Working Groups

Before I start dealing with reflecting on the content of the classes, I’ve got two more aspects of PCMI to mention.
The first is the most productive: The working group. Each of the teachers is assigned a working group in a topic of secondary mathematics for the afternoon (Wednesdays off) in which they, typically in groups, will produce a product useful to classroom teachers.
As the person in charge of a group this can be very challenging: these are all energetic, enthusiastic and talented teachers — who all teach in very different classrooms. So what may be appropriate for one school system could fail utterly in another, not just in terms of content but departmental expectations, school standards, etc. As the working group leader I have to steer these folks towards a consensus: a project that is meaningful to them, useful to others, and able to be accomplished in three weeks. Most of the time this takes the form of a lesson plan or activity that is refined throughout the three weeks — I find that too limiting and I’ll discuss what we did in a later post. I will say my group this year (go Discrete Math!) took on a huge challenge and did an amazing job; I was overwhelmed with how they took on their responsibilities and always questioned “how can we do this better, or different?
We also spend some time looking at different problems in the mathematical area and we’re always fortunate to have 200 world-class mathematicians running around in the corridor (well, they don’t run so much as shuffle) to snag for a few hours. It’s funny when you speak to them at lunch and then after lunch realize WHO they really are. They typically stride the mathematical world like colossus and you’ve asked them if they liked the carrot cake! :) We were lucky enough to have Joe Malkevitch (yes, THAT Joe Malkevitch) spend almost two hours discussing problems with us — starting with the Art Gallery problem and then seeing where that took us. That is how lucky we are at PCMI!
The other group of activities I have to mention are the cross-program ones. This is a huge umbrella and can cover things like I mentioned below, James Heibert discussing the TIMSS Video Study results, at least two Clay Scholars every year discussing their work (with us! High school teachers!), Gov. Huntsman (at the time) speaking of math at the state/national level, and even Tom Garrity explaing how “Functions describe the world”. The level and content varies so greatly, an exhaustive list would be its own (rather dull) blog post. Suffice it to say, it’s the kind of opportunity you would have to hang around Harvard for, for at least a few years.

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]
 

The 830 at PCMI

PCMI is a 3 week program; each day from about 830 to 1040 we have what can best be described as a math class. But it’s unlike any math class most people have ever had.
Each day starts with its own problem set designed by the class’ organizers, folks from the Education Development Center and Harvey Mudd College. The problem set is well structured, beginning with a simple idea or concept and then continually developing in both depth and breadth, although this may be obvious only several days later. The questions are also in categories: Important (things you’ll need to know for upcoming days), Neat and Tough (can be really tough! Clay Prize tough!) — we aim to get through at least the important stuff in our morning together.
The classroom is composed of 12 tables of 5-6 people each (we do have guests from the other programs) and as a table we tend to worth through things together; there’s a table sandbox monitor who is there to ensure that the teachers exercise all those collaborative skills they try to encourage with their students. Not only that, but we never tell people ideas, we create a situation in which they can they discover it themselves. This is not easy and like any skill takes practice and continual reinforcement. It is at the heart of the whole morning class (indeed, of PCMI) and the mathematics could almost be the motivation for appreciating this whole process. It’s why I call them “organizers” above and not teachers — it’s not instruction as you know it.
The math is very accessible and very deep – low threshold, high ceiling – and it is too easy to look at it only superficially. Teachers will occasionally race through the questions to get them done (remind you of any students?) and will miss out on the complexity of the mathematics. I remember my first year doing the same thing.
As one of the participants said “I’ve taken courses in number theory but never understood prime numbers until now.” This has been true for every topic I’ve encountered at PCMI — teachers seldom get the chance to think deeply of simple things that Al Cuoco of EDC, and one of the course’s authors, encourages.
If you visit PCMI @ the Math Forum you can click on Class Notes to read over the problem sets from previous years. Or, to get a very insufficient glimpse of the questions, the MAA has a book of Al’s work Mathematical Connections that includes material we’ve looked at during PCMI. It’s condensed (remember, we get three weeks) and doesn’t have the same level of personalization that our questions set have — the authors adapt the problem sets from day-to-day to build off of our ideas, suggestions, questions & comments.

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]