"Made-up" operations

Sparing some test-takers the abstraction of modern algebra

Here is a specific type of problem that usually confuses many students who are preparing for standardized tests like the GMAT, GRE, and SAT:

Let the operation Δ be defined as aΔb = (a² - b)/(a+b) for all real numbers a, b such that a does not equal -b. If a = 15 and aΔb = 5, what is the value of b?

One source of confusion here is the symbol used to represent the operation (either Δ, or θ, or @, or other similar symbol). To the student, these symbols seem unusual, odd, strange, or weird. The main confusion source is the word “operation” itself, referring to the odd-looking symbol. This causes a particularly strong reaction in students who have been away from school a long time, not taking any math classes in the last several years. When they hear or read the word “operation” in connection with math, they automatically think of the four classic operations they are familiar with since elementary school: addition, subtraction, multiplication, and division. They know that weird-looking symbol is none of them.
When they ask me questions about this type of problem, often the conversation unfolds like this (using the example problem above):
~~~~~
Student: What the heck is that symbol Δ? That is not an operation, is it?
Tutor: No, you are right, it is not an operation. Nobody uses that in math. It is nothing like the quadratic formula, or something. No.
Student: So, why are they saying it is an operation?
Tutor: Oh, do not worry about it, it is nothing, they are just making it up. It is a made-up operation.
Student: But, why? Just to confuse me?
Tutor: You got that right. They want to see if you can plug in whatever values they give you, and go along with whatever expression comes out of that. For example: let’s say a=1 and b=2.
Then we have 1Δ2 = (1² – 2)/(1+2) = -1/3. Now, I bet you can do this other example: if a was 3 and b was 5, how much would 3Δ5 equal?
Student: So, is that it? I just have to plug in the numbers?
Tutor: Yes, that is right, the numbers, or the expressions the problem gives you.
Student: O.K., then: (15²-b)/(15 + b) = 5. Oh, well, now I have an equation, and I can solve for b.
Tutor: Perfect.
Student [after solving the equation]: Pfff! That is easy.
Tutor: Good, excellent!
Student: It was just plugging in the numbers, and solving the equation but they make it seem so complicated at the beginning with that weird symbol.
Tutor: Yes, I know. That is exactly what they do. So, just be prepared for those weird-looking, out-of-the-blue, made-up operations. Do not let them surprise you.
~~~~~
In abstract algebra, a binary operation on a given set is a function taking two input values from that set, and returning an output value in the same set. The set does not even have to be a set of numbers. So, if you want to get technical, the question of whether or not a formula like (a² - b)/(a+b) defines an operation, really has to do with the domain and codomain of the function.
In this particular example (a² - b)/(a+b) is not a binary operation on the set of real numbers, because the restriction that the denominator needs to be other than zero excludes the set {(x, -x)} from the function’s domain. You could call it a partially defined operation. Other formulas, like sqrt(ab), the geometric mean of two numbers, are operations only on the set of positive numbers, because the product ab needs to be positive for the square root to be defined.

However, I do not get into any of these abstract concepts with my students, unless they specifically ask, with curiosity, and with an open mind because, otherwise, it would be Greek to them, and it would be a waste of their time. In most cases regarding this particular type of confusion, test takers only want validation that they are not crazy, and that they did not totally miss a whole classic operation (like addition, subtraction, multiplication, and division) during elementary and middle school. So, I want to address their concern, and make sure they know I understand their question; the source of their surprise and confusion. I want to increase their confidence in themselves, that they can successfully solve the problem on their own. To do it, they do not need to know anything about abstract binary operations in algebraic structures. That is a topic CSET takers need to pay some detailed attention to but not GMAT, GRE, or SAT takers. There is no time for me to go into such topics with them. The typical student only wants to know how to solve the problems. They are quite comfortable with their familiar belief that the word “operation” must mean addition, multiplication, subtraction, or division. They are not paying me to make them go through all the mental gymnastics it would take them to overcome their resistance to expand their concept of “operation.” So I just give them what they are looking for, that is, the fastest way for them to be able to solve the problems, and to feel good about it.

Who is driving?

Transferring control of the tutoring session to the student

Along the lines of my previous post, about how I help students in our math tutoring sessions, here is another ingredient of my tutoring method: I transfer as much control as possible to the student, over the tutoring session. The keywords here are “as much as possible,” meaning, making sure the students still learn all they need to learn. I do this by asking questions like: “What do we have today?” “Do you have any specific questions?” “What topics would you like us to review?” “What topics is the next midterm going to cover?” “Would you like to see a shortcut for doing that faster?” “Does this explanation make sense?” “What problem do you want to do next?” and so on and so forth. This is a major difference between tutoring one-on-one, a single student at a time, versus teaching a large class. A teacher in the classroom has to cover a large amount of material under a tight schedule; while the tutor can focus exclusively on the specific issues the student is having difficulties with. In a large class every student has different questions, and different difficulties, so the teacher cannot allow the lesson to wander all over the place by following the interests, questions, and difficulties of every single student in the class. That is practically impossible in traditional education. However, in a one-on-one tutoring session the tutor can answer most of the student’s questions without getting sidetracked. Actually, answering all specific questions each particular student may have, is not only possible but indeed necessary for the tutoring session to be successful. That is the very essence of private tutoring, as opposed to teaching a class of many students. Very early on in my tutoring business I discovered the educational benefits of developing the tutoring session along the needs of the individual personality of each student. Students learn better when they are learning at their own pace; when they are encouraged to ask all questions they have about a particular topic; when the instructor checks with them if the explanations make sense to them; and when the instructor lets them choose the order in which to work out the problems. Whenever I notice a student is showing signs of being bored, uninterested, impatient, or irritated, I try to find a way to give the student more control over the tutoring session. The ideal is to have the tutoring session resemble a casual conversation as much as possible. This cannot be done in the same way with every student. Each student is different. However, there are two very broad categories in relation to this topic of controlling the flow of the tutoring session. On one hand we have the working adults who are preparing to take a standardized test, and who pay for the tutoring sessions out of their own pocket. On the other hand we have the children, and teenagers, whose parents made the decision for them to take tutoring sessions. In the latter case the parents are paying for the tutoring sessions, not the students themselves. There are exceptions to every rule but, in general, I find it easier transferring control of the tutoring session to the working adults who are paying for themselves, than to the children or teenagers whose parents are paying for them. Working adults who pay out of their own pocket are already motivated enough to learn. They made the decision to hire a tutor; and they took the trouble of finding one. They usually have a better idea of why they are taking the tutoring, and what they want from it. On the other hand, the children who come to the tutoring because their parents made that decision for them, they are in a different situation. Often they are still struggling to get over the fact that they have to learn math even when they do not like it. Letting children start talking about whatever they have in mind leads much more quickly outside of math than it does with working adults. It may not show when viewing the process from the outside but actually, transferring more control of the tutoring session to the student, takes a lot more attention, and effort from the tutor than it would take otherwise but it is much more effective as far as the student achieving educational results.

To like or dislike math is an individual choice

Helping students regardless of whether they like math

One basic way I help my students is by respecting their right to dislike math. I do not try to make them like math. I refrain from insinuating, or even thinking to myself, that they should like math, because I believe they are free to make that choice by themselves. I am no longer one of those teachers who are always telling students how wonderful, important, or beautiful math is, and that they should like it. I personally love math but I very well know it is one of the least popular subjects among students. As a math tutor, I see my students as human beings first, then as clients, then as students. I know they hire me to help them pass their exams with a good score, not to make them like math, and I totally respect that. Often my students start their first session telling me they are not good at math, or they have always had problems with math, or they do not understand math, or they do not like math, or they hate math. I always listen to them, I acknowledge what they say, and I tell them that it is O.K., meaning, I have no problem with them hating math; I do not feel offended that they do not like math; I do not think they should like math; and I am not going to judge them, or criticize them, or give them a hard time just because they do not like math. Most times I do not even have to say it. Just a nod of the head, and a brief comment like “Yeah, that’s alright” make them feel comfortable with me from the very beginning because they perceive my attitude is sincere. Somehow they realize that, plain and simple, I could not care less whether they like math or not. It is their choice. I am still going to help them to the best of my ability. I do not believe there is anything wrong with them just because they do not like math, or are having problems with math. Once this basic understanding is established, that I am not going to try to change them, they trust me, and they are much more open to what I have to say to help them. In this way I can help them much better.

Negative exponents

Using powers of two for explaining the concept of negative exponents

Negative numbers confuse many students. Usually students tend to struggle with almost everything related to negative numbers. From the very concept of using the (-) sign to refer to conventional spatial directions (left, down, back), to the different rules for adding, subtracting, or multiplying positive and negative numbers; there are plenty of instances where the (-) sign is overlooked, or misinterpreted, resulting in a wrong answer. Given that a high number of wrong answers produce a low score, it is only natural for many students to react defensively whenever a new concept involving negative numbers shows up in their radar. This is the case for negative exponents. Remember that the first definition of exponent (positive) most students are introduced to is: “the number of times you multiply a number times itself.” When one tries to apply this definition to the case of negative exponents it does not make sense because, how do you multiply a number times itself “minus once,” or “minus twice”? One possible answer is that, when it comes to negative exponents, you do not multiply but you divide instead. Even with that interpretation the rule still needs some adjustment because, if you start with a number a, and you divide it by itself once, you get 1 as a result, so you would think a^-1 was 1 but that would be wrong because 1 = a⁰, whereas a^-1 = 1/a.
In order to avoid this kind of confusion, I follow another approach: By asking very simple questions I help the student build a list of powers of 2 from 2 to 1024, each related to their corresponding positive exponent. Then we notice the patterns how the numbers change, and how the exponents change. Then we move backwards all the way to the beginning of the list, and beyond, continuing into fractions, on one column, and into negative exponents, on the other column. In this way it becomes crystal clear to the student how the exact same pattern correlates the negative exponents to the fractions, and even the general formula a^-n = 1/aⁿ becomes apparent. I have successfully used this method many, many times, and so far it has worked wonderfully, clearing away all confusion and anxiety students of all ages had around negative exponents. The key to this approach is being very thorough, and asking the right questions, in the right way, at the right time.

Another Testimonial

This one from a GMAT student:

"I did tell you that I ended up with 690 on the GMAT, right? It was a good score for my purposes. I am accepted at the PhD program at University of South Florida. :) Thanks for all your help."
MAIA F. - March 16, 2009

Ratio Word Problems in Standardized Tests

Look for all the numbers the problem does not show you

Standardized tests like GMAT, GRE, CBEST, and ASVAB include ratio word problems. These may be, for example, problems about mixing water with alcohol, or about the ratio of girls to boys in a classroom, or any other type of situation where it makes sense to talk about ratios. There is a consistent pattern that shows in nearly every ratio word problem found in standardized tests. They give you the basic proportion between two parts, and then they ask you a question about the total. Or they give you the ratio between the total and one of the parts, and then they ask you a question about the other part. To give a simple example, let’s consider this problem:
In a certain school, the ratio of girls to boys is 5 to 7. How many students are there in a classroom with 15 boys, if the same girls to boys ratio applies to that classroom?
Notice how the given ratio is that of girls to boys but then the question is about the total number of students in the classroom. That is typical of these ratio word problems, and it tends to confuse some students, especially at the beginning of their preparation period. If you are preparing for a standardized test, when you see this type of problem make sure you keep track of all the quantities involved, all the different parts as well as the total, not only the parts that come with the numbers in the given ratio. Look for the numbers the problem is not giving you. More often than not, the key to the solution is in those numbers that pertain to the situation but are not shown in the phrasing of the problem.

Testimonial

From a Calculus student:

"The only class keeping me from a 4.0 GPA has always been my math class. Math has always felt impossible. However, Mr. Casteneda's tutoring has changed all of this! I just took my first Calculus exam, and scored 105 out of 100, so over 100%! His tutoring has helped me to not only get over my Math anxiety, but helped me to master the subject."
COLETTE D. - March 10, 2009

