Learning Diary Week 3

Per the feedback, I have been thinking more explicitly about the role of a teacher this week, including what
might be psychologically daunting to students (e.g. the subscripts and symbols in sequences and series, which I
will discuss in more detail below) and how what I have learned can challenge students of different levels of
aptitude and confidence. I have also taken a more systematic approach to writing rather than jotting only the
most essential steps to my own understanding.

With regards to the ‘four numbers’ puzzle, I imagine that, even just using the four main operators, the
numbers 1 to 4 alone (as was used in my example) would provide a challenge to almost anyone. Of course,
every other combination of four numbers exists too, as do other operators such as powers and factorials, if
students would like to be pushed further. In any case, finding 1 to 28 was a very interesting challenge and I
wonder if it could form some kind of competition in lessons. It would certainly help give students more
familiarity with the basic operators and bracket rules.

I have never seen LCMs visualised as a Venn Diagram before and it’s easily the most easy to grasp method I
have ever come across. It doesn’t necessary give a ‘why’ to students on its own; I will have to find a way to
explain how the intersection avoids double counting common factors. In any case, the Venn Diagram gives a
step by step way for students who may struggle with the abstract idea to get to the answer. If Venn Diagrams
have not been taught yet, this might also serve as a useful introduction to them.

Thinking of triangular numbers as handshakes is also a good idea. Person 1 must shake everyone else’s hand.
However, following this, person 2 has already shaken person 1’s hand, so there is one person fewer to shake
hands with, and so on. Hence, you get n+n-1+n-2….etc.

The question asked whether it was possible to do 17^2-14^2 without squaring. I assume they wanted us to
make the link between this and the difference of two squares rule; i.e. (17+14)(17-14). Often maths questions
involve ‘spotting’ something in the question, and many students, even those with high aptitude who know the
material well, can find this hard if the question is dense or wordy. Spotting that one square number minus
another could be calculated more easily using a rule they have learned (difference of two squares) is likely to
be very useful.

Regarding sequences, there is something very elegant and powerful about knowing you can sum, for example,
all the numbers 1 to 100 using a very simple formula or method. However, the challenge may come in some of
the other sequences, such as 1+4+7…+31. Once you notice that this is the 3x table shifted down by 2, it
becomes clear that there are 11 terms in the sequence (as it would otherwise start at 3x1 and end at 3x11).
From here, the usual method of pairing, multiplying by the number of terms and dividing by two will work.
However, this all requires extra steps, of course. Stronger students may find this a useful way of really getting
to the heart of the method’s specific mechanisms; these sequences require a deeper understanding of said
mechanisms and a grasp of exactly why the original summation method works. I think it is essential that
students are not overloaded with symbols; often sequences and series make use of the capital Σ and the
symbols above and below it, as well as subscripts, ns etc. This can be very psychologically daunting, and so
these more intuitive explanations should perhaps be grasped first.

Overall, this week has given me a significant appreciation of how many fundamental concepts in mathematics
can be visualised and explained using understandable concepts. Simply giving the summation formula to pupils
is likely to be far less fruitful, for example, than showing them a different way of thinking about sequences that
breaks it down into very easily digestible chunks (I.e. pairs of numbers). I remembered this method from A-
Level but this week really got me thinking about how it can be manipulated and applied to more complex
sequences.

I practice notating more this week; for example, writing each Venn Diagram out, with both numbers labelled,
and writing ‘LCM=’ rather than just writing what was easiest for me. There are still instances of rough notes,
but this week is a bit less ‘random’ and each practice question basically has the same level of detail.
Terminology that I could not articulate without further thought:

Lowest Common Multiple: Take any two numbers. Think of the times tables for those numbers. Eventually,
you’ll come across a number that is in both of the two numbers’ times tables. The first one you find is the
lowest common multiple.
15