Today we celebrate a Permutation Day! I call days like today permutation days because the digits of the day and the month can be rearranged to form the year.
And while the date may not be as exciting as the rotationally symmetric 02/02/2020, there is something interesting about today’s day: It’s the only permutation day this year! So enjoy it by switching things up today.
I know it’s a bit late for a Year in Review post, but in trying to keep the series alive, better late than never I guess.
One reason it’s been hard to find time to reflect is that I started at a new school this past year, by far my most significant professional event in 2019. After 12 years at Brooklyn Technical High School, I started at Stuyvesant last fall.
It’s been a lot of work starting at a new school after 12 years at my last. But a lot of that work comes from being forced to re-imagine everything I do as a teacher, and that has been exciting and invigorating.#edchat
— Patrick Honner (@MrHonner) September 28, 2019
I had a great time at Brooklyn Tech. Over 12 years I taught everything from algebra to multivariable calculus, designed and developed new courses in advanced mathematics and computing, and rebuilt Tech’s Mathematics Major. And in my role as instructional coach I mentored teachers, led teacher teams, redesigned curricula, and developed and structured professional learning for a department of over 40 teachers.
But the right opportunity came along at the right time, and I made the move. I’ve been very lucky to work with great students and teachers throughout my career, and that continues for me at Stuyvesant. And if these first few months are any indication, I have a lot to look forward to at my new school.
Writing was again a big part of my professional year. In August my test-prep book was published, the culmination of a long and satisfying experience working with Barron’s / Kaplan. I continued writing my column for Quanta Magazine, where I explored a faster way to multiply, the geometry of Netflix, and the limits of mathematics and our imagination, among other modern mathematical breakthroughs. And I also reviewed several manuscripts and book proposals this past year, which is always interesting and educational.
I was busy speaking and presenting on a wide variety of topics in mathematics, computing, and teaching in 2019. I presented at national events such as MSRI’s Critical Issues in Mathematics Education, the NCTM Annual Meeting, and the NSTA STEM Forum. I was happy to again visit NCSSM as an invited speaker at the TCM Conference, and I spoke in New York City several times, including talks on plane tilings and computational thinking for teachers at Math for America. I also participated in several webinars this past year, including moderating STEM Up Your Classroom for the NSTA and presenting a computational approach to functions for the Global Math Department.
As usual the new year is filling up, and going by, quickly. I’ve got several interesting projects in the works for 2020, but a strong finish to my first year at my new school is my primary goal. After that, making adjustments for year two will be next on the list.
Related Posts
I’m excited to head to San Diego next month for the 2019 NCTM Annual Meeting, the largest gathering of math educators in the country.
This is the third year in a row I’ll be presenting at NCTM, and I’ll be giving two talks. On Friday at 4:30 pm it’s “The Problem with Pentagons” (Session 560), my talk on the recently completed classification of plane tilings. This is modern mathematics with direct classroom connections–it’s a great way to show students that math is alive and always evolving. This is a talk I’ve given several times before, and is based in part on my column for Quanta magazine.
On Saturday at 9:45 am I’ll be co-facilitating the workshop “Assessing Mathematical Reasoning Through Engaging Group Tasks” (Session 636) with my colleague Andrew Wille. This presentation is based on work Andrew and I have been doing that emphasizes rigor, collaboration, and engagement in the math classroom. We’ll share some innovative approaches to task design and assessment, and talk about an overall framework for evaluating mathematical reasoning. This is a new presentation for us both: The response to our recent workshop with Math for America teachers was fantastic, so we are looking forward to bringing it to NCTM.
If you will be at NCTM San Diego, please keep the above presentations in mind as you plan your conference. And as in the past, I’m grateful to Math for America for providing financial support to make professional trips like this possible.
Related Posts
I don’t know exactly why, but fake graphs on Regents exams really offend me. Take a look at this “sine” curve from the June, 2016 Algebra 2 Trig exam.
Looking at this graph makes me uneasy. It’s just so … pointy. Here’s an actual sine graph, courtesy of Desmos.
Now this fake sine curve isn’t nearly as bad as these two half-ellipses put together, but I just don’t understand why we can’t have nice graphs on these exams. It only took me a few minutes to put this together in Desmos. Let’s invest a little time in mathematical fidelity.
Related Posts
When I looked at performance data from the June 2016 Common Core Geometry Regents exam, I noticed that students did exceptionally well on one of the final multiple choice questions. It didn’t take long to figure out why: it was virtually identical to a question asked on the August 2015 exam.
Just a few words changed here and there. All the specifics of the problem, and all the answer choices, are exactly the same.
The most basic quality control system conceivable should prevent questions from being copied from last year’s exam. It’s hard to understand how something like this could happen on a high stakes exam that affects tens of thousands of students and teachers.
Issues like this, which call into question the validity of these exams, are what led me to originally start asking the question, “Are these tests any good?”
Related Posts