Overview of Session 10

• Welcome
Designing Professional • Consider “What is a Proportion?”
Development in Mathematics • Work on a mathematical task
• Analyze OGAP tasks and student thinking

Michigan Mathematics and Science • Prepare for practice facilitation

Teacher Leadership Collaborative • Plan for facilitating a session
• Wrap-up

Goals of the Session Considering Proportionality

• To build connections among different solution • How is proportionality defined in your

strategies for proportional problemsTo textbooks?
develop the knowledge and skills for
• How does it compare to the key ideas in the
analyzing student thinkingTo identify
article “What is a Proportion? What Does it
difficulties that students might have when
Mean to be Proportional? What is
working on ratio comparison problemsTo
Proportional Reasoning?”
develop skills for facilitating professional
development around examining student work

1
 Organizing Our Work Organizing for Facilitation
• Work individually and discuss the math in • Thinking Through a Session Protocol:
small groups: Whole group
• A, A’, A”; B, B’, B”; C, C’, C”
• Planning facilitation
• Share out on common task
• A, A’, A’’, B, B’, B’’, C, C’, C’’
• A, A’, and A” (Paul’s Dog)
• B, B’, and B” (Racing Track) • Next Session:
• C, C’, and C” (Paper Towel)
A A’ A’’
• Analyzing student thinking
• A, A’, A”, B, B’, B”, C, C’, C”
B C B’ C’ B’’ C’’
• Sharing analysis on student thinking
• A, A’, and A”
• B, B’, and B”
• C, C’, and C”

Wrap up

• Expectations for February 20

• Bring five samples of student work on a high
level task
• Read Chapter 2 from Peg Smith’s book,
“Practiced-Based Professional Development for
Teachers of Mathematics”

2
 What is a Proportion? What Does it Mean to be Proportional? What is

Proportional Reasoning?

What is a Proportion?

A proportion is an equation composed of two equivalent ratios. (For a more detailed

discussion of ratios see the Rates and Ratios essay.) A common, generic way of writing a

a c
proportion is = ; another way of writing a proportion is a:b=c:d. The ratios in a
b d

proportion can be part-to-part ratios or part-to-whole ratios. For example, if there are 3

boys for every 2 girls in a classroom and a total of 12 girls in the classroom, we could use

2 girls 12 girls
part-to-part ratios = to determine how many boys are in the classroom, or we
3 boys x boys

2 girls 12 girls
could use part-to-whole ratios = to determine how many total students
5 students x students

are in the classroom. Notice that in both of the previous examples three of the four

values in each proportion are known and the fourth value is unknown. These types of

problems are typically called missing value problems.

When computing equivalent ratios, the backbone of proportions, we use multiplication or

division rather than addition or subtraction. For example, to compute ratios that are

12
equivalent to we can either multiply both the 12 and 15 by the same number, or divide
15

12 ! 4 48 12 ÷ 3 4
both the 12 and 15 by the same number. For example, = , and = are both
15 ! 4 60 15 ÷ 3 5

Copyright 2006 Vermont Mathematics Partnership.

Please do not copy or distribute materials without written permission from the Vermont Mathematics Partnership: www.vermontmathematics.org
The Vermont Mathematics Partnership is funded by a grant provided by the US Department of Education
(Award Number S366A020002) and the National Science Foundation (Award Number EHR-0227057)
 12
equivalent to . If we add the same number to both the 12 and 15, or subtract the same
15

12
number from both the 12 and 15 the resulting ratios are not equivalent to . For
15

12 + 45 57 12 ! 10 2 12
example, neither = nor = are equivalent to . Therefore, we say that
15 + 45 60 15 ! 10 5 15

ratios are multiplicative as opposed to additive in nature. Similarly, since proportions are

composed of two equivalent ratios, we say that proportions are multiplicative structures

(as opposed to additive structures). Elementary students typically spend the first several

years of their mathematical careers focusing solely on additive situations, and frequently

have difficulty transitioning to upper-elementary and middle grades mathematics which

requires them to discriminate between additive and multiplicative situations and apply the

appropriate type of reasoning for a given situation. See S. Lamon for more information

on additive versus multiplicative reasoning and on ways to encourage the development of

multiplicative reasoning skills. (Lamon, 2005)

In every proportion there are two multiplicative relationships: the multiplicative

relationship within each ratio and the multiplicative relationship between the two ratios.

