Where Was the Support?

We recently passed the one-year anniversary of school closures in New York City, which means that I have been engaged in remote / hybrid teaching for over a year. You might be surprised to learn that, during the past year, the NYC Department of Education has provided me virtually no support or training on how to teach remotely. Unless you’re a teacher, in which case you wouldn’t be surprised at all.

The lack of guidance at the outset of emergency remote learning in the spring of 2020 is somewhat understandable. Everyone was caught off guard, and schools and teachers were given a week to figure out how to do something they had never done before. Sure, it would have been nice if someone at the country’s largest school system actually knew something about remote learning — it certainly isn’t new — but at that point the best most of us could do was just react.

It was disappointing to return to school in the fall and discover that, after three months of emergency remote learning and an additional two months of summer to prepare, the DOE still didn’t have anything helpful to say about the practice of remote instruction. I’m sure some high-priced consultants or over-paid administrators prepared some unusable documents for us, and maybe a platitude-heavy keynote or webinar was offered. But the details of how to actually make this work were left up to the teacher. As those details usually are.

I was lucky to have a handful of thoughtful colleagues I could bounce ideas off, virtually observe, and share successes and failures with. This helped me identify the pressing issues I needed to deal with, and allowed me to converge on a system that, for the most part, works for me and my students. I doubt my teaching would win any awards this year, but students are learning, math is happening, and progress is being made.

The amount of struggle and independent effort required to reach even this point makes me wonder, where was the support? A year of remote learning was predictable enough in the face of a global pandemic. How is it that an expansive administration, one that oversees 75,000 teachers that serve 1 million students, had virtually nothing helpful to say about how to best implement remote instruction? As has happened so often throughout my career as a teacher, it seemed like it was all up to me to figure it out for myself and my students.

Midway through the year some teachers at my school ran workshops based on training in remote learning they received from Columbia’s Teacher’s College, an education school which enjoys great prestige. In these workshops the teachers told us what they learned about Maslow’s hierarchy of needs, and the difference between a recall question and a thought-provoking question. I remember listening to the same thing 20 years ago in my required education courses, and it was about as helpful then as it was now. I came to the same sad conclusion I came to 20 years ago: If this is the best they have to offer, I’m probably better off figuring it out on my own.

Related Posts

One Year Later

The week started out with a few empty chairs in class. My attendance is usually 100%, so even a couple of absences is noticeable. Especially when it happens every period. By Friday there were 7 or 8 students out in every class. The DOE wasn’t acting as fast as parents were, but the shutdown was inevitable.

I knew things had gotten real when the NBA suspended its season in of the middle of the game I was watching. I remember telling students closure was imminent. We probably won’t be back before Spring Break, I told them, maybe not even by end of the year. I said we might be dealing with this for the next two years, somewhat prophetically.

Teachers had started to stay home, too, which made it easier for me to book a computer lab for the Thursday and Friday of that week. I brought my geometry students in for a crash course in Geogebra. I had a feeling it would come in handy.

They closed the schools the next week. For students. Staff still had to report, though more were calling out. In an email the Chancellor of NYC Schools spelled it out for us: “By Monday, March 23, we expect all students and teachers to begin engaging in remote learning in all grades.” I had one week to figure out how to turn myself into a remote teacher.

One year later, I’m still figuring it out. This is the 40th entry about my transition from experienced classroom teacher to novice remote teacher. I’m glad this series is nearing its end, but I’m also glad I kept a record of where we started and how far we’ve come.

Related Posts

A New Unit

As a geometry teacher I rely heavily on compass and straightedge constructions. My course usually begins by establishing the basic construction results and developing facility with the technology, and those ideas are then woven into topics throughout the year. We’ll pull out our compasses to explore triangle congruence, review parallelogram theorems, understand concurrency, and more.

I worried about my ability to efficiently assess the hands-on construction skills of 34 Zoom boxes every class every day, so I took a different approach this year. I de-emphasized compass and straightedge constructions, and instead relied on Geogebra as a construction and exploration tool. Geogebra has generally been a terrific substitute: In most cases, we now just pull out Geogebra when we would have pulled out our compasses. The underlying thread of construction has been disrupted a bit, but the course has still flowed in the way I wanted.

Until we hit transformations. My approach to teaching reflections, rotations, and translations is deeply embedded in the theory, and the inherent constraints, of compass and straightedge construction. Out of necessity my approach this year has revolved around finding ways to make existing materials work, but this was a unit where simply swapping Geogebra into my existing materials wouldn’t cut it. Too much of the development of the ideas required a fluency with geometric construction that my students just didn’t have.

I’ve reached the point where I’ve started developing new lessons for remote instruction, but I hadn’t yet had to re-design an entire unit. That’s what I had to do with transformations. Luckily I no longer feel lost as a remote teacher. I’ve started to develop a sense of what works for me and my students, and I have a set of tools I can use to deliver instruction and gain access to student thinking. I redesigned my transformations unit around simple prompts like intuitively identify the center of rotation:

And simple tasks, like sketching transformations and investigating whether or not two objects could be images of each other.

In the end, I was happy with the way the unit worked. Ideas flowed differently, but they flowed, and well enough so that when I’m planning my transformations unit next year, for a (hopefully) normal classroom, I’ll be thinking about what I did remotely.

Related Posts

PCMI 2021

I’m excited to be a part of the Park City Math Institute’s 2021 upcoming summer program!

PCMI provides immersive mathematical experiences for scientists, students, and educators through their summer programs. This year, I’ll be running a week-long session for PCMI’s Teacher Leadership Program titled Complex Geometry Made Simple. Here’s the course description:

The complex numbers are one of the great achievements of algebra, but their geometry may be even more compelling. Join us as we explore the complex connections between elementary geometry, inversion, rotations, functions, and more! The shortest path to real truth may involve a detour through the complex plane, but in this course we’ll be sure to take time to enjoy the journey.

PCMI’s Teacher Leadership program runs July 12 — 30 and includes courses on Fibonacci Recurrences, led by Daryl Yong and Bowen Kerins, and Hands on Combinatorics, led by Brian Hopkins. You can find out more information on the programs, including how to apply, here.

Related Posts

The Mysterious Math of Perfection — Quanta Magazine

My latest column for Quanta Magazine explores the mathematics of perfect numbers. Humans have been studying perfect numbers for thousands of years, but we still don’t know if an odd perfect number exists!

Euclid laid out the basics of perfect numbers over 2,000 years ago, and he knew that the first four perfect numbers were 6, 28, 496 and 8,128. Since then, many more perfect numbers have been discovered. But, curiously, they’re all even. No one has been able to find an odd perfect number, and after thousands of years of unsuccessful searching, it might be tempting to conclude that odd perfect numbers don’t exist. But mathematicians haven’t been able to prove that either. How is it that we can know so much about even perfect numbers without being able to answer the simplest question about an odd one? 

With some basic number theory and an assist from a famous formula from Algebra class, we can get pretty far into the world of perfect numbers. So read the full article here, and be sure to stick around for the exercises at the end!

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox

Join other followers: