Regents Recap — June 2015: Are They Reading?

Here is another installment in my series reviewing the NY State Regents exams in mathematics.

I have been reviewing New York State Math Regents exams for several years now, and I occasionally wonder if anyone involved in the production of the exams pays attention to what I say.

Earlier this year I wrote about a terrible question asking students to justify why the sum of a rational number and an irrational number is irrational.  (Answer:  because the sum of a rational number and an irrational number is always irrational.)

So I was pleasantly surprised to see this question in the June 2015 Common Core Algebra exam.

2015 CC ALG 8

This multiple choice question assesses the same concept, but doesn’t ask the student to write a circular explanation as justification.  The less these tests ask students to do mathematically meaningless things, the better.

I also had serious complaints about how certain 3D geometry concepts were handled on the June, 2015 Common Core Geometry exam.  In particular, a solid of revolution problem was very poorly stated.  This question from the August, 2015 Common Core Geometry Regents exam shows some improvement.

2015 August CC GEO 3

It’s also true that recent locus questions have not suffered from the imprecise language I complained about some time ago:  in the last few iterations, problems have been more carefully worded to ask students explicitly to sketch individual loci and then indicate their intersection.

In the vastness of these flawed tests, it’s nice to occasionally see some progress.

Is Steven Strogatz Writing Regents Exam Questions?

When I saw this question on the 2015 Common Core Geometry Regents exam, I couldn’t help but think of mathematician and author Steven Strogatz.

2015 CC GEO 23

Strogatz wrote a popular series on math in the New York Times, and in his piece “Take it to the Limit“, he shares a beautiful and intuitive derivation of the formula for the area of a circle.  That technique involves slicing the circle up into sectors and re-arranging them into a shape that approximates a rectangle.

Circle with many slices

I’m certain his piece inspired this question (which I like), just as it inspired me when I was cutting up my homemade pizza!

Pizza Rectangle

Maybe we can add test prep to the long list of reasons to be reading Steve’s work!

Regents Recap — June 2015: Pointless Questions

Here is another installment in my series reviewing the NY State Regents exams in mathematics.

I really do not understand the point of questions like this, from the June 2015 Geometry Regents exam.

2015 GEO 12Why do we manufacture artificial multiple choice questions to assess whether or not students understands geometric constructions?  Why not just ask them to construct something?

Moreover, the construction aspect of this question is essentially irrelevant:  the question might as well be, “Which diagram shows an altitude?”.

The Regents exam writers have been using this approach in testing geometric constructions for some time.  It just seems pointless to me.  And it is often the case that the exam also includes a free-response question that asks the student to actually construct something with a compass, which makes this multiple choice question both pointless and redundant.

Much is made about the importance of testing when it comes to student learning and teacher accountability.  But such arguments seem less reasonable the more closely we look at what we test and how we test it.

Regents Recap — June 2015: Common Core Geometry Structure

Here is another installment in my series reviewing the NY State Regents exams in mathematics.

June, 2015 saw the administration of the first Common Core Geometry Regents exam in New York.  This exam will replace the Geometry Regents exam, which was also offered this testing cycle.

The CC Geometry exam has fewer multiple choice questions (24) than the Geometry exam (28).  It is worth noting that this change, in and of itself, likely will reduce average scores, as random guessing on those four extra questions would, on average, earn 2 points.  The free response sections are structured slightly differently, but not substantially so.  These differences mirror those between the new Common Core Algebra exam, introduced last year, and the old Integrated Algebra exam (see here).

The two Geometry exams are not drastically different, though there is greater emphasis on transformations on the CC Geometry exam, which I covered here.   However, there are some minor differences that have impact.

First, the multiple choice questions on the CC Geometry exam definitely seem a bit harder, on average, than those on the old Geometry exam.  One place this is apparent is the higher frequency of questions that ask the student to identify the false statement, rather than the true statement.  Here are two questions similar in content, one from each exam:  Question 20 from the CC exam (top) and Question 16 (bottom) from the non-CC exam.

2015 CC GEO 20

2015 GEO 16Generally speaking, I’d say it’s more challenging to identify a statement that is not always true than one which must be true.  There are three such problems on the CC exam, compared with one on the old exam.

Question 26 on the CC exam exemplifies the increased emphasis on explaining one’s work.

2015 CC GEO 26

A more traditional question might simply ask for the measure of angle NLO.  Here, the measure of the angle is given, and the student is asked to provide the mathematical justification for that value.

Lastly, our teacher team was somewhat surprised at how closely the exam tracked the sample items that were released by the state.  For example, the segment partitioning problem on the CC Geometry exam

2015 CC GEO 27

was very similar to a sample item

CC Sample Segment partitionAdditionally, the construction problem on the CC Geometry exam

2015 CC GEO 25was identical to problem 12 in the Fall sample items.

Our Geometry teacher team generally found this inaugural CC Geometry exam to be in line with our expectations in terms of content and difficulty.  If anything, we were surprised at how unsurprising it was to us.

More the anything related to the Common Core exam, the level of difficulty of the old Geometry exam given during the same cycle surprised us.  The multiple choice section seemed to be more challenging than those of past recent exams, which made us wonder if the two exams drew their multiple choice questions from a single pool.

MOVES 2015

MOVES 2015I’m excited to once again be participating in the MOVES conference at the Museum of Mathematics!

MOVES, the Mathematics of Various Entertaining Subjects, is a biennial event run by MoMath that celebrates recreational mathematics.  This year, the conference will be headlined by John Conway, Elwyn Berlekamp, and Richard Guy, co-authors of Winning Ways for Your Mathematical Plays, a classic book on mathematical games.

I’ll be running a session on the Activity Track called Games on Graphs”, where we will explore some elementary graph theory through a few simple graph-based games.   Most importantly, we’ll talk about how to create new games that can further our mathematical investigations!

You can learn more about the conference here, and see the full program here.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox

Join other followers: