) poster, Dennis Ashendorf:
David (quoting Ashendorf):
“As a consequence Pass/No Pass doesn’t work. Some students (which ones?) would be hurt. Therefore, give everyone an “A” to be safe.” So instead of enforcing some grades because a few kids might be hurt, don’t enforce learning at all. That’s a great strategy to get kids to learn.
David:
If a person doesn’t get the information in Algebra 1 because they already got the A, they cannot do well in Algebra 2. Same thing with foreign language for instance.
I really think you are the naive one.
Obviously, David is strongly opposed to the straight A's policy. Ashendorf also mentions Pass/No Pass (adopted by SFUSD and my new district), but David doesn't respond to it here. But in another post, "therandomtexan" mentions his own policy, and David compares it favorably to Pass/No Pass.
therandomtexan:
One of the pleasant surprises in my newly online asynchronous courses is the interaction with my students. Everyone gets 2 “free” re-dos on their statistics assignments, which I grade several times a day. They chat online, send me mail, and often start discussions tangential to the assignment they’re working on. Everyone’s shooting for a good grade, and working positively towards earning it. Big fun watching them build that A.
David:
That is awesome and shows true learning. If it was just pass/fail, then only some students would show up to get the material. I have also had some good discussions in my Zoom meetings with my students where they have asked good questions. (not as good as yours)
Our next traditionalist is Darren Miller of Right(-Wing) on the Left Coast:
Darren:
I haven’t encountered any teachers at my school that want to give all A’s. In fact, the vast majority believe in Pass/Fail because the precision required to give a letter grade just doesn’t exist online in our district–where students aren’t even required to attend online classes.
We have 40,000+ students in my district. 7 parents went to the school board and complained about P/F. Boom, district reversed course and said kids could ask for letter grades and could change their minds about letter grades up till early June. Complete and total mockery of anything even resembling education.
Hmm, is Miller calling the SFUSD all A's policy a complete mockery of education, or the policy of some students getting Pass/Fail and others getting letter grades? Anything, this sounds a lot like my new district.
Darren:
Makes me wonder if they can require me to give a letter grade if the *student* wants, while the vast majority get Credit/NoCredit. I’m banking on “no”.
Well, Miller does imply that since students aren't required to attend online classes, it's better just to stick to Pass/Fail then. I wonder whether my new district (as opposed to Miller's) can require teachers to give letter grades while the rest get Credit/Incomplete.
I usually consider the main traditionalist at the Joanne Jacobs site to be Bill, so let's see what he has to say in this thread:
Bill:
These kids are going to get a serious dose of reality when they get into the real world (which academia isn’t) and find out they actually have to compete with many others to get a job/employment or other things in life.
I’d suggest they take a look at the 20-25 million people who have lost their jobs as a result of COVID-19, that’s who these so called students are going to have to compete against in the next 2-3 years for employment.
Here Bill is still referring to the SFUSD straight-A policy, which wasn't adopted. But still, Bill's post summarizes the traditionalists' position.
Let's take a step back for a moment. Suppose I asked you to fill in the following blank:
"The coronavirus is obviously a traumatic event for children. Therefore in order to avoid adding to their trauma, we shouldn't make kids ____________________."
We might fill in the blank with some chore, such as washing dishes or taking out the trash. Then the sentence makes sense. On the other hand, imagine if someone tried filling in the blank with "play video games" or "play on their cell phone." Then the sentence no longer makes sense, since playing those games isn't something we make kids do. Playing games is a treat, not a chore.
Now the big question here is, is going to school and earning grades a chore or a treat? People like SFUSD board member Susan Collin are clearly arguing that school is a chore. It adds to the trauma that children are already feeling due to the virus. By giving them straight A's, we'd be relieving them of that trauma and making the students feel caring and affection.
Of course, David disagrees:
David:
I don’t care about caring/affection. I care about learning. If I didn’t enforce grades, some kids would never do the work; thus they are not learning. Tough love with some of these students is what they need. It doesn’t help anybody if a teacher doesn’t enforce learning.
To traditionalists like David and Bill, education isn't a chore -- it's a treat. Bill implies here that by enforcing strict standards, we're providing them with the treat of making them competitive for employment in a world with so many others looking for jobs.
But the problem is that many students don't think of education as a treat -- they think it's a chore. Yes, Bill, those students are simply wrong. But those wrong beliefs contribute to their trauma -- if they wrongly believe that education is a chore, they'll wonder why, on top of everything going on with the virus, we're still making them go through the chore of education.
And of course, this counts double for a class like math. Many students believe that no math beyond arithmetic is needed in the real world -- that they only have to learn math because something is requiring them to. Math is just jumping through hoops to get to what they really want, a diploma or degree and a well-paying job -- especially if they're going to forget all the math they learned as soon as the final is over. If math is just jumping through hoops, then shouldn't we make them jump through fewer hoops due to the coronavirus?
David mentions that giving everyone an A in Algebra I leaves students unprepared for Algebra II, but many students think that passing Algebra II is just hoop-jumping. He also mentions foreign language, but from the students' perspective, there's a difference. Learning Spanish I and II will help you if you want to go to Mexico to celebrate Cinco de Mayo, but learning Algebra I and II isn't needed in the real world and is just hoop-jumping.
Ironically, they agree with Bill when he says that academia isn't the real world. But they agree for a different reason -- in academia you need to know math, but in the real world you don't.
OK, so that's the traditionalists' stance. My own stance is to take the middle path, which here is best represented by my new district. Let Credit/Incomplete be the default option for students who think education is a chore, and let those who consider it to be a treat earn their letter grades. This idea also helps non-STEM students out -- they might choose to let their A's and B's in English, history, and Spanish appear on their transcript while masking their lower Algebra II grade with a "Credit" mark.
Grading at the Old Charter School
I'd love to say that I've never once considered using the crazy San Francisco straight-A grading system in my own classes. But unfortunately, I did have trouble with grades at one point at the old charter school.
It all started with the music teacher. At the end of the first trimester that year, he was asked to submit grades for all the students. It turns out that he simply gave most students an A. But I do know that there were some seventh graders (recall that only this grade had music in my classroom) who argued with him, and he kicked them out of his classroom for a few weeks. These students got C's, and everyone else got A's. So the music grades were almost like the original San Francisco grading plan.
Now let's move on to the second trimester. My biggest problem was that, about a week or two before the end of the tri, suddenly math and science appeared as separate subjects in PowerSchool. In the first trimester, I was asked to assign a single STEM grade, but now I needed to assign a math grade and a science grade. And we all know why that was a problem -- I hadn't taught much science at all.
I quickly declared a Science Week and had the students create Foldables for a quick unit. But unfortunately, the grades were due before I'd collected the Foldables from them. Thus it's similar to the last class I subbed for in the new district -- work was completed in notebooks/Foldables, but they just sat incomplete in students' backpacks on the day the grades were due.
And so I ended up having to use San Francisco grading. Actually, at the time I'd didn't call it "San Francisco grading" -- I called it "music teacher grading." I decided to give every student an A for their science grade, except for a few seventh graders who were absent that week. (Due to the aforementioned music class, seventh grade saw me one fewer day than the other grades, and so an absence or two that week was more detrimental for seventh graders.) Again, just like the music teacher, I gave C's to those missing students.
It's obvious what I should have done -- I should have taught science effectively to all grades the entire trimester, so that I'm not scrambling to give them a science grade at the end of the tri. (And of course, I described how I should have taught science in previous posts.) But given that I didn't, there's also something I could have done better once I needed to give them grades -- I could have assigned a simple science worksheet due that first day (a Tuesday) so that there would be at least one grade for them in the computer.
Of course, it would be hard to explain an F in science to any parent -- they'd rightly complain that I didn't teach much science, so it wasn't their kids' fault. Since our school (like many local charters) has a no-D policy, I'd need every student to get at least a C (70%) on this worksheet. To accomplish this, I make it so that 70% of the worksheet is just copying down notes, so that it would be impossible not to get 70% on it (unless the student is absent). The other 30% would be earned by answering simple questions based on the science they just learned.
The rest of the week's work could then be done in the Foldables. If by chance I'm able to collect any more work from the students, then I add these grades to the computer as well.
I had other problems with the grades that second trimester as well. In PowerSchool, when we listed each assignment, there's an option to name a standard (Common Core or NGSS) along with each of the assignments. The administrators said not to worry about it during the first tri, but we were required to do it the second tri -- and of course, we weren't told about this until the end of the tri, right around the time that science appeared as a separate subject. And PowerSchool didn't let us simply add a standard to the assignments -- we had to start over reenter the grades one-by-one.
Since I'd given dozens of assignments to each of my 60-70 students, this meant that I suddenly had thousands of grades to enter at the end of the second trimester. I actually wouldn't have minded doing all of this during a holiday break or long weekend -- but of course, the second tri ends right in the middle of the Big March, when every week has five days of school.
