Seating charts for equity

I can't imagine traveling to new lands and not wanting to try their cuisine. But there really are people who bring their own food with them. One of the best things about traveling in my opinion is being educated  in the sense of the Latin root word — being led out of my own ignorance.

The same is true for me about attending a large, great school. It always has been. From the moment I arrive in a great new school, I feel excited and open to meeting and learning with all different kinds of people from different cultures and backgrounds. I want to expand my own limited world view.

But it seems inevitable that, without outside intervention, I often end up knowing and hanging out with the other Buddhists and Jews in any room. Cultural affinity is a force that possesses a tractor beam all its own. Fortunately, I am not the first to have noticed noticed this.

Our amazing counseling department and our Peer Resources program noticed this phenomenon too, and when they did their most recent student survey of our very large, urban, diverse student body, they put in some questions about this in their student well-being section. And the results were very moving to me.

Students overwhelmingly reported that when they first arrived at our school, they felt enormous pressure to connect with their cultural affinity groups. And for this reason, they reported, they deeply appreciate seating charts in classes that take this pressure away. This practice overwhelmingly helped them to feel that they fit in here and that those who are different from them in some ways are more like them in other ways than they are inclined to believe. It also created a zone of psychological and emotional safety to explore social connections with others not as "Others" but as fellow explorers in a safe space.

These findings touched my heart. Our kids' deeper wisdom never fail to blow me away.

So I sit here on the Sunday before the first day of Spring term making up seating charts, making sure that everybody arrives in my classes in the same boat as everybody else, and with the same opportunity to experience connection with others in as safe a space as I can create.

I will also pre-make Seating Charts #2, #3, and #4 so that it's convenient for me to change the seating without having to think. Sometimes "don't think" is the best rule.

I don't have any scintillating conclusions to draw here. I just wanted to document for myself what I am doing and why so that when I forget, I can more easily remember.

A dented patchwork circle: new school, new impressions

This was my first week in my new school, which means I've been going through a few simultaneous transitions: (1) from middle schoolers to 11th and 12th graders, (2) from a 15-mile commute to a 1.5-mile commute, and (3) from a high-performing to a very diverse, high-need school.

I could not be more excited.

This first week was challenging because my partner-teacher and I were making a transition we could not inform them about fully until the end of the week. Also, he is beloved, which makes him a tough act to follow. But he is also my friend, so it was good, I think, for the kids to see that even math teachers have math teacher friends and that we are working hard to support them in a difficult transition. We did a restorative circle with Advisory so that everyone could be heard in the process of leave-taking, and we will do a round of circles with everybody tomorrow, Monday, to acknowledge the transition and to embody the process of support.

Our talking piece for circle practice is The Batman Ball — a small, inflated rubber ball with Batman on it that moved around the circle as each participant expressed his or her feelings about our shared situation.

What really struck me was their honesty and their authenticity. They honored the circle and each other. And they were willing to give me a chance. I know I will probably receive some of their displaced frustration and feelings of abandonment over the next few weeks, but they were making positive, honest effort that was moving to witness. For the guys in the class, it was especially hard. Most of them have at least one strong female authority figure in their lives, but for many of them, Mr. T was it — their one adult male role model: a young, whip-smart, kind, funny, warm, math-wizardy hipster with oversized glasses, a ready smile, and a heart the size of the ocean.

"Meetings end in departures," the Buddha said, but the fact that it's true doesn't make it any easier. They're still here, and now with me, but their hearts are going to be hurting for a little while. Plus we have finals coming up.

The other thing that made me happy to see was that they are incredibly capable math learners — more capable than they realize. Our department uses complex instruction pretty much exclusively, which was one of the reasons I really wanted to teach there. These gum-cracking wiseacres some of whom live in situations which are hard for most of us to imagine will sit their butts down in their table groups and do group work. I mean serious, collaborative mathematics.

The fact that they don't yet believe in themselves is a different problem. But that is a workable problem too.

My classroom is across the hall from the Special Ed department's special day class, and they are generous with their chilled filtered water and holiday cheer.

So tomorrow is another new beginning. I am trying to stay open and to notice and not to hesitate as I jump in. I am dressing warmly, drinking lots of water, and making effort to be present with an open heart. Looking forward to seeing what happens next.

