Find answers, ask questions, and connect with our
community around the world.

  • Josie Pierson

    July 7, 2022 at 11:50 am

    The 3-part framework is different from traditional math lessons because the students are free to explore and do more of the thinking on their own. Traditional lessons usually start with the teacher model how to do the example problems, instead of allowing students to try their own strategies first. Here students are encouraged to make predictions and create estimates with less emphasis on finding the “right” answer and more time spent on improving their original emphasis using information to help get them closer to the answer. This allows students to try multiple strategies and different methods to show thinking before the teacher consolidates the important points or shares a specific strategy or model. I also think that traditional lessons often completely neglect to spark any curiosity before beginning a new topic or problem. Here students are engaged first and want to know what is actually going on in the situation. They have more time to think about and understand the context before any math is applied. In a traditional lesson, we often model mathematical procedures without given students enough time to understand what the situation is or why it matters. Using multiple strategies allows students to make sense of the problem in different ways, and they can see that there is more than one way to solve a problem. Instead of showing a strategy to the whole class and asking students to replicate a process or procedure, the teacher is guiding the students through a process that they have started on their own, and then connecting the dots for everyone at the end of the lesson. Student voice, collaboration, and discussion are valued in this type of lesson, and it is more likely that students will remain engaged longer.