Because of having to enter all these grades suddenly, this was my toughest week as a teacher -- and yes, it ultimately contributed to my leaving the school. In the end, I entered each of the math quizzes and tests one-by-one with the respective standards, but lumped things like "classwork," "homework," "participation" (such as weekly Warm-Up sheets and so on) into a single assignment for each, and listed one of the Standards for Mathematical Practices (MP) as their standard. (Just imagine if I had taught science properly and I had another thousand grades to enter that week.)
There were other problems with my second trimester grades. In Grades 6-7, while almost every student had a A in science, almost no student had an A in math. Many students struggled on the tests, and my less-than-perfect classroom management contributed to kids talking instead of staying quiet and paying attention. But eighth grade was different -- there were several A's in that math class, and one or two students even had over 100%.
I can tell you exactly how that happened -- the culprit was the Hidden Figures extra credit. Right after winter break, I gave an extra credit assignment where students would watch the movie over the weekend and answer questions about it. I was expecting maybe one or two students at the most to watch the movie on their own -- until it became a field trip and most of them watched it.
Many of the eighth graders had low grades around 55% or so, and so to get them to work on the extra credit in time for the trimester progress report card (that is, the end of the "hexter"), I made the extra credit be worth enough points for them to get up to 70%. But then the top students in the class also turned in the generous extra credit assignment, and so this inflated their grades. This isn't quite San Francisco-level of grade inflation (since the A's weren't even in the majority), but there were still likely more students getting A's than deserving them.
Fewer students in Grades 6-7 were around 55% -- most were either passing (though not an A) or closer to it, or had a very low grade near the single digits (certain special ed students) for which no reasonable amount of extra credit would get them to passing. This is why the extra credit assignment was a problem for eighth grade only.
But then, that raises the question, why were eighth grade scores so low that they needed lots of extra credit in the first place? It's been a while so I'm not quite sure -- but a simple explanation is that it also goes back to science. Early in the trimester, the math and science grades were still combined, and eighth grade was at the time the only grade I'd attempted to teach science to. Many of the kids struggled on the science lessons.
And also, because math and science were combined, I tried let the students use science to make up missing assignments in math. This was, of course, a terrible idea. And in the end, I let them use math (via Hidden Figures) to make up their science grades.
Thus all the troubles I had with grades that trimester ultimately boil down to science. So there were several things that tri that were beyond my control:
- PowerSchool: combined STEM grade first tri, separate math/science grades second tri
- PowerSchool: no standards first tri, standards required second tri
- Science texts: printed teachers' editions not arriving until start of second tri
- Science texts: no printed students' editions at all
- Green Team: not knowing if and when the big project would begin
- BruinCorps: not knowing which college student would show up to help when
But I shouldn't have let what I couldn't control affect what I could control. I should have created a science curriculum based on what resources I did have (Study Island, online science texts) and used them to the best of my ability. Then whatever happens with the printed texts, Green Team, or BruinCorps would have been gravy.
Reblogging for Today
Yes -- I already reblogged my most popular post from last year. Here I'm referring to my daily reblog that I'm been doing during the virus shutdown, based on today's date, May 5th.
It's been a few years since I've made a Cinco de Mayo post. That's because the past two years, the holiday fell on the weekend. Both years, a Southern California baseball team spent the weekend in Mexico for a special two-game series -- two years ago the Dodgers threw a no-hitter against the Padres, and last year the Angels went south of the border to play the Houston Astros. (Of course, this year no sports are being played in either country.) Thus the last time Cinco de Mayo fell on a school day was three years ago, just after I left the old charter school.
Recall that at the old charter school, the grade level with the most students of Hispanic/Mexican descent was seventh grade. One day, when I was about to sing a song for music break in that class, one such guy wanted me to open my song by counting in Spanish -- "Uno, dos, tres, cuatro!"
Notice that there is a Square One TV song for which that opening might have made sense -- "Sign of the Times," aka "El Simbolo de los Tiempos." And so I considered obliging him by counting in Spanish and singing that song for him. And I wanted to do it on a special day -- and what day would have been more fitting than Cinco de Mayo?
Of course, we all know what happened -- I left the classroom and never made it to Cinco de Mayo. I did finally add "Sign of the Times" to my repertoire of songs, but not until a few months ago, well after I left the old charter.