2 girls
Using the example above, the multiplicative relationship within the ratio is 1.5 or
3 boys

3 boys
, since the number of boys is 1.5 times the number of girls.* Since equivalent
2 girl

ratios have the same multiplicative relationship within each ratio, we can use this

2 girls 12 girls
relationship to determine the missing value in the proportion = . To
3 boys x boys

determine the number of boys in the classroom, we simply need to compute

2
 boys 2 girls
12 girls ! 1.5 = 18 boys . The multiplicative relationship between the ratios and
girl 3 boys

12 girls
is 6 because the total number of girls in the classroom is 6 times the number of
x boys

girls in the sample.** Using the multiplicative relationship between the two ratios

provides us with another way of determining that there are 3 boys ! 6 = 18 boys in the

classroom. Notice that in this example the multiplicative relationship within the ratios is

boys
non-integral (1.5 ) whereas the multiplicative relationship between the ratios is
girl

integral (6).

*
Alternatively we could also say that the multiplicative relationship within the ratio is

2 girls 2
0.6666 or , since the number of girls is times the number of boys.
3 boy 3

**
Alternatively we could also say that the multiplicative relationship between the ratios is

1 1
0.1666 or because the number of girls in the sample is of the number of total girls in
6 6

the classroom.

3
Research Implications for Teaching:

In general, research shows that it is easier for students to solve problems in which the

multiplicative relationships within and between ratios are integral, and that it is more

difficult for students to solve problems in which the multiplicative relationships within

and/or between ratios are non-integral. (Cramer & Post, 1993) Before proceeding,

consider the following two problems and the questions that follow:

Problem 1: If 3 balloons cost $6, how much will 12 balloons cost?

Problem 2: If 3 balloons cost $5, how much will 10 balloons cost?

Which of these problems do you think would be more difficult for students?

Why?

The first problem has integral relationships within ($2/balloon) and between (4 times as

many balloons) ratios and is therefore much easier for students to solve than the second

problem, which has non-integral relationships within ($1.67/balloon) and between

1
(3 times as many balloons) ratios. Often students that successfully use proportional
3

reasoning to solve the first problem will inappropriately revert to additive reasoning on

the second problem because of the increased difficulty in the numerical relationships.

For example, in Problem 2 they might reason that since the difference between the

number of balloons and the cost in the first ratio is 2, that the difference in the second

ratio must also be 2 for a total cost of $12 in the second ratio…or they might reason that

because there are 7 more balloons in the second ratio than in the first ratio, the cost must

also increase by $7 resulting again in a total cost of $12 in the second ratio. Therefore,

it is important to remember that evidence of proportional reasoning on one problem does

4
not necessarily indicate a solid understanding of the concept that can be extended and

transferred to other problems. For more information on additional strategies for solving

proportions see the essay “Multiple Ways to Solve Proportional Reasoning Problems.”

5
What Does it Mean for Two Quantities to be Proportional?

Two quantities x and y are said to be proportional or in proportion with each other if all

x
ratios of the form (where x and y are nonzero* and form the ordered pair ( x, y ) ) are
y

x
equivalent to one another or, in other words, if all ratios create an equivalence class.
y

For example, when purchasing gasoline at a price of $1.20 per gallon, we see that

total cost
regardless of how much gasoline we buy, all ratios of the form are
# of gallons of gas

& $0.60 $8.40 $36.00 #

equivalent to one another $$ = = = K!! , and therefore we say
% 0.5 gallons 7 gallons 30 gallons "

that the total cost of the gasoline is proportional to the amount of gasoline purchased.