Collaboration Literacy Part 2 — DRAFT Rubric: essential skills for mathematical learning groups

I have said this before: middle schoolers are extremely concrete thinkers. This is why I find it so helpful to have a clear and concrete rubric I can use to help them to understand assessment of their work as specifically as possible. I'm reasonably happy with the rubric I've revised over the years for problem-solving, as it seems to help students diagnose and understand what went wrong in their individual work and where they need to head. But I've realized I also needed a new rubric — one for what I've been calling "collaboration literacy" in this blog. My students need help naming and understanding the various component skills that make up being a healthy and valuable collaborator.

My draft of this rubric for collaboration, which is grounded in restorative practices, can be found on the MS Math Teacher's wiki. I would very much value your input and feedback on this tool and its ideas.

I don't want to spend a lot of time talking about how and why Complex Instruction does not work for me. Suffice it to say that the rigid assignment of individual roles is a deal breaker. If CI works for you, please accept that I am happy that you have something that works well for you in your teaching practice.

This rubric incorporates a lot of great ideas from a lot of sources I admire deeply, including the restorative practices people everywhere, Dr. Fred Joseph Orr, Max Ray and The Math Forum, Malcolm Swan, Judy Kysh/CPM, Brian R. Lawler, Dan Pink's book Drive, Sam J. Shah, Kate Nowak, Jason Buell, Megan Hayes-Golding, Ashli Black, Grace A. Chen, Breedeen Murray, Avery Pickford, "Sophie Germain," and yes, also the Complex Instruction folks. I hope it is worthy of all that they have taught me.

Sometimes I teach, and sometimes I just try to get out of the way...

We are in the midst of our giant 8th grade culminating assessment extravaganza — a multi-part project that includes a research paper, a creative/expressive project, a presentation with slides, and several other components I'm spacing out on at the moment.

I have to admit something here: I used to be an unbeliever when it comes to projects.

I used to think they lacked rigor and intellectual heft.

But I was wrong.

Two years of this process has made me a believer in the power of project-based learning.

Sometimes the creative projects are merely terrific, but every year, there are a few that are incredible. This year, this has already happened twice... and only two projects have been turned in so far (they are due on Monday, 22-Apr-13).

Sometimes it is the quiet, timid kid who really blows my mind. Sometimes it is a kid who is kind of rowdy who reveals another, hidden side. But I never fail to be humbled at the potential inside each of these people, and I am honored to teach them.

So this is a reminder to myself that sometimes my job is simply to get out of their way.

Reflection on wallowing after the "Two Faces of 'Smartness'" workshop at the Creating Balance in an Unjust World conference

So yesterday I was at the Creating Balance in an Unjust World conference on math and social justice in San Francisco with Jason Buell (@jybuell) and Grace Chen (@graceachen), and I finally got to meet Brian Lawler of CSU San Marcos (@blaw0013) and Bryan Meyer (@doingmath) in person. They are (of course!) both terrific. I came away so impressed with Brian Lawler — a wonderful math education teacher and researcher as well as a fun guy and a total mensch, in addition to being my friend Sophie (@sophgermain) Germain's mentor. You should definitely follow him on Twitter if you're not already.

He and Jason and I crashed the "Two Faces of 'Smartness'" workshop session yesterday right after lunch, which was beautifully given by Nicole Louie and Evra Baldinger.  It was glorious to do math on the floor with Brian and Jason at the back of a classroom where about fifty math teachers from around the country had crammed ourselves in because we wanted to learn about this and well, honestly, we just didn't care about having to sit on the floor.

What was wonderful about it?

Well, first they are both such amazing, caring, reflective teachers and mathematicians. We were given an Algebra 1-style complex instruction group task and we worked on it deeply, in our own ways, for 15 or 20 minutes. There was so much respect for the others in the group, along with deep listening and amazing mathematical and teacherly thinking.

Some of that wonderfulness was wonderful for me was because of my own issues over the years with shame about my own mathematical thinking processes, which are usually quite different from those of other mathematicians and math thinkers I work with. Even after many years of intensive work, I still have a conditioned habit of abandoning my own thinking in favor of somebody else's — anybody else's — especially if they seem confident about their thinking. I have a sense that this is similar to what our discouraged math students often experience, the ones who prefer English class or music or social studies, because I was one of those students myself.

Jason is a middle school science teacher, so he also has a slightly different way of looking at math than Brian or I do. At one point he suggested that we verify our idea by counting the squares. Brian and I looked at each other dumbfounded for a moment, since that had not occurred to either one of us. I exclaimed, "What a great idea! It's so science-y!"

We laughed, counted, and continued our work together.

There can be such joy in a group task like that, but not if the group's working structure is set up with rigid norms that limit individual students' participation. Frankly, I just hate the "assigned roles" kind of group work because I find that it fails to reflect -- or prepare students for -- the kind of group work that happens in a real-world collaborative setting such as a software design meeting. There, engineers and product marketers and managers come together but are not restricted in their participatory roles. No one is limited to being a "recorder" or a "task manager." One person presents a starting point to kick things off, and from there everybody just jumps in with the best they have.

That's how we were working on the floor together yesterday. It was an organic, free-flowing process, and as a result, both the learning and the mathematical conversation were far more authentic than I've usually experienced in this kind of work.

There were also rat-holes — glorious rat-holes! — we chased down. At one point we had even (temporarily) convinced ourselves of the possibility of a quadratic formulation of the rule, even though we'd been told (by the title of the worksheet) that this was a linear growth function. After a few minutes, we punctured the balloon of that idea, and felt a little deflated ourselves. We'd been working for several minutes straight but unlike most of the other table groups, we had still not called the teacher over for even our first of three check-ins. I hung my head in discouragement. "We are fucked," I said. But then we laughed again, brushed ourselves off, and picked back up where we'd last seen something productive.

The end of the workshop activity involved reflection on what the others in our group had contributed to the process in a method known in complex instruction as "assigning competence." You highlight one of the key competencies that another group member demonstrated and you tie it to a positive learning consequence to which it had led us. For example, I appreciated how Jason had brought in ideas from the real-world thinking of science because it had added rigor and a verification mindset to our process. Brian appreciated how I'd been able to stay with my confusion and keep articulating it in a way that made my process visible and available for investigation.

This pleased me because it is something important I think I have to contribute. I call it my process of "wallowing." I have a deep and self-aware willingness to wallow in my mathematics.

One of the other teachers in the room asked me to say more about what "wallowing" meant, and at first I felt overwhelmingly self-conscious about speaking up. But then I remembered that (a) I was being asked by other math teachers who are passionately interested in understanding different ways of reaching students who have their own unusual relationships to mathematics, and (b) I had Brian Lawler and Jason Buell on either side as my wing men, and come on, who wouldn't find uncharacteristic courage in that situation?

So I told him that for me — and in my classroom — wallowing means learning how to be actively confused and developing a comfort and a willingness to stay present with that confusion while doing mathematics.

In much school mathematics, appearing confused is a frequent and constant source of unspoken shame. And so most people with any amount of self-regard quickly learn how to cover it up and hide it from view. I went through much of high school disguising my confusion and shame as thoughtful reflection. I became a master of avoiding humiliation in class by keeping my confusion well-hidden. If I didn't get *caught* being confused, then I couldn't be humiliated or shamed about it.

Later I would work through my confusion privately so I could show up in class always and only being able to raise my hand about something I felt I understood cold.

So I believe there needs to be a culture of allowing for wallowing in active confusion in our math classrooms. We should not be too quick to dismiss confusion or try to resolve it or spackle over it.  I would even argue we need to consider it a badge of honor and an activity worthy of our time, consideration, and cultivation. The only way to cultivate curiosity is to cultivate an environment that is supportive of wallowing — active engagement and presence in the process of being confused.

It is the deepest form of mathematical engagement I know, and it is thrilling, inspiring, and honoring to be a part of it. When a student experiences that euphoric, lightbulb moment of authentic, personal insight, we can be assured that the understanding it signals is not only deep but also durable. This is true because when you are actively confused about something, you are fully engaged in making your own mathematics. Whether it is a "big" idea or a "little" procedure, these moments of insight are the source of all intrinsic motivation. And isn't this the kind of reflective, metacognitive insight about student learning processes that we are hoping to cultivate?

And this is why I teach...

It was another crappy Friday in an arithmetic series of crappy Fridays that were running together and threatening to define the limit of my patience for fall trimester as x approaches a mid-sized number that is nowhere near infinity. So I have no idea what possessed me to wake up even earlier than usual to pull together an extra day's practice activity for my right-after-lunch class of rumpled and discouraged algebra students — the ones who believe to their core that California's Algebra 1 requirement is God's own punishment for unremembered karmic crimes they must have committed in previous lifetimes.

But I did it.

The topic was solving and graphing compound inequalities — a skill set that must be mastered in order to have any hope of making sense of and mastering the next topic traditional algebra curricula force-feed to our students: the dreaded topic of absolute value inequalities.

There's really nothing I can say to convince a roomful of skeptical eighth graders that compound inequalities will prove not only useful in business planning (which, after all, is simply algebra writ large across the canvas of the economy) but also amusing and possibly even interesting little puzzles to delight the mind.

To this group of students, they're simply another hoop to be jumped through.

So something in me understood that I needed to reframe the task for them, and to do so using Dan Pink's ideas about intrinsic motivation from his book Drive.

Nothing unlocks the eighth grade mind like an authentic offer of autonomy. As I explained recently to a room of educators at a mindfulness meditation training, middle school students suffer emotionally as much as adults, but they have comparatively little autonomy. A little well-targeted compassion about this can carry you for miles with them, though I usually forget this in the heat of working with them.

For this reason, I like to save practice structures such as Kate Nowak's Solve—Crumple—Toss for a moment when they are desperately needed. I have learned to withhold my Tiny Tykes basketball hoop for moments like this, when students need a little burst of wonder in the math classroom. And so even though I was tired and very crabby about the ever-increasing darkness over these mornings, I pushed myself to pull together a graduated, differentiated set of "solve and graph" practice problems to get this group of students over the hump of their own resistance and into the flow experience of practicing computation and analysis.

And oh, was it worth it, in the end.

The boys who are my most discouraged and resistant learners came alive when they understood that a little athletic silliness was to be their reward for persevering through something they considered too boring to give in to. They suddenly came alive with cries of, "Dr. X— watch this shot!" from halfway across the room. One boy who can rarely be convinced to do the minimum amount of classwork completed every problem I provided, then started tutoring other students in how to graph the solution sets and perform a proper crumpled-paper jump shot.

The girls in the class got into it too, but they seemed more excited about the possibility of using my self-inking date stamp to stamp their score sheets. So I gladly handed over the date stamp to whoever wanted to stamp their own successfully solved and graphed inequalities.

I was far more interested in reviewing their mathematics with them. One of the things I love best about practice structures like this one is that they give me an excuse to engage one on one with discouraged students under a time crunch pressure that adds a different dimension to their motivation. Suddenly they not only want to understand what they have done, but they want to understand it quickly, dammit, so they can move on to another problem, another solution, another graph, another bonus point.

Ultimately, Solve—Crumple—Toss becomes an occasion for conceptual breakthroughs in understanding.

I can't tell you why this happens. I can only tell you that it does happen — often. It makes me feel lighter, more buoyant about teaching them algebra. And it makes them feel happier too.

I wanted to write this down so I could capture it and remember this for a few weeks from now, when it stays darker even longer in the mornings and when I feel crappier and crabbier and more forgetful.

Intermezzo - summer reading seminar on The Curious Incident of the Dog in the Night-Time

One of the things I sometimes forget that I love about teaching English is the fact that I get to get adolescents talking and thinking about issues we all feel deeply about. The cool thing about sparking these conversations with young adolescents (by which I mean secondary students, as opposed to college students) is that most of them are just waking up to these issues for the first time in their lives, which means passions run deep. And that means they are ripe for thinking deeply about these issues — more deeply than we often give them credit for.

In my seminar this afternoon on The Curious Incident of the Dog in the Night-Time, I wanted to get students to develop for themselves a question that I think is fundamental to citizenship in a functioning democracy — specifically, who is it who, in different contexts, gets to decide what is to be considered "normal," and therefore acceptable?

The Curious Incident is an interesting reading choice for incoming 9th graders because the narrator, Christopher, is a young man on the autistic spectrum who easily qualifies in students' eyes as an outsider. In spite of extremely high math and science aptitude and achievement (preparing to take his maths A-levels at age 15), he is prevented from attending a mainstream secondary school. Instead, his social and emotional impairments have caused him to be marginalized into a special needs school where even he can see that most of the students are far less socially and emotionally functional than he is.

The students in my seminar are outgoing 8th graders I have known for a full year now. Because I teach both math and English, I have actually taught most of them for at least one period a day, and in many cases, for two periods a day. Which is to say, I know them unusually well for a casual summer reading seminar. I also know the ELA curriculum they have all just finished working through because I helped to develop some of it, and this gave me a lot of touchstones to draw on in our discussions. However, I would like to point out that this kind of lesson could work well with almost any group of students, since it centers on one of the main issues in adolescent life: namely, issues of fairness.

The activity I set up for today involved small groups doing "detective work" on five related thematic issues in the novel and then sharing out their findings with the rest of the group. The five thematic areas were:

• Belief systems: conventional religious beliefs versus Christopher's own unique belief system
• "Normal" behavior and how we judge differences in the behavior of others
• The nature of human memory: Christopher's beliefs about his own memory and other people's
• The significance of Christopher's dream in the novel
• The interrelated issues of truth, truthfulness, and trust

To get things started, I modeled the investigative process using issue #2 - what is considered "normal" behavior and who gets to decide whose behavior in a society will be considered "normal" and whose will be considered "deviant" (or sub-normal). Students needed a little more context on what autism is and how it can affect a young person socially, so we did a little quick internet-based research (thank you, iPhone!) on the autistic spectrum and what it means to be higher-functioning or less-high-functioning. Students zoomed in on the exact contradiction I had hoped — but have learned never to expect— they would target: the question of varying standards of "Behavior" that govern the judgment of and consequences for actions of adults (such as Christopher's father) and those of a kid like Christopher himself. Fairness is something that most adolescents feel strongly about, even when they are generally treated quite fairly, as most of these students usually are. [SPOILER ALERT: stop reading here if you haven't read the novel and don't want to know what happens as it progresses].

The kids were really quite exercised about the fact that while Christopher was the one labeled as having "Problem Behavior," his father committed a number of acts that we all agreed had to qualify as "Problem Behavior," including (a) killing an innocent dog, (b) lying to his son about the boy's mother being dead, and (c) hiding her letters to him to maintain the lie of her having died of an improbable illness. These were just the big issues.

So we circled around until we needed to land on a word they did not yet have in their vocabulary: arbitrary. Our dictionary manager looked the word up and read its several definitions to the group while we tried it on for size. "Arbitrary" definitely seemed to fit the contradictory categorizations of behavior of adults versus of Christopher in the novel. There was no way around the fact that the rules seemed both arbitrary and easily manipulated by the adults — far more easily than by Christopher himself. The notion that society's rules are subjective constructs, influenced by the personal beliefs and opinions of human beings, struck them as a significant new insight.

This part of the discussion led to a second insight I'd been hoping we might arrive at: the fact that whoever is in power gets to determine what will be considered normal. The idea of differences in power is something most of these students have not encountered much, except in the context of adults/parents versus adolescents/children. So for many of them, it was a new idea to think that these inequities could extend outside of families to other social relationships and interactions.

Their investigations and presentations were rich and quite thorough. To save time, I provided more scaffolding in the worksheets (chapter and/or page references) than I would have if we had been doing the project over several class periods. Still, I was pleased that they were able to reread their sections closely, draw on their annotations and notes, and quickly assemble arguments about each of these thematic areas that were supported by evidence from the text.

Having just come back from Twitter Math Camp, and still being immersed in rich dialogue about math pedagogy and equity, the conversation reminded me that every subject area in which we teach is a powerful opportunity to engage with students. At Twitter Math Camp, I loved being able to drop directly into the middle of an ongoing conversation I've been having with colleagues in the Math Twitterblogosphere for months or years in the virtual realm. In our seminar today, I loved being able to drop directly back into pretty advanced investigation with these students because I had already done so much formative assessment with them over the past year in this same kind of context.

These conversations are a gift of deep teaching and learning, and they are a reminder of what gets lost when policymakers become enchanted with the kind of magical thinking that allows them to chase the illusions of quick fixes and silver bullets such as plopping kids down in front of a giant library of videotaped lectures. Developing a library of tutorial videos may be a worthwhile archival goal, but it is no substitute for the magic that can happen when good and authentic teaching connects with a ready student.

TMC 12 - Some other "AnyQs" I've always had about "real-world" problems but been too ashamed to admit in public that I have

I am so appreciative of Dan Meyer's digital media problems and set-ups as well as his wholehearted spirit of collegiality. I have made what I'm sure must have been perceived as strange or totally off-the-wall comments or observations, and he has never been anything but gracious, kind, and supportive, both online and in person. Sometimes this has involved beer, but I like to think it has mostly to do with his innately generous and collaborative spirit.

So at my session at Twitter Math Camp 12, I felt brave enough to admit to some of the questions I've found myself having as a non-native speaker of math teaching who walks among you. I confessed that they do not sound like the typical questions I feel are expected to be generated by students, although there are plenty of students in math classrooms who, like me, are non-native speakers.

The perplexing thing is, they generated a lot of interest and conversation about on-ramps for students into a state of flow while doing mathematical activity, so I thought I would make a list of them here. So without editing, here is a list of the questions I prepared as part of my thinking as I was working through the issues of flow for students to whom the physics-oriented world-around-us questions are not the most natural ones to raise.

I often look at Dan's digital media problems and set-ups and find myself wondering...

• Does it always work that way?
• Does it ever deviate?
• Are there any rules of thumb we can abstract from observing this process?
• Are there any exceptions? If so, what? If not, why not?
• How long have people known about this?
• Who first discovered this phenomenon?
• How was it useful to them in their context?
• How did they convince others it was an important aspect of the problem?
• Did the knowledge it represents ever get lost?
• If so, how/when was it rediscovered?
• How did this discovery cross culture? How did it cross between different fields of knowledge?
• What were the cultural barriers/obstacles to wider acceptance of these findings as knowledge?
• What were the implications of a culture accepting this knowledge?
• Why do I feel like the only person in the room who ever cares about these questions?

It made me realize I object to the characterization of mathematics as the exclusive slave to physics. It also makes me want to introduce students to other fields (such as economics, financial modeling, forecasting and projections, free cash flow analysis, business planning and marketing planning).

It also made me realize that I am not, in fact, alone.

TMC 12 SESSION: Increasing intrinsic motivation using the ideas in Dan Pink's Drive

Dan Pink's bestselling book Drive: ___  has given the business world new ways to think about increasing intrinsic motivation in the workplace, but his ideas have resonance in math education too. The purpose of my Twitter Math Camp 12 session was to summarize the main ideas in Drive and to talk about how I have applied them to the specific situation of the math classroom.

In the model he sets out, Pink presents three fundamental pillars of intrinsic motivation:

• AUTONOMY, which he defines as "behaving with a full sense of volition and choice” as opposed to feeling pushed around by “external pressure toward specific outcomes” (Drive, p. 88). 
• MASTERY, which is a growth mindset in the model of Carol Dweck's work, a way of thinking about one's work that requires both effort and engagement. He also describes mastery as "an asymptote," an impulse that moves toward an ideal of perfect oneness without ever fully achieving it (Drive, pp. 118, 122, & 124).
• PURPOSE, a sense of being connected to the why of what one is doing (Drive, p. 233).

All three of these elements support the development of FLOW — a profound human state of "optimal experience" which was first studied in depth by the renowned psychologist Mihalyi Csikszentmihalyi (pronounced "chick-sent-me-high").

Flow is what many of us who teach math feel when we lose ourselves in doing mathematics, and my argument in this presentation is that helping our students to experience the flow state while they're doing math should be our top priority when thinking about motivation.

We can help students tap into the flow state by using Pink's three elements of intrinsic motivation to create "on ramps" for students to the flow experience.

PURPOSE is a terrific building block for many of our most capable students, but for the discouraged or disengaged student, it is necessary but not sufficient. What Can You Do With This?, Three-Act Digital Problems, and AnyQs? activities can be helpful in cultivating a sense of purpose in students, but it is important to keep in mind that there are other factors — including social, emotional, and psychological factors — at work with our most discouraged students.

Using a Standards-Based Grading framework helps students understand talk about MASTERY by clarifying expectations and improving communication between and among students, teachers, and parents.

AUTONOMY is the hardest of the three elements to encourage, so I spent most of my talk about ways to develop a sense of autonomy with math students.

There are two parts to autonomy: (1) an outer component and (2) an inner component. The EXTERNAL part can be built up by disrupting student expectations through alternative  activity structures. Games, game-like activity structures, treasure hunts, creating foldables, making up dances or songs, creating and performing skits or puppet shows that demonstrate definitions or processes, and other such reframing activities redirect student attention away from what causes them anxiety or trauma and toward something that allows them to relax and let doing mathematics be simply a means to an end. REFRAMING can be a crucial part of helping students find themselves in flow while doing mathematics.

The INTERNAL component of boosting autonomy has to do with helping students to NOTICE their fears or reactive responses and ALLOWING there to be space for their authentic feelings and conditioned reactions. We can support students by not taking their reactions/reflexes personally and by noticing our own reactions/reflexive responses to different kinds of disengagement we experience from students. Encouraging a posture of noticing and allowing enables us to help students loosen their identification with past negative experiences and open up space for newer, positive experiences to overwrite those in their minds and bodies.

By honoring and encouraging the flow state in our students while they are engaged in mathematics, we can help them to renegotiate their relationship with math class. And that creates space for the positive and self-reinforcing intrinsic motivation that will help them get out of their own way and find lifelong success with mathematics.

Put some big, ironic air quotes around that word "winning"

My school is located in a sports-crazy town. It's not just that we are located very close to our major professional sports teams or that many of the players and owners live in our town. It's also that it's a very outdoors-oriented, sports-minded place. Monday-morning conversations about what students and their families did over the weekend always revolve around a list of soccer matches, lacrosse games, swim meets, softball and/or tennis and/or golf games, basketball or touch football games, long recreational or competitive runs, and even some hilarious made-up sports.

Although I am the child of a terrific amateur athlete and major sports fan, I did not inherit the sports gene. In fact, if anything, I inherited the opposite of the sports gene. I love walking my dog and hiking, and I'll do yoga or other health-oriented activities, but I don't care about organized competitive sports. This is probably because I was such an unsuccessful and discouraged participant in sports as a child — always the last kid picked, usually humiliated, never celebrated on the blacktop or the athletic field.

The places where I could compete were always in the classroom or on the musical stage. At our schools, I was always considered a "brain" or a "music kid," which had its own kind of competitive aspects, but not the kind that sports-minded people think of.

So when Sports came up as a Spirit Day theme, I mentally waved it away as something irrelevant to me, something I feel too defended against to participate in. But I knew that the kids would hound me about why I wasn't wearing some sports team's paraphernalia, which meant I had to think about what to wear instead.

On the day of the Spirit Day/Class Competition, I wore my NASA sweatshirt.

When students asked me why I wasn't wearing a sports team shirt, I spoke to them honestly. I told them I'd been a terrible athlete in school and that I had always been made to feel ashamed on the blacktop and on the playing fields. But, I said, there are other kinds of teams and many other kinds of "winning" in this world. And one of the teams I admire most in our country is NASA because, if what they do every day and every year — with little money and constant attacks — isn't winning, then I can't imagine what is.

It seemed to gladden the hearts of my fellow nerds and non-athletes tremendously to have a faculty advocate and fellow traveler in this regard.

SBG, Intrinsic Motivation, and the "Grading" of "Homework"

One of the surprising parts of this latest round of parent conferences was the number of parents who wanted to talk to me about why their child is suddenly interested and engaged in learning mathematics when — as I gathered — this was not previously always the case.

I teach in a district which places a very high value on school, teachers, and academic achievement, so this conversation in and of itself was not the surprising thing.

