This was an odd week. First session only had one new explorer with us. None of our regulars so I just we started with last week's challenges and number bonds/split three ways. We finished with Nim. It was a good introductory session as I got to know quite a bit about what he can do and how he reasons his way to an answer. I should have an introductory session for all new students like this. Worth thinking about. I could get some of the cornerstone activities that we do regularly and assess number bonds, multiplication, shape ideas and so on.
The second session was almost doomed from the start. I didn't get the things I needed ready and my printer stopped working. That said, I should have been able to get through it with if I had had a clearer idea of what out comes I wanted. I got bogged down on activities (not for the first or last time probably). In hindsight, I should have set it up as exploring how difference works. I had activities pointing towards this and plenty of opportunity to explore at each level. The younger ones could play the balance game, the older ones could have worked on the challenge. The older one could have supported and also worked on the consecutive challenge. I was not in charge of my options so to speak.
The first game hi lo was reasonably engaging but I'm sure I could have got more out of it. It should have been leading to the concepts of equality and difference. I could have had points or a way back into the game for those who were out by getting them to guess the difference also. We could have then done + and - instead of H & L. I should have had cards that they just hold up.
The cuisenaire activity also started well and they the younger ones did really well with that and showed a lot of reasoning skills. The older ones did useful reasoning also. It just was too stand alone and I don't think that anyone was sold on what they were doing. I was not clear enough myself. I wanted them to associate numbers with the amount and use difference to confirm the number that it should be. Larger blocks would have been good also and more of a choice. Getting IN to ask certain questions and critique thinking through the questions also would have been a better way to get them involved in the thinking that I wanted.
Getting the number sentences from the three blocks was a good choice of an activity for the session but poorly run. It needs more of a hook or competitive edge. To add to this it would be good to present 4 numbers and see if they can find the odd one out. For example, In the case of 2, 3, 6, 8 it would be 3 as it cannot combine with two other numbers. I should have got them to link the bars to the number lines also. So many missed opportunities. I couldn't find or print number lines of course. Organisation! Set up a grid for them to write the three numbers that combine in triangle vertices and the odd one out in the middle. I could have explored one number that could change to include the odd one and things like that.
The towers activity was just a mess. It could have led on from the previous activity. The strips of laminate just confused the challenge. The little ones had no way to get into the activity. A story would have been a good intro for this. It could have been that the king's tower has to be 5 higher than the Prince's and they have to use a certain number of blocks. I could have highlighted methods such as trial and improvement (just moving one at a time and evaluating each time) or getting the right difference and putting the rest on equally. IN came out with really good methods but I didn't use it. Again this could have been on challenge cards once I had confirmed that explorers had the activity. I should really have got the really little ones playing with the scale (limited weights!). Actually the scale activity went reasonably well for them. They had some success after a while. It just needed to be clearer from the start. I challenge them all individually to find ways to balance it and then record the solutions. I could have got the little ones to explore that further after seeing everyone do it.
Arithmagons are a great activity to add to these or to extend the towers activity. Again no link. Not thought through well enough (until now). Start with the puzzle intro that I used (covering up the edge numbers of a completed solution and asking them to guess what's there. A few of these examples would be a good intro to the puzzle.) The challenge could be to find the link with the previous (towers) puzzle.
The ending game also really good if the lessons have been learnt from the previous activities. This week's session. It deals with the same idea of difference and equality. Before playing it, a structured talk about what had been learnt would have been good. It would be great if I could have had concept cards that I showed at the beginning (odd, even, one more one less, balance etc.) and got some ideas about meanings from them and told them that these ideas might be important in the session. I could then check what the links were or if any had been discovered. Odd and even is really important for the game and I could ask them to see if they can tell why. It is also important for the towers and the balancing activity so I should have asked them about it. It probably would have been good to do a specific odd and even adding thing in the previous session. I think it was planned but not executed. Definitely try to get it included in future sessions
I understand this session a lot better now and so it is good in that respect. It's a shame that yesterday those in the session had to suffer it but hopefully they were not too badly affected.