A Number Divided By Another Number

One more instance of Math not being English

Lately I had a few students who had some trouble with fractions. Part of the problem was a very specific type of confusion at the time of setting up a division calculation. When asked “How much is 5 divided by 12?” for example, they would sometimes correctly calculate the result but most other times they would set up the division as 12 divided by 5. One of them asked me a few times if the result would be the same. When I tried to explain that division is not commutative, using some visual representations of fractions, he was not totally convinced. So I just pulled the calculator, I asked him to give me a couple numbers, and I did both divisions (let’s say, 17/4 and 4/17) with the calculator, showing him the results. We repeated the “experiment” with two other examples, and then he was convinced that division is not commutative. However, such discovery created some anxiety in him because he doubted he would choose the right order of calculation in any given problem. Actually, it took multiple repetitions on my part for him to finally learn how to set up the right calculation when a word problem involves the phrase “divided by.” At first he wanted to transliterate the written phrase (“105 divided by 15” for example) word by word, and number by number, in the exact same order into the division calculation by writing, from left to right, the 105 first, outside the division symbol, then the division symbol (the one that looks like a rotated “L”), and finally the 15, inside the division symbol. I would tell him that the order of the numbers in the phrase “105 divided by 15” is backwards to the order of the same numbers in the actual calculation but this only seemed to surprise him, and confuse him. Once more, I resorted to the calculator. I said: “O.K. just do the division.” When he asked: “In what order?” I said: “Do them both.” Once he had calculated both results by long-hand, I gave him the calculator, and I said, “Now do them both with the calculator.” As he punched the calculator keys, I directed his attention to what sequence in the calculator was giving him the same result as he had calculated long-hand. I said “Do you see when you enter into the calculator: ‘105, division symbol, 15, enter’ that gives you the same result as when you did ’15, division symbol, 105’ by long-hand?” When he saw this evidence he still said “It is confusing.” Then I said: “Yes, I know, but that is just the way it is, so you are going to have to remember it that way. In the calculator division the numbers go in the same order as they are in the phrase ‘105 divided by 15,’ whereas in the long-hand division, to get the same result, the numbers have to go backwards.” It took some repetition over a few tutoring sessions but he finally got it consistently right.

Ubiquitous Numbers

One and Zero are always everywhere

The more you tutor math, the more skilled you become in finding good, clear ways to explain all types of math concepts to students. However, some concepts are more elusive than others. The difficulty of grasping a concept depends not only on the concept itself but also on the student who is assimilating it. One person, for example, can easily understand polynomial multiplication, and struggle with percentages, while someone else can find percentages very easy but have trouble with polynomials. There are also some concepts or topics that seem to be hard for a significant majority of students, like word problems for instance.
Substitution is a very powerful problem-solving technique, and it is widely used in a variety of situations. Students who find substitution easy have a clear advantage over students who have trouble understanding it. Substitution comes up in many different ways, some more complex than others. Some students understand the more basic forms of substitution but have problems applying the same techniques when dealing with more complex expressions. In fact, a very consistent general trend is the host of negative reactions students tend to show in varying degrees when facing bigger, longer, more complicated expressions. The more complex the expression, the more likely that students will get confused, or feel overwhelmed by it.
There is a particular way of using substitution to which most students react with a strong resistance: It involves transforming a given expression into another one that is equivalent in value but looks more complicated. This is done with the ultimate goal of simplifying the expression but it starts out by complicating it a little more. It is like climbing up a hill to find a way down the mountain.
The most common way of using this technique is by introducing a representation of the numbers Zero or One into the given expression.
Zero and One are very special numbers. They implicitly are everywhere in any given algebraic expression, even when we do not see them written out.
Zero is called the additive identity because zero plus any number is that same number ( x + 0 = x ).
One is called the multiplicative identity because one times any number equals that same number ( x∙1 = x ).
These two properties make Zero and One algebraically omnipresent in an implicit way.
Further, we have the following properties:
A number subtracted from itself equals zero ( x – x = 0 ).
A number different from zero, when divided by itself gives us one as the result ( x/x = 1 ).
These last two properties give Zero and One an infinite number of representations (“disguises” if you will) to show up in a formula. So, not only are Zero and One ubiquitous, they can come in a dizzying multiplicity of seemingly different forms.
The above properties of Zero and One, and their consequences, make them extremely useful in solving equations, and in manipulating algebraic expressions in general.
However, as I mentioned before, many students present a strong resistance to the idea of making an expression more complicated to be able to reduce it later. This is partly because they do not see the point of multiplying a number times one, or adding zero to it; partly because doing so seems to increase the problem in size and complexity; partly because they feel we are working backwards into some uncalled-for calculation, and finally because they believe they would not know what particular form of Zero or One they are supposed to introduce into the expression if they were doing the problem on their own.
Sometimes, when working with a student on a given problem, it is very easy for me to see a path to the solution using these types of techniques but I have learned to make sure the student does not feel like I was expecting him or her to be able to solve the problem in the same way. I only use these techniques when the student is completely stuck in the problem, not making any progress at all. When they see one possible solution, it gives them some perspective on the different factors playing a role in the problem. After showing them one possible solution method, if they do not feel comfortable that they would be able to successfully use the same method on their own, we focus on finding an alternate method that works better for them.