Notice that the multiplicative relationship within each ratio is $1.20 per gallon, and that

$1.20
we can use variables to succinctly portray this relationship as y = x, where x
gallon

represents the number of gallons of gasoline purchased and y represents the total cost of

the gasoline. In fact, another equivalent way of defining proportional relationships is that

the quantities x and y are proportional if y = kx for some nonzero constant k. The

constant k is known as the constant of proportionality. Notice that the constant of

proportionality is the slope of the line y = kx , and it is the unit rate of y per unit of x.

Notice also that from this alternative definition it follows that in a proportional

y
relationship the quotient of the quantities remains constant, that is = k (where x and y
x

are nonzero and form the ordered pair ( x, y ) ).

6
A few examples of quantities that are related proportionally include:

o If traveling at a constant rate (r), the distance traveled (d) is proportional to the

time (t) traveled [or d = r ! t ].

o If a scuba diver starts at sea level and descends 10 meters every 30 seconds, the

diver’s height in meters above sea level (h) is proportional to his/her time in

1
seconds under water (t) [or h = ! t ]. Note that this situation cannot continue
3

indefinitely. Typically recreational divers do not descend below -120m or -130m.

Therefore these two quantities are proportional from the start of the descent until

the maximum depth of the dive is reached around 6 minutes after beginning the

descent.

o In the set of all rectangles for which the length (l) is 1.5 times the width (w), the

length is proportional to the width [or l = 1.5w ].

o When making orange juice from concentrate, one can of concentrate calls for 2.5

cans of water. Therefore, the amount of water (w) needed is proportional to the

amount of orange juice concentrate (j) used [or w = 2.5 j ].

o If the exchange rate between Euro and US $ is 1 Euro = 1.3 US $, the number of

Euro (r) received in an exchange is proportional to the amount of US $ (d)

1 Euro
converted [or r = d ].
1.3 US $

o When rolling a fair die the number of fours predicted (f) is proportional to the

1
number of rolls (r) [or f = r ].
6

7
*Why do we require that x and y be nonzero members of the same ordered pair?

Notice that, in any proportional relationship, that is any relationship in which the two

quantities are related by the equation y = kx , the ordered pair (0, 0) satisfies the equation

since 0 multiplied by any constant, k, is 0. Therefore in any proportional relationship the

0 units of x x
ratio will be the exception to the rule that all ratios of the form are
0 units of y y

0
equivalent to one another, since the fraction is undefined.**
0

0
**Notice that this provides one of many good explanations of why is undefined.
0

0
Suppose that were defined, to which equivalence class should it belong? Since there
0

are an infinite number of possibilities for the constant k in the equation y = kx , and the

ordered pair (0, 0) satisfies all of these, there are an infinite number of possible

0
equivalence classes to which could belong. For example, if k=3, since both (0, 0) and
0

0 1
(1, 3) satisfy the equation y=3x , could belong to the equivalence class containing ;
0 3

0
while if k=2, since both (0, 0) and (1, 2) satisfy the equation y=2x, could belong to the
0

1 1
equivalence class containing . By transitivity, this would, however, then imply that
2 3

1
and belong to the same equivalence class, which we know is untrue. As in many other
2

0 0
cases, attempting to define results in a contradiction therefore is undefined.
0 0

8
What is Proportional Reasoning?

Now that we know what a proportion is, and what it means for two quantities to be

proportional, it would seem as though defining the concept of proportional reasoning

would simply be a formality. Unfortunately, proportional reasoning has long been, as S.

