Chess as a Math Centre

Search "chess improves math" on an internet search engine and a plethora of sites show up. I stopped investigating them at the fifteenth page of results.

A good paper that summarizes the general academic research on the affect that teaching chess has on student's math abilities can be found through this link -

http://sgo.sagepub.com/content/5/3/2158244015596050

In its conclusion, it states that:

"...the game of chess is a powerful tool to build children’s problem-solving competence in the mathematical domain, even with brief courses..."

The American Chess Foundation found that "chess improves visual memory, attention span,
spatial reasoning skills, capacity to predict and anticipate consequences and an ability to use criteria to drive decision making and evaluate alternatives."

Chess is a natural component of Math class and Math Centres. I'll add some extra reasons why.

In an earlier blog post, I pointed out that people naturally connect with reading on an intimate level because we read for enjoyment. Unfortunately, this same connection is not easily made to Math. As I suggested, many people think math is a tedious means to an end, a task, a tool. We use math to do our taxes, not for enjoyment.

However, we can connect with games. Games are entertaining. They are fun. And Chess is a game that incorporates Mathematical Thinking.

When teaching Problem Solving in math, we promote a method that usually chunks the process into steps. Students show that they understand the problem. Then they make a plan. Next, they carry out their calculations. Finally, they check to see if their plan worked or if there might be a better way.

This IS chess.

Chess is a game of problems. "What opening will allow me to control the middle of the board? How can I defend against an attack? What should I do now that my opponent has figured out my plan? How can I checkmate my opponent in the fewest possible moves?" Each problem has a wide variety of possible solutions. Opponents are constantly planning, predicting responses and altering their plans accordingly. Geometry and the rules of the pieces are the method of calculations. Teachers talk about direct, honest and timely feedback when assessing students. In chess, the feedback for every move meets those three criteria.

Reflection is also an important stage of learning. In chess, reflection is made more powerful with the use of Chess Notation. Players can use symbols and an understanding of the grid pattern of the chess board to notate each move (there's a lot of math going on there).

Here is a link to one of many websites that teach chess notation. I like this site mainly because of the title to their tutorial - "How to Read and Write Algebraic Chess Notation."

http://www.chesshouse.com/how_to_read_and_write_chess_notation_a/166.htm

Here is a link to a free computer chess game that can be played by students on-line (Flash is required). It can be found at the aptly named website "Math if Fun."

https://www.mathsisfun.com/games/chess.html

And for those that might not know how to play, much less teach chess, here is a link that should solve your problems.

https://www.chesskid.com/learn-how-to-play-chess.html

I've been using chess in classrooms for about 8 years now. I find that many students absolutely love the game. However, it does tend to attract boys more than girls (my chess team this year has 17 boys and 1 girl) and those who like competition more than those who don't. I have gone out of my way to promote girls to play chess and to get those who shy away from competition to play as well. What I have found works best in both cases is to allow for partners to play each other. It gives students the chance to talk about their moves before making them (communication in math!). This added social element usually solves both groups of reluctant players.

Good Luck and Happy Chess

Technology in the Classroom

This post is connected to my series of posts on Math Centres.

Technology in the classroom is promoted as one of the ways, if not the way of being a 21st Century Teacher. There are a lot of reasons for this opinion. Young people are engaged with their technology and educators want them to be similarly engaged with their learning. Technology allows students to access a world of information in a wide variety of formats. It is also a way of replacing a lot of expensive school purchases - from textbooks to manipulatives. This point is especially true if students bring in their own devices to schools.

Now, I am of the generation that pioneered computer technology in the classroom. When I was in grade 7, my middle school purchased a dozen PET computers, made by Commodore.

This picture is courtesy of "Science and Society Picture Library Prints" http://www.ssplprints.com/image/94110/commodore-pet-personal-computer-c-1980

 

 

I remember the excitement of using BASIC to get my name to scroll down a monitor in blocky letters. By high school, I was creating simple "choose your own adventure" type role playing games. I spent countless hours learning how to organize my ideas and debugging them when they didn't work But, the truth is, my school never taught me any of this. They opened the door by showing me the "scroll your name down the monitor" code. I pretty much taught myself the rest. As I grew older, I taught myself all manner of software out of interest and sometimes even necessity. After I graduated from university, I got a couple of jobs just because I said I could use software which, in truth, I had never seen before. But, each time, I dove in and, over a weekend or two, became an "expert." Of course, by "expert," I mean that I knew just a little bit more than anyone else in the office. Now, enough about me. I only write this down to be transparent about my ersatz credentials.

 

When I think about technology in the classroom, I have a few rules.

 

First, I like it to be free. Private business looks to public education and sees billions of dollars to be made. There is a reason that <insert name of immensely profitable corporation here> wants elementary children to use their devices or apps. They want a customer for life. They are maximizing their profits. At its heart, these companies have business models that are little different from soft drink companies that put vending machines in schools. They offer a deal in order to get the kids hooked. The use of devices has become as addictive as sugar. There is an argument that the deals that tech companies are offering are altruistic - apps and devices do have some benefits to learners. However, bottled water (mostly sold by soft drink manufacturers) in vending machines also has its benefits.

 

 

 

Secondly, I like what technology has to offer to be advertisement free. It wasn't that long ago that this was an important condition demanded by educators. It is now mostly forgotten, replaced by lessons in media studies. To continue my earlier analogy, it is very similar to how sugary treats are now in every lunch sack. Social mores regarding the health of children have been replaced by "freedom of choice" arguments from junk food manufacturers and health lessons teaching children about "sometimes" foods and suggesting that families limit trans fats (as opposed to avoiding them completely). Listen, advertisements work. The most profitable companies in the world wouldn't spend billions of dollars advertising if they didn't. They work especially well on young people. Schools completely lack the resources to balance the onslaught of advertisements children witness with education, and putting them in the background of leaning experiences implies that they really are okay.