Now that I've left the school, I regret not having performed the song much earlier. I shouldn't have had to wait until a special day to celebrate the majority culture in my seventh grade class. Since the song is all about multiplication, I could have performed it around the time of the 4's Dren Quiz on December 9th -- which I believe is when this student asked me to sing in Spanish. (And if I needed a Mexican holiday to justify the song, just use Loteria Day instead.)
For today's reblog, I'll post part of what I wrote on Cinco de Mayo 2017. Of course there's no mention of the "Sign of the Times" song. Instead, it's a Geometry activity on vectors:
Today I finally post the vector activity that I've been planning this week.
There is also a page to cut out with 36 given vectors -- since as I mentioned earlier, I don't want the students to choose the vectors. Of course, cutting out the vectors is time consuming -- even if the teacher does it before the class -- and those tiny slips of paper are easily lost. Then teachers will have to cut them out several times throughout the day.
Another way to have the students choose vectors would be to have something larger represent the vectors, such as playing cards. The playing cards can be converted to vectors, as follows:
For the horizontal component:
Ace through 10 -- valued 1 through 10
Jack -- valued -2
Queen -- valued -1
King -- valued 0
For the vertical component, use the suit:
Clubs -- valued -1
Diamonds -- valued 0
Hearts -- valued 1
Spades -- valued 2
Examples:
Eight of Diamonds -- (8, 0)
Ace of Clubs -- (1, -1)
Jack of Hearts -- (-2, 1)
Because they are larger, playing cards are less likely to be lost than the little slips of paper that I provide for this activity. But there are problems with using playing cards. First of all, the conversion from playing card to vector is another step that the first partner can get wrong -- and once again this may frustrate the second partner. (I've heard that some people don't even know the difference between clubs and spades!) Furthermore, vectors with large components, such as (8, 0) for the eight of diamonds above, become (30, -2) after performing the steps in Task Three -- and then they are asked to graph that vector (30, -2) in Task Four. So I leave it up to individual teachers whether to use playing cards or the slips of paper that I provide.
Returning to 2020, I do wish to tell one more Cinco de Mayo story today. One of the worst days I ever had as a sub occurred on Cinco de Mayo. It obviously wasn't last year or the year before, since the holiday fell on the weekend in those years. Thus it was earlier in my career.
And while it might have been in the older of my two current districts, I believe that this was at a middle school -- hence it must have been in a district where I no longer work. This incident occurred in an English class, and this was back when I only posted math classes on the blog. Therefore I've never mentioned this incident on the blog -- until today, that is.
This incident took place in May, so you know what that means -- SBAC testing. There was a block schedule to accommodate the state test. I believe that the students were taking the math test that day in their math classes, and so English classes had just regular work to do.
Anyway, the regular teacher specifically wrote "no bathroom passes at all today" in her lesson plans for me. But of course, one girl asked for a pass anyway. This led to the expected arguments, as both she and a few other students said, "Our teacher normally lets us go whenever we want, so why would it be any problem today?" Eventually, the girl simply walked out, and the rest of the class was out of control from that moment on.
Then again, it wasn't as if the students were behaving up to that point as well. The assignment involved one student either reading aloud or presenting something to the rest of the class, but the others were never quiet enough to hear the presenter. My response, unfortunately, was to argue -- so we were already in an argumentative mood by the time the girl walked out of the room. I also remember that this was an eighth grade class with a particularly tough group of students -- I'd been subbing at that school since the group was in seventh grade, and that cohort had misbehaved a lot that year as well.
What should I have done to avoid the arguments and handle the situation better? Notice that I've written about several restroom arguments this year as well, especially since I came up with my own rule "We attend every single second of class."
So I discussed this on the blog, and I decided that the best thing to do is simply to accept that more students will ask for restroom passes than on regular teacher days. There are some things that a regular teacher can do to limit passes that a sub can't, such as give the student a tough teacher look and say, "No, you've asked for a pass everyday this week." After all, there's no way for the sub to know who the frequent leavers are and insist that they stay. (There might be a sign-out so I can see who asks for passes a lot, but that doesn't help because I don't know the students' names.)
But all of this would go out the window on that Cinco de Mayo, because that regular teacher had written explicitly that there would be no restroom passes at all. And note -- it might be tough on a block schedule day to forbid passes, yet the regular teacher had written the schedule in her lesson plan, so she was fully aware that she was forbidding passes on a block day.
Here's what I should have done to avoid an argument -- when the girl asks for a restroom pass, I walk directly up to her and show her the teacher's lesson plan. After all, what often causes a student to argue (and her friends to join in) is if she feels I'm embarrassing her. If I say "no" out loud to her (even if I'm not arguing or yelling as I say it), she might feel embarrassed and will be ready to start arguing with me. By walking up to her and showing her the lesson plan, she'll be less embarrassed and thus more likely to cooperate with me.
Suppose the girl now claims that it's an emergency. Then I tell her that she's been made fully aware of the teacher's note and so I must write her name down since she's disobeying it. It's now a matter of discussion between her and the regular teacher upon her return to the classroom. (If she won't tell me her name, try to figure it out. Begin by checking her desk while she's at the restroom and see whether her name is on her worksheet.)
This was, of course, before I sang songs as an incentive when subbing. But if I had sung back then, I could have had an incentive where I sing an entire song if no one goes to the restroom, and one fewer verse each time someone leaves. (Note: restroom visits should be the criterion for the song incentive only when a strict restroom policy is explicitly mentioned in the lesson plan -- otherwise another criterion should be chosen.) Since it was Cinco de Mayo, I might even have chosen "Sign of the Times" as my incentive song.
Of course, I needed to avoid arguments when getting the class to be quiet as well. I'm not sure whether there was much I could do other than write down names of talking students. (I tried to assign someone a trash pickup, which led to the argument that I couldn't, since at this school, it could only be assigned online and I didn't have the password.)
Reblogging for Today
Yes -- I already reblogged my most popular post from last year. Here I'm referring to my daily reblog that I'm been doing during the virus shutdown, based on today's date, May 5th.
It's been a few years since I've made a Cinco de Mayo post. That's because the past two years, the holiday fell on the weekend. Both years, a Southern California baseball team spent the weekend in Mexico for a special two-game series -- two years ago the Dodgers threw a no-hitter against the Padres, and last year the Angels went south of the border to play the Houston Astros. (Of course, this year no sports are being played in either country.) Thus the last time Cinco de Mayo fell on a school day was three years ago, just after I left the old charter school.
Recall that at the old charter school, the grade level with the most students of Hispanic/Mexican descent was seventh grade. One day, when I was about to sing a song for music break in that class, one such guy wanted me to open my song by counting in Spanish -- "Uno, dos, tres, cuatro!"
Notice that there is a Square One TV song for which that opening might have made sense -- "Sign of the Times," aka "El Simbolo de los Tiempos." And so I considered obliging him by counting in Spanish and singing that song for him. And I wanted to do it on a special day -- and what day would have been more fitting than Cinco de Mayo?
Of course, we all know what happened -- I left the classroom and never made it to Cinco de Mayo. I did finally add "Sign of the Times" to my repertoire of songs, but not until a few months ago, well after I left the old charter.
Now that I've left the school, I regret not having performed the song much earlier. I shouldn't have had to wait until a special day to celebrate the majority culture in my seventh grade class. Since the song is all about multiplication, I could have performed it around the time of the 4's Dren Quiz on December 9th -- which I believe is when this student asked me to sing in Spanish. (And if I needed a Mexican holiday to justify the song, just use Loteria Day instead.)
For today's reblog, I'll post part of what I wrote on Cinco de Mayo 2017. Of course there's no mention of the "Sign of the Times" song. Instead, it's a Geometry activity on vectors:
Today I finally post the vector activity that I've been planning this week.
There is also a page to cut out with 36 given vectors -- since as I mentioned earlier, I don't want the students to choose the vectors. Of course, cutting out the vectors is time consuming -- even if the teacher does it before the class -- and those tiny slips of paper are easily lost. Then teachers will have to cut them out several times throughout the day.
Another way to have the students choose vectors would be to have something larger represent the vectors, such as playing cards. The playing cards can be converted to vectors, as follows:
For the horizontal component:
Ace through 10 -- valued 1 through 10
Jack -- valued -2
Queen -- valued -1
King -- valued 0
For the vertical component, use the suit:
Clubs -- valued -1
Diamonds -- valued 0
Hearts -- valued 1
Spades -- valued 2
Examples:
Eight of Diamonds -- (8, 0)
Ace of Clubs -- (1, -1)
Jack of Hearts -- (-2, 1)
Because they are larger, playing cards are less likely to be lost than the little slips of paper that I provide for this activity. But there are problems with using playing cards. First of all, the conversion from playing card to vector is another step that the first partner can get wrong -- and once again this may frustrate the second partner. (I've heard that some people don't even know the difference between clubs and spades!) Furthermore, vectors with large components, such as (8, 0) for the eight of diamonds above, become (30, -2) after performing the steps in Task Three -- and then they are asked to graph that vector (30, -2) in Task Four. So I leave it up to individual teachers whether to use playing cards or the slips of paper that I provide.