Lamon states, “an umbrella term, a catch-all phrase that refers to a certain facility with

rational number concepts and contexts. The term is ill-defined and researchers have been

better at defining when a student or an adult does not reason proportionally than at

defining characteristics of one who does.” (Lamon, 2005) T. Post, M. Behr, and R. Lesh

add, “The majority of past attempts to define proportional reasoning (e.g., Karplus, Pulas,

and Stage 1983; Noelting 1980) have been primarily concerned with individual responses

to missing value problems where three of the four values in two rate pairs were given and

the fourth was to be found. Those students who were able to answer successfully the

numerically ‘awkward’ situations containing non-integer multiples within and between

rate pairs were thought to be at the highest level and were considered proportional

reasoners. We believe that this is a limited perspective, a necessary but not a sufficient

condition, especially since these problems lend themselves to purely algorithmic

solutions.” (Post, Behr, & Lesh, 1988) Proportional reasoning certainly requires that

reasoning about proportional relationships occur. Therefore, proportional reasoning

requires more than a simple application of a rule or procedure to solve proportions; it

requires flexibly solving problems involving proportional situations, with meaning and

understanding. Proportional reasoners have several methods, including the standard

algorithm (cross-products/cross-multiplication), for solving problems involving

9
proportional situations and they employ appropriate and efficient methods depending on

the complexity of the situation. The following examples of student work provide an

overview of several commonly used proportional reasoning strategies. We will look at

student work from two different problems. The first problem is an example of a missing-

value problem. (For more information on missing-value problems, see p. 1 of this essay.)

Problem 3:

Paul’s dog eats 20 pounds of food in 30 days. How long will it take Paul’s dog to eat a
45 pound bag of dog food?
Explain your thinking.

Solve this problem yourself before examining the student work that follows.

Student A:

10
Student A uses proportional reasoning to build down both the number of pounds and the

number of days to determine how long 5 lbs. of food will last. Using this information

and the given rate of 20 lbs. eaten in 30 days, Student A then builds both the number of

pounds and the number of days back up to correctly determine that 45 lbs. of food are

consumed in 67.5 days. Notice, however, Student A’s incorrect use of the equality

symbol in the “run-on equation” 20 + 20 = 40 + 5 = 45 , where the leftmost and rightmost

expressions are not equal. For more information on the building up/down strategy see the

essay “Multiple Ways to Solve Proportional Reasoning Problems.”

Student B:

11
Student B reasons proportionally by computing a unit-rate of 0.66 pounds per day, and

then divides 45 pounds of food by this unit-rate to find the number of days 45 pounds of

food will last at this rate. Notice, however, that Student B rounds 0.666 to 0.66 , and then

rounds the result of 45 ÷ 0.66 to 68 with an overall result of 68 days instead of the more

accurate 67.5 days.

Student C:

Student C reasons proportionally by building up both the amount of dog food and the

number of days to find that 40 lbs. of dog food will last 60 days. This student then builds

down the rate of 20 lbs. for 30 days to 5 lbs. in 7.5 days. Student C then combines these

results to arrive at the correct answer of 67.5 days.

12
Student D:

1
Student D reasons proportionally by recognizing the factor-of-change of 1 within the
2

given rate of 20 pounds per 30 days, and applies this factor-of-change to the known

amount of 45 pounds of dog food to find the unknown number of days that the dog food

will last.

Student E:

Student E reasons proportionally by applying the cross-products/cross-multiplication

algorithm to find the missing value, the number of days 45 pounds of food will last.

13
Notice that after setting up the proportion and performing the cross-multiplication,

Student E omits the units in the product of 30 days and 45 pounds. This is extremely

common in the use of cross products, presumably because the appropriate units days-

pounds are incomprehensible.

Next we examine examples of student work from another type of problem frequently

used to elicit proportional reasoning strategies. The following problem is an example of

a ratio comparison problem. Try to solve it before continuing. For more discussion on

ratio comparison problems, see p. 21 of this essay.

Problem 4:

The chart below shows the population of raccoons in two towns.

Town A Town B
60 square miles 40 square miles
480 raccoons 380 raccoons

Karl says that Town A has more raccoons per square mile. Josh says that Town B has
more raccoons per square mile. Who is right?

Justify your answer.

Solve this problem yourself before examining the student work that follows.

