1) Write up the first line of the problem on the board: “Justing is preparing for a violin performance this weekend.” Then ask the students what they bet will come next. Discuss, asking for reasoning behind their suggestions.

2) Write the next line. Again ask what they bet will come next and discuss the reasoning.

3) Repeat for the following lines. Being careful of pacing so you get to the ending sentence without creating the feeling of beating a dead horse.

4) Have the kids solve the problem.

There are lots of things I like about this protocol. One of the biggest is the opportunity to be developing my own understanding of how the kids are thinking about this problem, what they are picking up from the words, how they are creating the picture in their head of what’s going on, how they are making the decision for how they are going to go about finding a solution. As kids share out their thinking they are providing an opportunity for the teacher to represent their thinking using a good model (possibly like the one @joeshwartz10a suggested above).

Also, credit where credit is due, I picked up this protocol via http://www.therecoveringtraditionalist.com/

]]>________________________________who ever made this is an idiot lol I’m a freaking grade 4 ]]>

http://www.jonathancrabtree.com/mathematics/new-lattice-gelosia-multiplication-template/ ]]>

What appears to be missing is carrying, and I wonder if that same issue shows up in multidigit addition, so I’d want to check that first. If not, I might consider something like 700 x 8 and then assuming that s/he gets 5600, I’d try something that would cause one carry. Also, a smaller multiplier like 2 or 3 would allow the student to test this buggy algorithm by doing, say, 350 x 3 by addition and then by this approach and notice if the results differ. Eventually, the crisis comes when the disparity is highlighted. An area model could also help show the problem, as could lattice multiplication.

]]>They seem to not understand the role x plays in change. On a lower level, they don’t seem to understand the naming conventions for polynomial terms.

]]>