Comments on: Three Claims Function Carnival Makes About Online Math Education

By: Dan Meyer

Dan Meyer — Thu, 27 Feb 2014 04:11:33 +0000

Hi Zachary, great critique. We're aware of the issue and will be resolving it in future updates. Thanks for taking the time.

By: Zachary

Zachary — Tue, 25 Feb 2014 04:54:06 +0000

Great activity! My students were pretty into how you can see the man or car described by your graph laid over the original. They were a little bummed because they couldn’t figure out how to save orreturn to their work (they started after they took a quiz, and had about 30 min in class to work). Is this possible or do they need to complete the exercise in one sitting?

By: Jacob Klein

Jacob Klein — Tue, 04 Feb 2014 02:15:46 +0000

Kudos! I like how the image of Cannon Man appears when you hover over the graph. Even before committing to any answer, I get instant feedback. Also love the diversity of drawing tools – line, dots, freehand.

How many different “filters for common misconceptions” did you put in for each puzzle? And what kind of AI or sorting algorithms are you using to detect misconceptions?

By: Nyima Drayang

Nyima Drayang — Wed, 29 Jan 2014 23:13:13 +0000

Spot on! This is actually VERY similar to how motion is controlled in 3D animation software (except in 3 separate axes: x,y and z – which kind of hurts your brain in a good way!)
The feedback tool is exceptionally well thought out – I like how you can move the play-head and place a dot at key locations etc. all the time seeing both the video and your own version.
As Chris Painter mentioned: using this tool in conjunction with other videos would add another level of challenge. Could pupils upload videos of their own and then use the tool to graph them? Maybe that’s a big ask? : )

By: Matt Vaudrey

Matt Vaudrey — Wed, 29 Jan 2014 23:03:08 +0000

My 8th grade math intervention class just did this, and these thoughts need to get written while they’re fresh:

1.) The user interface is clean and easy-to-use, even on iPads (though it automatically selected blocks of text when students tapped-and-held too long).
2.) I gave easy corrections while the class was working, viewing individual graphs (projected on the wall) and offering feedback in real time. Many who were stuck would just watch the screen as I critiqued others, then apply my advice to their own.
3.) The Carnival supported students working at their own pace. Three finished the whole 6 steps (nearly perfectly) before 1/4 of the class finished cannon man.
4.) That class–and probably all my classes–need remediation on “the graph of a line is a series of points all close together”. I had the same conversation 15 times one-on-one.
5.) More students were engaged with this activity than during my lesson the hour previous.

Well done.
~Matt

By: Maryke

Maryke — Wed, 29 Jan 2014 20:44:09 +0000

That WAS fun! I was mesmerized for a good ten minutes, and embarrassed by my first attempt at the cars activity. I should really know better ;). After fixing my mistake, it was very satisfying to see the “feedback” problem that I now knew how to fix! If go this excited over “being wrong and then right” and only imagine how my students would feel!

By: Holly Brie Thomas

Holly Brie Thomas — Wed, 29 Jan 2014 16:32:34 +0000

Gorgeous! It’s wonderful to see someone actually designing lessons (and software) that adds value by using technology, instead of essentially duplicating a paper-and-pen experience digitally.
I checked out the PARCC sample items yesterday and had the exact same reaction as Dan’s responses to Jason — they are basically old-school tasks with digital data entry, and with a clunky interface at that — Who clicks 48 separate boxes adjacent boxes when they want to select them in a spreadsheet? Why must I structure my work as a paragraph proof because the entry box is text-based & linear? Why is there no opportunity to SKETCH anything anywhere? Why didn’t the interface CONNECT the plotted points in the “graph 3 vertices of a rectangle and find the fourth”, which would at least add _some_ value beyond pen-and-paper graphing. And don’t get me started on the quality of the tasks as actual assessment items capable of providing meaningful, nuanced feedback about what a student can actually do…
Dan, if you have ANY ability to get what you are doing in front of the PARCC/SBAC folks, please do! Tasks like Function Carnival beautifully illustrate a paradigm shift from using technology to duplicate “the way we’ve always done it”, to a using technology as a tool to give students a deeper experience that takes them further into the math. The teacher feedback with miniature versions of the graphs students created is wonderful — much more powerful than any kind of alpha-numeric data would be.
This reminds me of a methods course I took focused on teaching functions using graphing calculators. I’m just old enough that graphing functions in high school was all pencil & paper, and there was still resistence to letting students use standard calculators in lower-level courses like Algebra. Consequently, it took a while to graph a quadratic function because you had to calculate 5-7 points and then plot them, so exposure to parabolic functions was mostly limited to those that could be expressed as x^2 + bx + c or -x^2 + bx + c, and which were located relatively close to the origin. However, with graphing calculators, the focus could shift from calculating and plotting individual functions to examining permutations within a class of functions (i.e. viewing a quadratic function through the lens of standard form, vertex form or factored form, as well as looking at how changes to variables impact the graph), and easily comparing classes of functions. The calculators could have been used to look at old-school functions faster (HOW the material was presented), but the real power actually came from changing WHAT material was presented — the automaticity of graphing the calculators afforded allowed for deeper exploration of functions (and hopefully deeper understanding, as well).
Since so much of what is happening in education right now is being driven by high-stakes assessment, it would be amazing if the folks designing the high-stakes assessments were thinking along the lines of Function Carnival, rather than drag-and-drop, point-and-click, and type-the-number-in-the-box, as they currently (sadly) appear to have the ability to reach the widest audience.

By: Elaine Watson

Elaine Watson — Wed, 29 Jan 2014 03:49:51 +0000

Jason, I tried them out too. Ouch! I would not agree that the tasks aim in the same direction as Dan’s and Christopher’s tasks. I answered all of the items and was told that 4 of the 6 did not have answers. This was because I evidently didn’t know the nuances, the correct format, of the system. It was not intuitive at all. It also did not include the feedback loop that the blue and green icons supplied in Function
Carnival. Granted that the PARCC tasks were not necessarily functions. Considering only functions with an independent and dependent variable allowed allowed Function Carnival to be more focused. Thanks, though, for sending the link. I am hoping that there is a major overhaul before this becomes the real assessment!

By: Dan Meyer

Dan Meyer — Tue, 28 Jan 2014 23:42:31 +0000

Jason:

The interesting thing is, philosophically, it makes all the same points as your #1, yet somehow it comes off worse.

I see how it aims in the same direction. It's an instance where the tools get in the way of thought, where the same task (constructing a geometric argument) would be easier on paper than digitally. It doesn't enhance thought. It's like running an already-pretty-tough race with leg weights.

By: Jason Dyer

Jason Dyer — Tue, 28 Jan 2014 22:49:31 +0000

@Dan: The equation editor is especially painful. I challenge anyone to type in the geometry proof they are asking for without tearing their hair out and/or having the browser crash and lose all their data.

The interesting thing is, philosophically, it makes all the same points as your #1, yet somehow it comes off worse.