14
Student F:

Student F reasons proportionally using a model to effectively partition the raccoons in

each town into 10 square mile blocks. Notice, however, that Student F’s explanation

refers to raccoons per square mile while his/her model is in terms of raccoons per 10

square mile block and that his/her use of decimal points in the explanation is inconsistent.

(“Town B has 95 raccoons per square mile. 9.5 is more than 8.0, so Josh is right.”)

Student G:

15
Student G reasons proportionally using a building down strategy resulting in a common

number of square miles, 20, thereby allowing for a direct comparison of the number of

raccoons in each town (Town A has 160 raccoons in 20 square miles, while Town B has

190 raccoons in 20 square miles). Notice, however, that Student G’s work completely

lacks units throughout and may be a cause of concern.

Student H:

Student H reasons proportionally by dividing the number of raccoons by the number of

square miles to find the unit-rate of raccoons per square mile in each town. Notice,

however, that Student H’s work lacks units throughout, so there is some question about

whether Student H fully understands the problem and the results of his/her calculations,

or arrived at the correct solution by fortuitously selecting the bigger quotient.

16
Student I:

2
Student I reasons proportionally by recognizing the factor-of-change of between the
3

sizes of Towns A and B. This student then applies the factor-of-change to the number of

1
raccoons in Town A by finding of the raccoons in Town A and subtracting them from
3

2
480, the total number of raccoons in Town A, to determine that of the raccoons in
3

Town A is 320 raccoons. This allows Student I to see that, “40 square miles of town A

only has 320 raccoons” and to directly compare the number of raccoons in 40 square

miles of each town.

For more information on the use of models, unit-rates, factors-of-change, and/or building

up/down strategies see the essay “Multiple Ways to Solve Proportional Reasoning

Problems.”

17
It is very possible for a student, or an adult, to solve proportions correctly by following a

procedure without reasoning proportionally. In general, application of the traditional

algorithm (cross-products/cross-multiplication) without supporting evidence (e.g., use of

appropriate units throughout or justification of the procedure) provides little evidence of

any type of reasoning, much less proportional reasoning. In fact, R. Lesh, T. Post, and

M. Behr state that the traditional algorithm is, “often used by students to avoid

proportional reasoning rather than to facilitate it.” (Lesh, Post, & Behr, 1988)

All too often the traditional algorithm is introduced procedurally without first developing

a conceptual understanding of proportional relationships. T. Post, M. Behr, and R. Lesh

add, “Unfortunately we sometimes confuse efficiency and meaning, and by default, even

with the best intentions, we introduce a concept in the most efficient but least meaningful

manner.” (Post, Behr, & Lesh, 1988) K. Cramer, T. Post, and S. Currier state that,

“Teachers need to step outside the textbook and provide hands-on experiences with ratio

and proportional situations. Initial activities should focus on the development of

meaning, postponing efficient procedures until such understandings are internalized by

students.” (Cramer, Post, & Currier, 1993) Premature introduction of the traditional

algorithm frequently leads both adults and students to apply it both in appropriate and in

inappropriate situations. Before proceeding, try to solve the following problems.

18
 Problem 5: Sue and Julie were running equally fast around a track. Sue started

first. When she had run 9 laps, Julie had run 3 laps. When Julie completed 15

laps, how many laps had Sue run?

Problem 6: 3 U.S. Dollars can be exchanged for 2 British pounds. How many

pounds for 21 U.S. Dollars?

Can the traditional cross-products/cross-multiplication algorithm be applied to

both of these problems? Why or why not?

