› file › 127511 › download › nti... · web viewdue 6-13: facilitators guide template - cc...

Modeling Word Problems with Tape Diagrams: Multiplication and DivisionSequence of Sessions

Overarching Objectives of this March 2015 Network Team Institute Participants will be able to identify, practice, and use best instructional moves and scaffolds for chosen common core standards.

High-Level Purpose of this Session This session provides an opportunity to understand more deeply the coherence of mathematics K-7 and suggests a pedagogy allowing students to make

intuitive drawings followed by teachers’ guidance with the tape diagram. Throughout the session, participants will:o Analyze 7 multiplication and division word problem situations, “equal groups” and “multiplicative comparison with greater and lesser

unknowns,” categorizing prior to drawing. o Become more familiar with situation types and how those situations manifest in multi-step problems at later grades, thereby gaining a deeper

understanding of the ways in which the foundational work of grades : Multiplication and Division contributes to success through middle school and into algebra.

o Develop mathematically as they work on the upper grade problems, making important connections in particular to ratio and algebra.

Related Learning Experiences This topic is extended in a companion session, Modeling Word Problems with Tape Diagrams: Addition and Subtraction. This session is part of a series supporting implementation of A Story of Units. Sessions on Crafting Teaching Sequences for Extended Interventions

will also develop teachers’ ability to customize the curriculum to meet the specific needs of their students. Module Focus sessions also support implementation of the curriculum by closely examining each module in A Story of Units.

Key Points• Participants will learn about Polya’s Problem Solving Process and compare it to the RDW (Read-Draw-Write) Process. • Participants will discuss obstacles students may have with each of these processes.• Participants will explore different modes of instructional delivery and their effectiveness.• Participants will work challenging problems using the Deliberate Practice protocol.

Session Outcomes

What do we want participants to be able to do as a result of this session?

How will we know that they are able to do this?

Participants will be able to distinguish the various multiplication and division problem types.

Participants will be able to describe the relationship between simple problem types in early grades and multi-step problem types that are found in upper grades.

Participants will be able to support students in use of the tape diagram using the RDW process.

Participants will be able to articulate the key points listed above.

Session Overview

Section Time Overview Prepared Resources Facilitator Preparation

Introduction 11 minIntroduces the key ideas in this session.

• Modeling Word Problems With Tape Diagrams: Multiplication and Division PPT

• Modeling Word Problems With Tape Diagrams: Multiplication and Division Facilitator Guide

Review Modeling Word Problems with Tape Diagrams : Multiplication and Division PPT and Facilitator Guide

Problem Solving Processes

35 min

Explores Polya’s Problem Solving Process and the Read-Draw-Write (RDW) process and apply them to specific problems.


• Modeling Word Problems with Tape Diagrams : Multiplication and Division Facilitator Guide


Modes of Instructional Delivery

73 min Explores modes of instructional delivery and view them in action.

• Modeling Word Problems With Tape Diagrams: Multiplication and Division

Review Modeling Word Problems with Tape Diagrams : Multiplication and Division PPT

PPT• Modeling Word Problems

with Tape Diagrams : Multiplication and Division Facilitator Guide

and Facilitator Guide

Protocol D: Precise Descriptions of Terminology

34 minExplores Protocol D and use all of the protocols discussed so far to solve problems.




Problem Analysis 27

Explores using the different models and protocols from the previous sections to solve difficult problems.




Session Roadmap

Section: Introduction Time: 11 minutes

In this section, you will be introduced to … Materials used include:• Modeling Word Problems with Tape Diagrams : Multiplication

and Division PPT• Modeling Word Problems with Tape Diagrams : Multiplication

and Division Facilitator Guide• Modeling Word Problems with Tape Diagrams : Multiplication

and Division Participant Handout

Time Slide # Slide #/ Pic of Slide Script/ Activity directions GROUP

4 min 1. (PH – Page 2)

Participants work on solving one challenge problem.(Prompt participants to solve the “Camp Okey-Fun-Okey” problem. If they finish early, challenge them to try the other problem.)Model the tape diagram. Inform participants that the solutions for each of the problems will be in the answer packet they will receive at the end of the session.

Last summer, at Camp Okey-Fun-Okey, the ratio of the number of boy campers to the number of girl campers was 𝟖:𝟕. If there were a total of 195 campers, how many boy campers were there? How many girl campers? (G6-M1-L5)

PS

2 min 2. Total Session Time: 180 Minutes

Introduce yourself and the professional development session to participants.

Codes within PPT: (PS = Partner Share; ITT = Independent Think Time; WG = Whole Group; PH = Participant Handout)

** Descriptions of Addition and Subtraction Problem Types (Situations) can be found on 6 of the Participant Handout. **

As time allows, consider using Protocol C (PH – Page 43) at various times throughout the session.

WG

A NOTE REGARDING APPENDIX C – STAGES OF MODEL DRAWING:At an ideal time within the session, turn attention to Appendix C (pp 48-49 of the Participant Handout). Give participants time to read and analyze the document. Encourage them to pay close attention to the 6 Stages of Model Drawing. Engage participants in a discussion. What are the new complexities at each stage? How does the narrative on page 48 contribute to an understanding of tape diagrams? How can this document help inform teachers?

5 min 3. (PH – Page 3)1. Participants read and analyze the highlighted situation types

silently. (2 minutes)2. Participants stand and find a partner from a different table to

create an A x B = ____ for one minute. Change partners and create a C ÷ A = ___ situation, and finally change to create a C ÷ B = ___ situation. Encourage participants to use grade-appropriate measurement, whole number, or fractional units. (3 minutes total)

Facilitator Considerations - Whole group: share examples and have all identify the situation type.

1. Which situation types do we use most frequently?

ITT PS WG

Section: Problem Solving Processes Time: 35 minutes

In this section, you will explore Polya’s Problem Solving Process and the Read-Draw-Write (RDW) process and apply them to specific problems.

Materials used include:• Modeling Word Problems with Tape Diagrams : Multiplication





5 min 4. 1. Provide some history of Polya’s Problem Solving Process.2. Participants compare Polya’s process to the RDW process.3. Discuss obstacles students may have with each of these

processes.4. Share thoughts about why Eureka Math has chosen to use the

RDW process.5. Participants read through the Pedagogy Notes on page 5 of the

Participant Handout and discuss in groups how this would look in their classroom.

NOTE: Facilitator will use RDW during “super-modeling” of problems throughout the PD.

*** RDW has been chosen because the Draw (and Label) process helps students to make sense of the problem (understand). Students then write and solve an equation. ***

WG PS

Notes on Pedagogy:When using the RDW process, it often involves moving back and forth between reading and drawing. Students might first read the problem entirely then reread the first sentence. Draw and label. Read the second sentence. Draw and label. Consider the following example:Mr. Peterson bought a case (24 boxes) of fruit juice. One-third of the drinks were grape and two-thirds were cranberry. How many boxes of cranberry drinks did Mr. Peterson buy? (G5 M2 L10)Read:Mr. Peterson bought a case (24 boxes) of fruit juice.Draw:

Read:One-third of the drinks were grape.Draw:

Read: Two-thirds were cranberry. Draw:

Read:How many boxes of cranberry drinks did Mr. Peterson buy?Write:

Polya’s process culminates with “look back.” The RDW process, on the other hand, culminates with a statement and a labeled drawing, an illustration of the story. The statement puts the answer back into context. Does the statement make sense? Does it correspond correctly to the drawing? Does the drawing tell the story? This is MP.2 in action, “reasoning abstractly and quantitatively.” The drawing precipitates the reasoning. The student does not figure out the problem and then draw but rather decodes the relationships through the drawing. The abstract numbers are manipulated in the calculation and restored as quantities in the statement.

10 min

5. (PH – Pages 6-7)Set 1, Group A (Unknown product – whole numbers (#4 has fractions))

1. Facilitator super-models the first problem using the RDW process using the “Modeling with Interactive Questioning” method.

NOTE: Solve numerically below the tape diagram so the right and left handed people can see the model while they work. Follow this suggestion throughout the day.

2. Participants complete the Problem Solving Protocol A (PH – Page 43).

NOTE: Reasoning for Step 3 in the protocol: When we, as educators, model a problem, it is important we present a solution whose relationship to the problem situation is understandable by the most students.3. Classify the problem type and label with the variables, identifying the meaning of the factors. A X B = C. Label the factors.

Facilitator Considerations: Criteria for a good model – have apiece of chart paper up and we addcriteria of a good model as we go through the day.

WG ITT PS

10 min

6. (PH – Page 8)Set 1, Group B (Unknown product – fractions)

1. Facilitator models the first problem using the RDW process using the “Guided Practice” method.

2. Participants complete the Problem Solving Protocol A.3. Classify the problem type and label with the variables,

identifying the meaning of the factors. A X B = C. Label the factors.

Facilitator Considerations:Possible Whole Group Discussion Questions:

1. What are some road blocks students will face?2. How can you help them through these road blocks?

WG ITT PS

10 min

7. (PH – Page 9)Set 1, Group C (Unknown product – fraction of a whole)

1. Facilitator models the first problem using the RDW process.2. Participants complete the Problem Solving Protocol A.3. Classify the problem type and label with the variables, identifying

the meaning of the factors. A X B = C. Label the factors.


1. What is different about this group compared to the previous two groups?

2. What type of problem was the hardest to model?

WG ITT PS

Section: Modes of Instructional Delivery Time: 73 minutes

In this section, you will explore modes of instructional delivery and view them in action.

Materials used include:• Modeling Word Problems with Tape Diagrams : Multiplication and

Division PPT


• Modeling Word Problems with Tape Diagrams : Multiplication and Division Participant Handout

TimeSlide #

Slide #/ Pic of Slide Script/ Activity directions GROUP

2 min 8. (PH – Page 10)Participants read the different modes of instructional delivery along with the paragraph that precedes it.

Modes of Instructional Delivery

A teacher also needs to make a decision about the mode of delivery of instruction each day as it is not dictated in the curriculum at all. Will students be encouraged to use a specific model to reason about the relationships within the problem (e.g. an array or tape diagram) or will any math drawing that makes sense be encouraged? Will this be a better problem to use a step-by-step guided approach because of new complexities, or will the students work independently and then share out their strategies? Will the students work independently or in pairs? In cooperative groups with a protocol or solo and then share with a partner? The chart below lays out three modes of delivery of instruction. There are many gradations within and between each one.

ITT

8 min 9. (PH – Page 10) (Set 1, Group A, #3)1. Show the video and ask participants to pay attention to the mode of delivery

being used.2. Participants determine which type of delivery is being modeled in the video.3. Participants discuss what they would hear, see, and experience with the other

two modes of delivery.4. Participants discuss strengths and weaknesses of each mode of instructional

delivery and when each might be the right choice.

Facilitator Considerations:

Possible Whole Group Discussion Questions:1. How would the other two modes look/sound different than the one we saw in

the video?2. During instruction, when did the teacher release the students to work on

their own? What affect did that have on the students' work?3. If the students had worked independently, how would the student work have

been different?4. If the teacher had controlled the guided instruction more, how would the

work be different?

WG PS WG

5. If the teacher had modeled interactively, how would the students' experience be different?

6. When is it best to control more? Less?

10 min

10. (PH – Page 11)1. Direct participants to the Deliberate Practice Protocol B and have them

silently read the protocol.2. Participants decide who will be the teacher and then follow the protocol for

the indicated problem (Set 1,Group A, #3).

