Two comments:

@Dina, your critique describes the failure of every lesson plan sharing site to date. They ask for lesson plans that too particular to the pacing and style of the author’s class for anyone else to download apart from really desperate new teachers.

I have built the WCYDWT framework, instead, around the rule of least power, which means the media come pre-packaged with the least possible structure to get a discussion started – a raw video clip or photo or sound file with the mathematical structure waiting somewhere in the wings – specifically so it can be adapted easily to the most classes possible.

@sylvia, I’m not sure you appreciate the range of possible outcomes here. It took me three years using the same tasty/easy picture to go from a simple conversation about which quadrant was the worst quadrant for a fruit to a conversation about how a coordinate graph is so much better than a dot plot of the same information. All of those exercises resulted in better retention and more fun than my textbook’s approach to quadrants, but yeah, the better you are as a teacher the more success you’ll have with these resources. Nothing too controversial about that, I hope.

1. cover up all the fruit.
2. have an argument about where fruit goes.
3. work mathematical terms into the conversation as they become useful.

I think 2 & 3 require quite a bit of mathematical imagination on the teacher’s part plus skills in steering group conversation. Neither of these are easy. This kind of conversation will veer from the “right answer” if you really do allow student to discuss their theories. It takes understanding more than the mechanics of how to solve problems as the textbook suggests to a greater and wider understanding of how to see student conceptions, misconceptions, and perhaps new ideas as viable paths to possible solutions. That kind of mathematical imagination is not “easy” to develop.

I also agree with Dina’s line of questioning. I think the creation of these WCYDWT problems helps you anticipate student reactions. Finding them, tuning them, and testing them out hones your skills. Plus, over time, you’ve become more adept at steering the resulting conversations towards the math you are trying to teach.

I’m just not seeing how handing these artifacts off to a different teacher shortcuts the process. And I certainly don’t see this as “easy.”

I’m not saying it’s impossible, and creating an electronic treasure trove of these items would be extremely useful. That being said, even if you got it together, I am doubtful that the WCYDWT product– divorced from the process of creating it– lives up to your lofty claim. Why would it revolutionize teaching practice any more than plunking a Smartboard into a struggling teacher’s classroom does?

Teaching is just too complex a phenomena, and the true benefits of WCYDWT to *practice*, as far as I can see, are tied too tightly to the hands-on creation of the thing. So now tell me why I’m wrong.

Dina:: … it seems you are talking about the ease, fun, and financial freedom of teachers downloading and using *your* WCYDWT work.

Swap out “your” with “anyone’s” and I’d say that’s about right.

“I’m confused. Why do you need to know After Effects, Photoshop, or Premiere Pro to have a conversation with your class about the tasty / easy graph?”

…with your comments in “Who Cares”?

“One, the average WCYDWT activity takes me ten hours to complete. Maybe I flatter myself, but this form of curriculum development involves something more than just a few snapshots.”

Given the above, seems to me that if you’re talking “easy, fun, and free,” you’re talking about something very different from empowering teachers to create beautiful, class-specific, local standards-based WCYDWT stuff. Rather, it it seems you are talking about the ease, fun, and financial freedom of teachers downloading and using *your* WCYDWT work.

Not that there’s anything wrong with pimping good curriculum. But let’s be clear– given the extremely small quantity of tools on your shortlist, of which a whopping 50% is yours– that this is what you are doing.

Many of you have vastly overrated the ease of educational computing.

thanks for this in particular.

I firmly believe that WCYDWT is so much more powerful than a traditional math textbook. I want it to spread like lice in a kindergarten classroom.

Gross. I appreciate the sentiment, however.

I think the site you are creating is brilliant. I agree that it will make WCYDWT more accessible to many more teachers. It would thrill me beyond belief if 80% jump on it.

It’s possible that my concerns stem from being an elementary school teacher rather than middle/high. In my experience, many elementary school teachers, even really fabulous ones, are intimidated by math. Many teachers who would never use a textbook for social studies or English rely on a math textbook for everything. It’s hard for me to imagine them being able/willing to open things up in the way WCYDWT does. I hope I’m wrong.

I firmly believe that WCYDWT is so much more powerful than a traditional math textbook. I want it to spread like lice in a kindergarten classroom.