I explained about using Standards-Based Grading, frequent formative assessment, and the remediation and reassessment method I first stole learned about from Sam Shah and others in my Twitterverse/blogosphere orbit, but two things came up again and again during this round of conversations which really caught me by surprise: my emphasis on in-class autonomy as a mode of differentiation and my approach to grading homework.

In-Class Autonomy
My Algebra 1 classes are unusual for a middle school in that they contain a mixture of 7th and 8th graders. I find there are huge benefits to this kind of heterogeneous grouping. For one thing, the students in one grade tend not to have met the students in the other grade, so there are fewer preexisting status issues to contend with among math learners (for an excellent discussion of working with status issues in the math classroom, see Between the Numbers' presentation on this issue from the Creating Balance conference on Math & Social Justice in an Unjust World). For another, it creates a healthy competitive atmosphere in which neither age range wants to be shown up by the other. 8th graders do not want to have their clocks cleaned by a bunch of 7th-grade whippersnappers, and this is an excellent antidote to the problem of 8th grade "senioritis." At the same time, 7th graders are somewhat intimidated by being around the older kids, and that motivates them to bring their A game to class to help them compensate for any feelings of insecurity. The mixing of students encourages everybody to notice and value what others bring to the situation and to stay focused on their own work.

I am pretty much tied to the curriculum, our pacing guide, and the state testing schedule, with minor variations allowed to deal with large-group (or whole-group) lostness as need be. But that means that there are times when the most with-it students could get frustrated or bored if I did not provide them with some differentiated alternatives to keep them engaged while I work with the 75% of the class who are catching up to them.

So I allow students who are ahead of others to either "work ahead" or "dive deeper" during these times. I see no reason to bore them when I can challenge them and call them back to work with the whole group when I need everybody (or when there is a whole-class activity they do not wish to miss out on). I provide them with self-selectable options and I find that it works out really well.

This fits well with Dan Pink's thesis in his book Drive that intrinsic motivation arises from our basic human desires for autonomy, mastery, and purpose. Middle-schoolers do not have much autonomy in their own lives, so giving them a little bit in the classroom goes a long way towards both motivation and harmony (which is how I prefer to think of "classroom management").

Apparently this has been my unwitting secret to getting many of my students' cooperation. Students who would be bored or frustrated at being tethered to a whole-class pace that is either too fast or too slow feel happy and engaged because I try to make it possible for them to work at a pace and a depth that is meaningful for them. I did not realize this was such a giant change for so many of them.

The Grading of Homework
The other thing that seems to be working for my students is the change in emphasis on the "grading" of "homework," in that I do not actually grade their homework.

I was convinced long ago that Sam Shah's approach to Binder Checks is the best way to place an appropriate value on homework — namely, that homework is work one does at home to improve one's own learning. In an SBG world, mastery is measured by the student's performance on assessments — not by the teacher assessing each of 40 problems that one has worked on at home. The purpose of homework is to provide practice and investigation time, in addition to exposure to different kinds of problems and issues that may come up. The purpose of "assessing" homework is to assist the student in developing good study habits and organizational habits so that homework becomes a meaningful part of their school lives.

When I moved from high school to middle school, I discovered that the full binder check approach was a recipe for discouragement. It seems to be a developmental issue. So instead, I have modified the program into a system of "mini-binder checks," in which I check the corresponding homework "chunk" while they work on the test/assessment on that particular chapter/chunk. The "grade" or "score" they receive for "homework" is merely a completion score. It is not a problem-by-problem assessment of their thought process on each homework assignment.

Apparently it's a novel approach to trust motivated middle school students to do their homework and check it all at the assessment point in one fell swoop. At conferences this week, I heard some pretty upsetting stories about students staying up until midnight or one o'clock in the morning, trying to get all their math homework done so they would not get punished and graded down. I heard stories of students I think of as super-mathletes breaking down into tears and meltdowns because they couldn't get their homework all done and they got punished (and shamed) in class because of this failure. So I heard a lot of appreciation that I assign a reasonable amount of homework and expect them to take ownership of getting it all done in time for a reasonable assessment of completion.

It makes me kind of sad to hear these stories because I think of the students in my Algebra classes as pretty joyful learners. And it also saddens me because I do not see these practices as leading toward the "positive dispositions toward mathematics" that we are supposed to be building.