Three boxes weighing 128 pounds each and one box weighing 254 pounds were loaded onto the back of an empty truck. A crate of apples was then loaded onto the same truck. If the total weight loaded onto the truck was 2,000 pounds, how much did the crate of apples weigh? (G4 M3 L13)

** Refer to Deliberate Practice Stems found on Page 44 of the Participant Handout.**

PS

10 min

11. (PH – Pages 12-15)Set 2, Group A (Problems 1-4 only) (Group size unknown – partitive – whole numbers)

1. Facilitator models the first problem using the RDW process.2. Participants complete the Problem Solving Protocol.3. Classify the problem type and label with the variables, identifying the

meaning of the factors. A X B = C. Label the factors.


Possible Whole Group Discussion Questions:1. What type of division is being modeled in these problems?2. Are these problems more/less difficult than problems in Set 1? Why?3. Where may students get stuck when modeling these types of problems?

WG ITT PS

15 min

12. (PH – Pages 16-17)Set 2, Group B (Group size unknown – partitive – fractions (“whole” as 1))



WG ITT PS

8 min 13. (PH – Pages 18-19)1. Participants silently examine each model and write a word problem that can

be solved using the model.2. Signal participants to discuss their word problems with a partner.

NOTE: The actual word problems given in the curriculum for all models throughout the session are presented in Appendix B of the Participant Handout (Page 47).


1. How were your and your partners’ problems similar/different?2. Is one problem more difficult than another?

ITT PS

10 min

14. (PH – Pages 20-21)Set 3, Group A (Number of groups unknown – measurement – whole numbers)



WG ITT PS

10 min

15. (PH – Page 22-23)Set 3, Group B (Number of groups unknown – measurement – fractions)



WG ITT PS

Section: Protocol D: Precise Descriptions of Terminology Time: 34 minutes

In this section, you will explore Protocol D and use all of the protocols discussed so far to solve problems.





TimeSlide #

Slide #/ Pic of Slide Script/ Activity directions GROUP

4 min 16. (PH – Page 24)Protocol D: Precise Descriptions of Terminology

1. Participants individually derive a description of these terms based on their past experiences.

2. Participants share description with partners and revise as necessary.3. Participants share their descriptions with the whole group.4. Participants are guided to the glossary, providing the precise descriptions

from the curriculum.Glossary (PH – Page 45)

Measurement Division: The whole and the size or measure of one group is known, but the number of groups needs to be determined.

Partitive Division: The whole and the number of groups being created are known, but the size of the groups needs to be determined.

ITT PS

10 min

17. (PH – Page 25)1. Distribute student work.2. Participants compare and contrast the student work.3. Participants discuss how they would help the struggling student after

examining their work.

ITT PS

5 min 18. (PH – Page 26 and 27)1. Participants read and analyze the highlighted problem types silently. (1

minute)2. Participants stand and find a partner from a different table. For 1 minute,

using grade-appropriate measurement, whole number, or fractional units, they create a ‘Compare, Larger Unknown’ situation.

3. Participants change partners. For 1 minute, they create a ‘Compare, Smaller Unknown A > 1’ situation.

4. Participants change partners. For 1 minute, they create a ‘Compare, Smaller Unknown’ situation.

5. Participants change partners. For 1 minute, they create a ‘Compare, Larger

ITT PS WG

Unknown A < 1’ situation.


1. How are these different than the problem types we discussed and practiced earlier?

15 min

19. (PH – Pages 28-29)

Set 4, Group A (Compare – larger unknown)1. Facilitator models the first problem using the RDW process.2. Participants complete the Problem Solving Protocol.3. Classify the problem type and label with the variables, identifying the


Note: Set 4, Group B (Compare – smaller unknown – A<1) is on Page 30 of the PH. It will not be used in this session. It remains in the handout for the participants to reference at a later time.

WG ITT PS

Section: Problem Analysis Time: 27 minutes

In this section, you will explore using the different models and protocols from the previous sections to solve difficult problems.






5 min 20. (PH – Page 31)1. Participants choose one problem in Set 4 they found difficult to

model and then find a partner from another table.2. Each partner shares the model drawn for the problems he/she

chose and why he/she believes this problem was difficult.


Participants share some questions that could help students. “Share It” cards.Survey the room to see who chose difficult problems from each group, showing that one type of problem may be more difficult than another group.

Out of Seat Sharing

13 min 21. (PH – Pages 32-34)Set 5, Group A (Compare – smaller unknown - (A>1))

1. Facilitator models the first problem using the RDW process.2. Participants complete the Problem Solving Protocol.3. Classify the problem type and label with the variables, identifying

the meaning of the factors. A X B = C. Label the factors.

Note: Although not included within the content of this session, Set 5, Group B (Compare – larger unknown - (A<1)) (PH - Pages 35-36) and Set 6, Group A (Ratios) (PH – Pages 38-40) are included within the Participant Handout. Both sets remain in the handout for the participants to reference at a later time. Also included within the Participant Handout, on pages 37 and 41, are models for which word problems can be written.

WG ITT PS

6 min 22. (PH – Page 42)Revisit the Camp Okey-Fun-Okey problem. Have a brief conversation about how the multiplicative comparison model bridges so beautifully into student work with ratios.

Use “Share It” cards to have participants share their thinking.

Last summer, at Camp Okey-Fun-Okey, the ratio of the number of boy campers to the number of girl campers was 𝟖:𝟕. If there were a total of 195 campers, how many boy campers were there? How many girl campers? (G6-M1-L5)

WG

3 min 23. How does knowledge of the various problem situations support educators to be more effective in empowering every student to be a better problem solver?THE FOLLOWING VIDEO/ACTIVITY COULD BE INCORPORATED INTO ANY PART OF THE SESSION. THE PURPOSE OF THE VIDEO IS TO SHOW HOW THE RDW PROCESS ENCOURAGES DEEP THINKING AND CAN BE EVIDENCED IN THE STANDARDS FOR MATHEMATICAL PRACTICE.Prompt participants to turn to APPENDIX D of the Participant Handout (Page 50). Show the video of the G2 student explaining his thinking. Prompt participants to take note of the model drawing and of the explanation that the student gives. Discuss how the student’s answers are evidenced in the Standards for Mathematical Practice. (See activity below.)Analysis of Evidence of the Mathematical Practice Standards within a Grade 2 ClassroomDirections: Watch the following short video clip of the Grade 2 student’s thinking about his work.Discuss with your partner: What Standards of Mathematical Practice are evidenced? How are they evidenced?MP.1 Make sense of problems and persevere in solving them.MP.2 Reason abstractly and quantitatively.MP.3 Construct viable arguments and critique the reasoning of others.MP.4 Model with mathematics.MP.5 Use appropriate tools strategically.MP.6 Attend to precision.MP.7 Look for and make use of structure.

ITT WG

MP.8 Look for and express regularity in repeated reasoning.Discussion questions might include the following:How is the student…• decontextualizing and contextualizing? (MP.2)• modeling with mathematics? (MP.4)• using appropriate tools strategically? (MP.5)• attending to precision? (MP.6)• looking for and making use of structure? (MP.7)

Use the following icons in the script to indicate different learning modes.

Video Reflect on a prompt Active learning Turn and talk

Turnkey Materials Provided

• Modeling Word Problems with Tape Diagrams : Multiplication and Division PPT• Modeling Word Problems with Tape Diagrams : Multiplication and Division Facilitator Guide

Modeling Word Problems with Tape Diagrams : Multiplication and Division Participant Handout

Additional Suggested Resources

• How to Implement A Story of Units• A Story of Units Year Long Curriculum Overview• A Story of Units CCLS Checklist

› file › 127511 › download › nti... · web viewdue 6-13: facilitators guide template - cc...

Documents