Returning to 2020, I do wish to tell one more Cinco de Mayo story today. One of the worst days I ever had as a sub occurred on Cinco de Mayo. It obviously wasn't last year or the year before, since the holiday fell on the weekend in those years. Thus it was earlier in my career.
And while it might have been in the older of my two current districts, I believe that this was at a middle school -- hence it must have been in a district where I no longer work. This incident occurred in an English class, and this was back when I only posted math classes on the blog. Therefore I've never mentioned this incident on the blog -- until today, that is.
This incident took place in May, so you know what that means -- SBAC testing. There was a block schedule to accommodate the state test. I believe that the students were taking the math test that day in their math classes, and so English classes had just regular work to do.
Anyway, the regular teacher specifically wrote "no bathroom passes at all today" in her lesson plans for me. But of course, one girl asked for a pass anyway. This led to the expected arguments, as both she and a few other students said, "Our teacher normally lets us go whenever we want, so why would it be any problem today?" Eventually, the girl simply walked out, and the rest of the class was out of control from that moment on.
Then again, it wasn't as if the students were behaving up to that point as well. The assignment involved one student either reading aloud or presenting something to the rest of the class, but the others were never quiet enough to hear the presenter. My response, unfortunately, was to argue -- so we were already in an argumentative mood by the time the girl walked out of the room. I also remember that this was an eighth grade class with a particularly tough group of students -- I'd been subbing at that school since the group was in seventh grade, and that cohort had misbehaved a lot that year as well.
What should I have done to avoid the arguments and handle the situation better? Notice that I've written about several restroom arguments this year as well, especially since I came up with my own rule "We attend every single second of class."
So I discussed this on the blog, and I decided that the best thing to do is simply to accept that more students will ask for restroom passes than on regular teacher days. There are some things that a regular teacher can do to limit passes that a sub can't, such as give the student a tough teacher look and say, "No, you've asked for a pass everyday this week." After all, there's no way for the sub to know who the frequent leavers are and insist that they stay. (There might be a sign-out so I can see who asks for passes a lot, but that doesn't help because I don't know the students' names.)
But all of this would go out the window on that Cinco de Mayo, because that regular teacher had written explicitly that there would be no restroom passes at all. And note -- it might be tough on a block schedule day to forbid passes, yet the regular teacher had written the schedule in her lesson plan, so she was fully aware that she was forbidding passes on a block day.
Here's what I should have done to avoid an argument -- when the girl asks for a restroom pass, I walk directly up to her and show her the teacher's lesson plan. After all, what often causes a student to argue (and her friends to join in) is if she feels I'm embarrassing her. If I say "no" out loud to her (even if I'm not arguing or yelling as I say it), she might feel embarrassed and will be ready to start arguing with me. By walking up to her and showing her the lesson plan, she'll be less embarrassed and thus more likely to cooperate with me.
Suppose the girl now claims that it's an emergency. Then I tell her that she's been made fully aware of the teacher's note and so I must write her name down since she's disobeying it. It's now a matter of discussion between her and the regular teacher upon her return to the classroom. (If she won't tell me her name, try to figure it out. Begin by checking her desk while she's at the restroom and see whether her name is on her worksheet.)
This was, of course, before I sang songs as an incentive when subbing. But if I had sung back then, I could have had an incentive where I sing an entire song if no one goes to the restroom, and one fewer verse each time someone leaves. (Note: restroom visits should be the criterion for the song incentive only when a strict restroom policy is explicitly mentioned in the lesson plan -- otherwise another criterion should be chosen.) Since it was Cinco de Mayo, I might even have chosen "Sign of the Times" as my incentive song.
Of course, I needed to avoid arguments when getting the class to be quiet as well. I'm not sure whether there was much I could do other than write down names of talking students. (I tried to assign someone a trash pickup, which led to the argument that I couldn't, since at this school, it could only be assigned online and I didn't have the password.)
Conclusion
I hope to post Lesson 2 Part 2 in a few days, and perhaps finally download Java by then. Of course, it all depends on how well my old computer decides to work. I know what you're thinking -- maybe I should spend my stimulus check on a new computer and leave it at that. But I'm not sure I really want to go that far yet.
No comments:
Post a Comment