About cookies

The NCETM site uses cookies. Read more about our privacy policy

Please agree to accept our cookies. If you continue to use the site, we'll assume you're happy to accept them.

 

Personal Learning Login






Sign Up | Forgotten password?
 
Register with the NCETM

Secondary Magazine - Issue 118: Building Bridges


Created on 14 January 2015 by ncetm_administrator
Updated on 02 February 2015 by ncetm_administrator

 

Secondary Magazine Issue 118'Infinity Bridge' by PauliCarmody (adapted), some rights resered
 

Building Bridges

New Year, New Year’s resolutions, time for changes (ch … ch … changes) … so let’s be contrary and consider things not changing: the fact that 3 + 5 – 5 = 3, and that 3 × 5 ÷ 5 = 3. Let’s call these examples of, respectively, additive and multiplicative invariance. Additive invariance is a concept that most secondary pupils have grasped in KS2: it is not a surprise to them that 3 + 5 – 5 = 3. It is, nonetheless, well worth ensuring that your pupils are absolutely confident with less straightforward examples of the form a + b – a and a – b + c + b, and also those of the form a – b + c – d where b + d = a (or c). To confirm that your pupils are fluent with additive invariance, ask them a calculation such as (673 + 356) – (675 + 354): do they reason that the answer must be 0, because a sum of two terms is invariant if one term increases by an amount and the second term decreases by the same amount?

Part of the reason for looking at calculation strings such as these is to challenge your pupils’ likely misunderstanding of the unhelpful cliché “BODMAS”: they may think (indeed, they may have been told) that “you work out addition before subtraction” and so they think that they have to evaluate 3 + 5 – 5 as 8 – 5 = 3, rather than 3 + 0 = 3. The difference in efficiency will be stark when you ask them to evaluate 2368 – 9674 + 1332 + 9674! A better mnemonic for the order of operations is to think of a pyramid or a podium for gold, silver and bronze medals (a mnemonic that will work especially well in 2016!):

BODMAS gold silver bronze pyramid

They need to be confident when, and why, calculation strings can be re-ordered, for example

  • 14 + 6 – 9 = 14 – 9 + 6 = 6 – 9 + 14 etc.
  • 8 × 6 ÷ 4 = 8 ÷ 4 × 6 = 6 ÷ 4 × 8 etc.
  • 14 + 6 – 9 ≠ either 14 – 6 + 9 or 9 + 6 – 14
  • 8 × 6 ÷ 4 ≠ either 8 ÷ 6 × 4 or 6 × 4 ÷ 8
  • 30 ÷ 3 ÷ 2 = 30 ÷ 2 ÷ 3, but not 3 ÷ 30 ÷ 2.

The order of operations is reflected in the medal winners’ hierarchy: gold before silver before bronze: 8 + 6 ÷ 2 = 11 not 7, and 5 × 32 = 45 not 225. This podium layout also captures distributivity: pupils see that × is literally written over + and –, and so they recall that multiplication is distributive over addition and subtraction, hence 3 × (a – b + c) ≡ 3a – 3b + 3c. Similarly, they see that division is written over addition and subtraction, and this should help them recall that

12 + 153 = (12 ÷ 3) + (15 ÷ 3) = 4 + 5, and that xx2x ≡ (x ÷ x) − (x2 ÷ x) ≡ 1 − x.

In contrast, 3 × (4 × 5) ≠ (3 × 4) × (3 × 5) because multiplication is not distributive over multiplication: × is not written over ×.

It is likely that your pupils will be less confident with multiplicative invariance, other than in straightforward strings such as 6 × 4 ÷ 4 and 6 ÷ 4 × 4. Calculations such as 7 ÷ 3 ÷ 2 × 24 and 632 × 123 – 316 × 246 will generate lots of worthwhile discussion and reasoning. Confident mastery of multiplicative invariance will enable your pupils to reasons in contexts where its applicability is not immediately apparent: if the density of metal G is 25% bigger than the density of metal S, by what % will the volume of a block of metal G be smaller than a block of metal S if the two blocks have the same mass?

The area representation of multiplication should help develop pupils’ understanding of multiplicative invariance. If your pupils think of the picture of a (real) 12 by 4 rectangle when considering the (abstract) multiplication 12 × 4, then they can see (with either real or abstract scissors) that doubling the width and halving the length keeps the area the same, i.e. that 12 × 4 = 6 × 8.

12 x 4 = 6 x 8

More complicated examples can be tackled either numerically or algebraically:

algebraic example

This experiment shows that if one factor is increased by a half (and so multiplied by a scale factor of 3/2), and the second factor is decreased by a third (and so multiplied by a scale factor of 2/3), then the product of the two factors – the area of the rectangle – will be unchanged. Once pupils have seen this represented pictorially (and, ideally, experienced it in the concrete with paper, scissors and glue), then the identity

a × b 23 a × 32 b

is easy for pupils to understand and explain. They can then conjecture, and prove, the result needed in the % context cited earlier: increasing the density by 25% is the same as multiplying it by 5/4, and therefore multiplying the volume by 4/5, i.e. decreasing it by 20%, will keep the product, which is the mass, invariant.

example showing relationship between mass and density

In conclusion they can articulate the general result: the product of two factors is invariant whenever one factor is multiplied by a scale factor and the second factor is multiplied by the reciprocal of the same scale factor. The mathematical language is spot on; for song lyrics, though, I’ll stick with Bowie.

Image credit
Page header by PauliCarmody (adapted), some rights reserved

 

 

 
 
 
 
Download the magazine as a PDF
 
Secondary Magazine Archive
 
Magazine Feed - keep informed of forthcoming issues
 
Departmental Workshops - Structured professional development activities
 
Explore the Secondary Forum
 
Contact us - share your ideas and comments 
 

 


Comment on this item  
 
Add to your NCETM favourites
Remove from your NCETM favourites
Add a note on this item
Recommend to a friend
Comment on this item
Send to printer
Request a reminder of this item
Cancel a reminder of this item

Comments

 


03 February 2015 08:39
I use this idea already in my classes, without the medal approach, I write the inverses alongside each other, So it looks like B - I - DM - AS. I like the idea of medal though
By Higgie
         Alert us about this comment  
02 February 2015 20:54
Rants against Bodmas fully sympathised with. Could we at the very least ask Key stage 1&2 to think of using BIDMAS in preference to BODMAS? "Order" was never any easier than "Index" anyway, but the medal table approach of encouraging the letters to be considered in pairs has a lot of merit too.
By philmurray
         Alert us about this comment  
Only registered users may comment. Log in to comment