Tutoring Vector Calculus

Rich Problems

I really like tutoring Vector Calculus because the problems are very rich. Very often you get to do a lot of stuff in a single problem, like: partial derivatives; determinants; dot-product; graphing three-dimensional shapes, parametrizing curves and/or surfaces; substitution; double or triple integrals; polar, cylindrical, or spherical coordinates; trigonometric substitution and/or integration by parts. Plus usually there is some flexibility as to how to go about setting up the problems; with quite a few choices from ordering the variables to writing down the equations, and selecting the integration techniques. It is a lot of fun.

Math is not English

The order of operations messes with our reading habits.

The mathematical order of operations seems to be a source of confusion for some students, sometimes even frustration. For example, when presented with the expression
3 + 4(x-1)
some students ask: “Why can’t we just start by adding 3 + 4, and then multiplying 7 times (x-1)?”
My short answer is: “Because math is not English.” Then I ask: “Is there any parenthesis around the 3 + 4 sum?” When they say “no” I continue: “Then the parenthesis that is there right after the 4 claims that 4 for itself, for multiplication purposes. It will not let the 4 run away with the 3, oh no sir, no way! The multiplication operation has title to that 4, and to that (x-1) as well, and it does not care about the 3 the slightest bit. The addition operation holds a lesser priority than multiplication does, so it has to wait for its turn.”
I explain the PEMDAS rules using action verbs commonly applied to human situations, thus making the math symbols play the role of active, independent characters with human-like behaviors. This type of explanation makes my students understand the mathematical structure of the expression at hand but still some seem puzzled, or surprised, or even bothered by the fact that the applicable sequence of operation does not necessarily follow the simple left-to-right order. So in those cases I proceed with the following explanation:
There is a crucial difference between the way we read math, and the way we read English. This is very important. We always read English from left to right. Such a simple, linear, unidirectional way does not do it for math. It does not work. Reading math from left to right only, is insufficient, and inadequate. In math we have to read formulas and expressions not just from left to right but from right to left; from the top down; from the bottom up; from the inside out; from the outside in; and even around in circles. In short, every which way, else we run the risk of missing essential information about the structure of the thing. Reading math is not reading. Reading math is much more similar to what the eyes of a helicopter pilot do when they are flying over a mountain terrain, looking for a spot to safely land the helicopter. You look at everything, everywhere.
Written language mimics spoken language, going along with the flow of the story. English is perfect for telling stories. Math describes structures. It has an altogether different goal, so it cannot work the same way English does. Mathematical expressions do not resemble stories nearly enough the way they resemble gizmos, appliances, devices, or cars, objects made out of parts. The parts are connected to each other in a very specific way. Each part has its own function, and its own place within the whole thing. So, really, reading math from left to right only, makes as much sense as trying to “read a car” from left to right only.

The Square of a Sum

An arithmetic and geometric approach to Algebra

A very common mistake test takers make when they have been out of school for a while is that they automatically try to expand the square of a sum as if it was the same as the plain sum of the squares of the individual terms. For example, sometimes some students, when presented with say, (x + 5)², they wrongly expand it as x² + 25, leaving out the middle term 10x.
They forget they have to use the foil method to multiply the given sum times itself. Since typographically the sum of the squares looks like something that could equal the square of the sum, they guess they can expand the square that way, as if it was a real math rule, and then they get the problem wrong.
I try to preemptively address the possibility of this mistake, because both sums of squares and squares of sums show up a lot in the math section of standardized tests. For a long time I have used a drawing, with two little squares and two congruent rectangles filling up a larger square, to show the geometric interpretation (in terms of area) for the algebraic formula (a + b)² = a² + 2ab + b². I emphasize the middle term, 2ab, in this expansion, and I point to the corresponding two rectangles in the drawing.
The above approach is useful but many students forget the formula when it comes to actually applying it. Most do not realize it is a universal pattern where to plug any other expressions in.
So, lately I have been experimenting with a slightly different approach: I present two or three numerical examples first, before drawing the squares and rectangles. I ask the student to choose two numbers, and then I guide them through a sequence of calculations that allows them to actually compute and see the numerical difference between the square of the sum, and the sum of the squares. Then I ask them to multiply the original numbers, then to double this product. By asking all the questions in the right order, I have gotten comments from them like: “Wow!” or “How weird!” or “That is so funny!” or “This is very interesting!” or “Does it always work like that?” or “How can that be?” or “What is going on?” or “I’m sure there is a pattern here!” Then I draw the squares and rectangles with all the numbers in their proper places. So, creating the perception of a “mystery” with the numbers, and then explaining it away with the picture seems to work well. It makes sense for the students. They usually say: “Oh, right! Now I get it.”