Problems from: K. Cramer, T. Post, S. Currier, Learning and Teaching Ratio and Proportion: Research Implications, p159

K. Cramer, T. Post, and S. Currier gave Problems 5 and 6 to 33 preservice elementary

education teachers enrolled in a mathematics methods course. Of the 33 preservice

teachers, 32 of them incorrectly applied the cross-products/cross-multiplication algorithm

in Problem 5, while all 33 correctly applied the cross-products/cross-multiplication

algorithm in Problem 6. None of the 33 preservice teachers could explain why Problem 6

represented a proportional situation but Problem 5 did not. (Cramer, Post, & Currier,

1993) Typically the traditional algorithm is introduced as a means of solving missing

value problems in a very efficient manner. Therefore, it is not surprising that it is

common for adults and students to apply the traditional algorithm to any problem in

which three values are given and the question asks for the fourth value to be found, even

if the situation is non-proportional. (For a complete discussion of the first problem, see

the section “What are Some Examples of Non-Proportional Relationships?”)

19
Hence another characteristic of proportional reasoning is that it should be reserved only

for those situations in which it is appropriate. In other words, proportional reasoning

requires discrimination between proportional and non-proportional situations.

In summary, S. Lamon’s definition of proportional reasoning, “the ability to scale up and

down in appropriate situations and to supply justification for assertions made about

relationships involving simple direct proportions and inverse proportions” (Lamon, 2005)

provides us with a succinct and useable definition that supports the thoughts and ideas

developed above.

20
Categories of Problems Used to Encourage Proportional Reasoning

There are two broad categories of problems that are typically used to encourage

proportional reasoning. The first is the category of missing value problems illustrated

above with the example of the number girls to boys in a classroom. The second category

is known as ratio (or rate) comparison problems. The raccoon problem above is an

example of a ratio comparison problem. Another example of a ratio comparison problem

for you to solve is:

Problem 7:

Amy and Bryan are mixing paint. Amy mixes 2 quarts of blue paint with 5 quarts

of white paint. Bryan mixes 4 quarts of blue paint with 7 quarts of white paint.

Whose mix is more blue? Explain your reasoning.

In general, in a ratio comparison problem two ratios are given and the task is to determine

which is darker, lighter, faster, slower, more expensive, less expensive, stronger, weaker,

more dense, less dense, etc. A wide variety of missing value problems and ratio

comparison problems can be found in most middle level mathematics programs. Typical

contexts include concentrations, density, consumption, production, packing, similarity,

scale, percents, probability, conversion, etc. Proportional reasoning problems are also

found in a third, commonly overlooked category known as qualitative reasoning

problems. These problems do not involve any numbers, but instead require reasoning

about a situation and the relationship between the quantities involved to answer a

question. An example of a qualitative reasoning problem for you to solve is:

21
 Problem 8:

Alice ran more laps in more time today than she did yesterday. Did she run faster,

slower, or the same speed today as she did yesterday? Or is there not enough

information to compare her speed today with her speed yesterday?

Qualitative reasoning problems require thinking about questions such as, “Is this answer

reasonable? As one quantity increases, what happens to the other quantity?” One

advantage to using qualitative problems is that they require more than procedural

knowledge of an algorithm; they require reasoning. According to T. Post, M. Behr, and

R. Lesh, “It is well known that experts in a wide variety of areas use qualitative

approaches to problems as a means to better understand the situation before proceeding to

actual calculations and the generation of an answer. Novices, however, tend to proceed

directly to a calculation or a formula without the benefit of prior qualitative analyses. It

should also be pointed out that novices often answer problems incorrectly, suggesting

that they could benefit from the use of qualitative procedures.” (Post, Behr, & Lesh,

1988)

22
Solutions to Problems:

Problem 1: If 3 balloons cost $6, 12 balloons will cost four times as much for a cost of

$24.

1
Problem 2: If 3 balloons cost $5, 10 balloons will cost 3 times as much for a cost of
3

$16.67.

Problem 3: Paul’s dog eats 20 pounds of food in 30 days or equivalently Paul’s dog eats

1 pound in 1.5 days. Therefore, a 45 pound bag of dog food will last Paul’s dog

days
45 pounds ! 1.5 = 67.5 days .
pound

raccoons
Problem 4: Town A has 480 ÷ 60 = 8 . If Town B had 8 raccoons per square
square mile

8 raccoons
mile, it would have 40 square miles ! = 320 raccoons . However, Town B has 380
square mile

raccoons. Therefore Town B has more raccoons per square mile than Town A, making

Josh correct.