The second session was almost doomed from the start. I didn't get the things I needed ready and my printer stopped working. That said, I should have been able to get through it with if I had had a clearer idea of what out comes I wanted. I got bogged down on activities (not for the first or last time probably). In hindsight, I should have set it up as exploring how difference works. I had activities pointing towards this and plenty of opportunity to explore at each level. The younger ones could play the balance game, the older ones could have worked on the challenge. The older one could have supported and also worked on the consecutive challenge. I was not in charge of my options so to speak.
The first game hi lo was reasonably engaging but I'm sure I could have got more out of it. It should have been leading to the concepts of equality and difference. I could have had points or a way back into the game for those who were out by getting them to guess the difference also. We could have then done + and - instead of H & L. I should have had cards that they just hold up.
The cuisenaire activity also started well and they the younger ones did really well with that and showed a lot of reasoning skills. The older ones did useful reasoning also. It just was too stand alone and I don't think that anyone was sold on what they were doing. I was not clear enough myself. I wanted them to associate numbers with the amount and use difference to confirm the number that it should be. Larger blocks would have been good also and more of a choice. Getting IN to ask certain questions and critique thinking through the questions also would have been a better way to get them involved in the thinking that I wanted.
Getting the number sentences from the three blocks was a good choice of an activity for the session but poorly run. It needs more of a hook or competitive edge. To add to this it would be good to present 4 numbers and see if they can find the odd one out. For example, In the case of 2, 3, 6, 8 it would be 3 as it cannot combine with two other numbers. I should have got them to link the bars to the number lines also. So many missed opportunities. I couldn't find or print number lines of course. Organisation! Set up a grid for them to write the three numbers that combine in triangle vertices and the odd one out in the middle. I could have explored one number that could change to include the odd one and things like that.
The towers activity was just a mess. It could have led on from the previous activity. The strips of laminate just confused the challenge. The little ones had no way to get into the activity. A story would have been a good intro for this. It could have been that the king's tower has to be 5 higher than the Prince's and they have to use a certain number of blocks. I could have highlighted methods such as trial and improvement (just moving one at a time and evaluating each time) or getting the right difference and putting the rest on equally. IN came out with really good methods but I didn't use it. Again this could have been on challenge cards once I had confirmed that explorers had the activity. I should really have got the really little ones playing with the scale (limited weights!). Actually the scale activity went reasonably well for them. They had some success after a while. It just needed to be clearer from the start. I challenge them all individually to find ways to balance it and then record the solutions. I could have got the little ones to explore that further after seeing everyone do it.
Arithmagons are a great activity to add to these or to extend the towers activity. Again no link. Not thought through well enough (until now). Start with the puzzle intro that I used (covering up the edge numbers of a completed solution and asking them to guess what's there. A few of these examples would be a good intro to the puzzle.) The challenge could be to find the link with the previous (towers) puzzle.
The ending game also really good if the lessons have been learnt from the previous activities. This week's session. It deals with the same idea of difference and equality. Before playing it, a structured talk about what had been learnt would have been good. It would be great if I could have had concept cards that I showed at the beginning (odd, even, one more one less, balance etc.) and got some ideas about meanings from them and told them that these ideas might be important in the session. I could then check what the links were or if any had been discovered. Odd and even is really important for the game and I could ask them to see if they can tell why. It is also important for the towers and the balancing activity so I should have asked them about it. It probably would have been good to do a specific odd and even adding thing in the previous session. I think it was planned but not executed. Definitely try to get it included in future sessions
I understand this session a lot better now and so it is good in that respect. It's a shame that yesterday those in the session had to suffer it but hopefully they were not too badly affected.
Hikaku would work well in this session also for an exploration section. http://www.puzzlephil.com/puzzles/hikaku/en/
ReplyDelete