Tutoring for the CSET

Matrix Multiplication, Fields, and Other Abstract Concepts

Lately I have been tutoring a few CSET takers. The CSET tests for math knowledge equivalent to what is expected from a math major. Consequently, the CSET covers a lot of topics, and some of them are quite abstract. One of the common CSET preparation guides out there starts with one of its most abstract questions right at the very beginning. The question asks to identify, among five possible options, one valid argument showing that the set of all invertible 3-by-3 matrices is not a field. So, this particular question checks whether the student knows what a field is (as an algebraic structure), and also that matrix multiplication is not commutative.
Many CSET takers who are not math majors have the goal of teaching middle school math. They are usually surprised by the amount of math in the CSET. At least two of them have made this remark to me: “Wow! Maybe I do not want to teach math. This is quite a lot, and very complicated.”
Individual reactions to that first question (on the set of invertible square matrices not being a field) vary widely from student to student.
One of them told me: “Let’s just skip this one. I do not want to waste time on this. If I see a question like this one in the test, I am just going to take a guess and that is it.”
However, some other students have the sort of driving curiosity that do not allow them to let go so easily, because they want to know what the question talks about. So, another student kept asking me question after question, during a couple sessions, until she understood the algebraic concept of “field”. As we went through several examples and counter-examples of number types, sets, functions, operations, and properties, along with the abstract names and notation, she kept saying: “Wow! This is mind-blowing! I never thought they would expect me to know so much stuff.” But she kept asking questions all the way until she made sure she understood that first problem in her practice test.
I very much enjoy tutoring for the CSET, precisely because the wide variety of abstract topics it covers. Just like Linear Algebra, and Vector Calculus, the CSET reminds me of my college years.

Look for Solutions with Less Math and More Logic.

One instance where often “less is more.”

The following question is an excellent guideline for solving math word problems:
“How can I solve this problem by doing the least possible amount of math?”

Oftentimes there are several pathways from the setting of a problem to its final solution. Some routes are safer, while some are riskier, more error-prone. Some routes are faster, while some are time-consuming. Some routes are clearer, while some may be confusing.
Usually, the routes with more elementary operations (especially long division), and bigger numbers, tend to be lengthier, longer, and riskier, because adding, multiplying, and dividing big numbers or expressions requires a laser-focus attention. There are plenty of opportunities for doing silly mistakes during these calculations. Besides, it is easy to lose sight of the big picture when worrying about the accuracy of the calculations.
Factoring whole numbers and algebraic expressions is a good habit because it allows you to simplify some expressions before diving into the calculations, so you can operate with smaller numbers, gaining time, and accuracy.
Using logic is a very good habit, too. Many problems lend themselves to solutions that involve more reasoning, and less calculation. This is usually a good thing because these solutions tend to be clearer, and shorter.
Organizing all the information about a problem in a way that makes sense to you, is an excellent habit because this way you keep track of where you are and what you are doing all the time through the problem, and having all these references available makes it easy to retrace your steps, and identify any possible mistakes.
Go visual at any opportunity. Pictures, drawings, charts, graphs, and tables often are a huge help in writing down the right equations, or even in avoiding equations altogether sometimes.
There are many problems you can solve with a drawing and a little logic. Just because the problem is a math problem, that does not mean you need to write down an equation to solve it.
Focus on your possibilities, on what you can do. Organize the information in a logical way, using a drawing, or a table. Above all, try to spend the least possible amount of time and energy doing long, detailed, time-consuming calculations. Instead, simplify the expressions, and ask yourself logical questions about the problem.