 

This picture is courtesy of "Science and Society Picture Library Prints" http://www.ssplprints.com/image/130806/richardson-claire-polaroid-sx70-model-i-land-camera-c-1973

 

Thirdly, I like the technology to do something that is actually better than what it is replacing. Does a device take a better picture than a Polaroid Camera with a flash? Can the device record a conversation better than a cassette recorder? Can a student use their finger to draw and print on the touch screen better than they can with some markers and a piece of paper? Is the information on a website better researched and more clearly written than what can be found in a children's encyclopedia (which never have advertisements in them)? If the technology isn't better, then, it is really just a gimmick.

 

Next, I like the technology to make learning more engaging for students. The key word here is learning. Some educational video games and apps offer far too much playing time for the amount of learning that goes on in them. Especially when the learning comes in the format of multiple choice questions or questions that students learn to "game" (i.e., get points for without learning or knowing what it is that they answered). As a parent, I am shocked when choosing a movie on my family's once-a-week family movie night is made overly difficult because my elementary school aged children have already watched a litany of movies at school. Using social media in the classroom needs to be more than having one student post a thoughtful comment which is followed by a host of cliché replies.

 

Saying all of this, I have witnessed social media work very well. Recently, I had students post book reviews on-line. I was impressed by the thoughtfulness of most of the reviews and by the back and forth commentary with their peers.

 

This picture is courtesy of "Wikimedia Commons"

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Think..._will_it_save_production_time%5E_Plant_efficiency_starts_with_your_ability._-_NARA_-_535136.tif?uselang=en-ca

 

Lastly, I like technology to make my job as an educator more efficient. I can write anecdotal notes quite quickly. I have coding systems that allow me to get a lot of data into my pencil and paper checklists. And if I drop my assessment duotang on the floor, it never breaks. When I write report cards, I can place two or three sheets of notes beside each other and scan from one to the other easily. I have tried using a variety of apps for assessment, but none has been able to replace what I already do. I'm a touch typer and I am adept at spreadsheets. I've yet to find an app that can do more, faster, than what these two abilities allow me to do.

 

I have made it part of my practice to use the device provided to me by my school to photograph examples of student work. I currently have a huge number of photos in my files with labels like "DSC098763.JPG" that I don't have the time to rename. As a result, finding a particular student's work entails that I view photo files as large icons, thus slowing down my search. Videos increase my workload even more. When I go home, I am loathe to assess a student's work by watching a video that takes 30 seconds of viewing just to get to the point that I want to assess. That time adds up in a class of 25 or more students.

 

Technology does offer me the ability to save a learning experience to use it again. This saves me time, as long as I can use it again. Changes in curriculum and expectations don't always make this possible. Technology also makes it possible to create extremely interesting and interactive activities for my students. However, my rule of thumb is that the time that goes into the creation of an activity should be at least close to the amount of time that it will actually be used by students. In other words, efficiency dictates that I shouldn't spend an hour creating a learning experience that my students will only use for 15 minutes. Of course, as I type these words I find myself looking up to the ceiling and exclaiming to the bumpy white finish, "so why do I keep doing it then !?!"

 

This post ended up being quite long winded. That wasn't my intention. I really do like technology. In fact, I plan on writing a post (hopefully soon) that will point out how I use technology and what websites, apps and software I have come across that meets the standards that I have stated in this post. This site is "The Handy Teacher" after all, and its purpose is to offer handy and useful ideas, not just rants.

Admitting that you are poor at math vs Admiting that you are poor at Literacy

This post is the second of a series that I am writing about Math Centres. The topic of this post is an idea that I discussed with other educators at a recent workshop that I went to #PeelMathCentres.


I have been at a few other workshops recently where the following analogy was made.


"People seem to easily admit that they are not good at math. For example, when it is time to tip a waiter, no one would bat an eye if someone at a dinner party passed the job off of figuring out15% of the total bill. On the other hand, it would create quite the stir if someone at the same dinner party said that they couldn't read the menu. Very few will admit that they are not good at literacy."

When the analogy has been made, I have looked around the room to see lots of heads nodding in agreement. But it doesn't ring true for me.


First of all, amongst my group of friends, no one would admit that they couldn't figure out 15% of a bill. If someone did, they would be ridiculed. It would be like admitting that one couldn't use a hammer. So, the analogy is made based on an opinion that isn't true for everyone.


Herein lies the problem with the analogy. Math can be used to solve problems. So can reading. But when we think of reading, we don't automatically think about reading something like an operations manual or a government form. If people did, many would probably say that they didn't like reading much either.


When we think of reading, we think of the connections that we make to reading - reading text messages, a novel, a Twitter post, a favourite magazine. When we think of math, we think of a task that we must do. Often times, that task has a consequence for not doing it correctly (tip that waiter too little, and service won't be so good the next time we visit that restaurant).


Math, as traditionally taught in school and understood by many, is a chore. We read before we go to sleep; that's not the time when anyone who wants to get some sleep would do their taxes.


However, math can be engaging. Playing many card games requires strong mental math skills, completing puzzles requires an understanding of geometry as well as planning skills and playing chess requires logical reasoning.


Using Math Centres gives teachers the opportunity to work in small groups or one-on-one with students while the rest of the class independently consolidates what they have learnt in math. To promote their independence, activities need to be engaging. It is an opportunity to illustrate to students that they can connect with math just as they are able to connect with reading.