Say what you mean, the importance of language in a math class
“Why?” asked a student on some day in that one class. The teacher replied, “Because.” Often this conversation goes on without even a word spoken aloud. Teachers develop routines in the classroom, and students learn to follow them. The cliche at home of “Do as I say, not as I do,” doesn’t always fit into the classroom structure of I do, we do, you do (which may not be the best method either). It might have transformed into more of a modeling-focused perspective of “Do as I do [, not as I say].” Words in the classroom can get confusing, leading many teachers to struggle using proper language with students and instead depending on visual aids and demonstrations. These conversations can get even more complicated when the students jump in.
Students are true artists when it comes to words and interpreting directions. They are the best peer-editing service, often exposing any fault or loophole left open in an activity. A skilled teacher can anticipate these attempts for learners to go off script and plan accordingly. An even more skilled teacher can say less with more, only giving a few cleverly designed guidelines that allow students to explore and still arrive at some type of expected outcome. For example, an assignment may have required students to write 1-2 page research paper on the topic of proportional relationships and its applications in scaling up or expanding a business. This guideline is specific but has too many holes. Through various interpretations of format, the students can complete the task without demonstrating any understanding. Some think that more detail in the directions is the remedy for this situation. I’m on the other side, preferring to give directions that would say something like, “In enough words and/or pictures, show me how proportional reasoning can help expand a business.”
Many view math as an objective and direct subject, being so reasonable and having one answer (or at least a best answer). Some also say that one method is the best method and should be the only one that any true mathematician should use. There is a strong movement to have a more open middle lead by dynamic educators such as Dan Meyer. Math still has structure, and such structure should be highlighted. I think it’s just foolish of us to attempt to summarize that structure into discrete, specific statements and expect the statements to transfer the understanding directly and objectively. Math is just as much abstract as it is concrete.
This entire preface is to address one major issue with the most common prompt given in a math activity: “Solve it.” First of all, we might even need clarification on the it that needs to be solved. More importantly what does it mean (in the context of a math activity) to solve. I ask this question to my students every year, sometimes multiple times a year, and their most common responses often include:
- work it out
- break it down
- simplify it
- find the solution
- or everyone’s favorite Nike slogan (yeah, that one you’re thinking of right now)
- and sometimes an unrelated word like sold