Problem 5: For a complete discussion of the first problem see the section “What are

Some Examples of Non-proportional Relationships?”

23
Problem 6: 3 U.S. Dollars can be exchanged for 2 British pounds. Since 21 U.S. Dollars

is seven times 3 U.S. Dollars, seven times 2 British pounds will be received, or 14 British

pounds.

Problem 7: If Amy doubled her mix, she would mix 4 quarts of blue paint with 10 quarts

of white paint. Bryan mixes 4 quarts of blue paint with only 7 quarts of white paint.

Therefore, Bryan’s mix will be more blue (because there are fewer quarts of white paint

to “dilute” the same amount of blue paint).

Problem 8: If Alice ran more laps in more time today than she did yesterday, there is no

way to tell whether her running speed was faster, slower, or the same as it was yesterday.

24
Bibliography

Cramer, K., & Post, T. (1993). Connecting research to teaching proportional

reasoning. Mathematics Teacher. 86(5), 404-407.

Cramer, K., Post, T., & Currier, S. (1993). Learning and Teaching Ratio and
Proportion: Research Implications. In D. Owens (Ed.), Research Ideas for the
Classroom: Middle Grades Mathematics. (pp. 159-178) Reston, VA: National
Council of Teachers of Mathematics & Macmillan.

Lamon, S. J. (2005). Teaching fractions and ratios for understanding: Essential

content knowledge and instructional strategies for teachers. Mahwah, New Jersey:
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Lesh,R., Post, T., & Behr,M. (1988). Proportional Reasoning. In J. Heibert & M.
Behr (Eds.) Number concepts and operation in the middle grades. (pp. 93-118)
Reston,VA: Lawrence Erlbaum & National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.

National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (NCTM). Principles and Standards for

School Mathematics. Reston, VA.:NCTM, 2000.

Post, T., Behr, M., & Lesh, R. (1988). Proportionality and the development of pre-
algebra understanding. In A.F. Coxford & A.P. Schulte (Eds.), The ideas of algebra,
K-12 (1988 Yearbook of the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics, pp. 78–
90). Reston, VA: NCTM.

25
THINKING TH R OU GH A SESSION
PROT OCOL (TTSP)

Part 1: Setting up the Task/Session

What are your mathematical and pedagogical goals for the task/session?

In what ways does the task build on participants’ previous knowledge and experiences?
How will you help participants make these connections?

What are all the ways the task can be solved?

What misconceptions might students have? What errors might they make?

© 2008, University of Michigan

Part 2: Supporting Participants’ Exploration of the Task/Activity
As participants are working independently or in small groups:
What might you do (questions, suggestions, directions, etc.) to focus their participants’
thinking on the key mathematical ideas/concepts of the task?

What will you see or hear that lets you know how participants are thinking about the
mathematical ideas or aspects of practice?

What assistance will you give or what questions will you ask participants who become
frustrated or finish the task almost immediately?

What might you do to encourage participants to share their thinking or to analyze the
thinking of others?

© 2008, University of Michigan

Part 3: Sharing and Discussing the Task/Activity

Which solution paths do you want to have shared during the discussion?

Which common misconceptions do you want to discuss publicly?

What specific questions will you ask so that participants will make sense of the
mathematical ideas that you want them to learn?

What specific questions will you ask so that participants will make connections among the
different strategies that are presented?

What will you see or hear that lets you know that participants in the session understand the
mathematical and pedagogical ideas that you intended for them to learn?

What records of practice will you have participants bring to the next session?

© 2008, University of Michigan

PLAN FOR MMSTLC SESSION 10: PRACTICE
FACILITATION
Materials Handouts

To do before session Basic sketch of session activities

Welcome participants, agenda of the session. (X min)

Session Goals:
Time Activity/Task Detail Notes
Welcome/Agenda w/ goals: