Tag Archives: flowchart math

The Flowchart Method: Learn It, Love it, Log it.

Astute readers of my blog may remember my ramblings of the “flowchart method” last summer (and my use of it at the start of the year in Algebra II). After not focusing on it for quite a while, I brought it back for solving logs and exponentials, and it helped so much, all the way from struggling Algebra II students to PreAP Precal rock stars. Next year I really want to focus more on carrying it through all that we do, but baby steps first.

My introduction to composition of functions remained the same, next year I want them to really focus on writing the steps of each function in order. I changed up how I introduced inverse functions, but I’m not sure if it went better than the previous year or not. I need to work on melding the two together (I also think a couple more days for this unit would have been reallllly helpful, but Spring Break!).

I started by having them do the first row on the NTM below as a bellringer. Whoa, that’s weird, 3 and 4 have the same answer! And it’s what we started with! Then we did the next row, whoa, so 7 & 8 have an output of x!  That means anything we put into it will come out the same!

from megcraig.org

(file here) (If you’re like my students, you may not get the ServPro reference: they are a disaster cleanup company with the tagline “Like it never even happened,” which became our tagline for inverse functions.)  After explaining the joke, we worked on the chart, determining inverse functions and checking with whatever number they desired (We don’t make a big deal about 1:1 functions until Precal, although we did talk it about the next day a wee bit).  And this is where building up the function machine the day before would have been super handy!  Let’s just reverse the machine!  (I also wanted to do Bob’s Inverse Function Partner Activity, but again, time!) Then the next day I felt I had to discuss some more properties of inverse functions, but again, not the greatest:

from megcraig.org

(file here) Trying to do too much at once, so we didn’t get to focus on the chart at the bottom: “Oh, so we’re really using inverse function machines when we solve equations!”

Then the next day we did exponential equations:

from megcraig.org

(file here) I really wanted to do the Zombies! Activity but, again, time! So at the end of the day we did #14 with our calculator, leaving the last two for homework. So much frustration! “Really, there’s no other way to solve these?”

Well, maybe there is….

from megcraig.org

(file here)  Thanks to Kate for the fill-in-the-blank problems at the bottom. I would probably save the beginning part for the next day, when we are actually solving equations.  But look at that glorious chart!  Oh, so you’re telling me that logs and exponentials are inverses?

The next day is when we REALLY focused on the inverses idea:

from megcraig.org

(file here) I wish I would have had them write down the actual flowchart on these, though, just to reinforce the fact that log base 6 in the inverse of 6^x. As in, the number matters! You wouldn’t undo +3 by -4! So you wouldn’t undo 7^x by taking just log!

I also always have this conflict with myself, as illustrated here:

from megcraig.org

Teach “undoing a log” by converting to an exponential equation or as exponentiating both sides? I usually stick with option 1 in Alg II, then bring in option 2 in Precal. But maybe with the flowchart option 2 would make more sense?

Anyway, speaking of the flowchart, here is where it gets super useful:

from megcraig.org

(file here) Look how beautiful that is. No one thought to make #12 into 5 ln x! And it really focuses on ln and e being inverses of each other. We held off on the homework until we had some group whiteboard practice the following day, using slides like these:

from megcraig.orgFlowchart 10

(file here) Now, don’t get me wrong, we still struggled. We spent two days on the study guide (file here, with video key part I and part II) after this and I still had students try to undo a log by using a log. However, I also saw a lot of students that have been struggling do really well on this test–because they had a strategy they could use to attack each problem. (We also talked about how hard it is to intuitively feel like your answers is correct, so let’s use the calculator to plug it back in–this was complete news to many of them that they could have been doing that for any equation we solve!)  And it wasn’t just the struggling students who were fans–I overheard one top-notch student say to another, “Hey, did you write the flowchart? It really helps!”

As I mentioned, I also used it in Precal with great success:

from megcraig.org

(File here) We also used it for actually solving equations, but I can’t seem to find that file! Doh! But hopefully you get the idea: flowchart it!

An Algebraic Epiphany

Posted on by 7 comments

People, this post is why I love the #MTBoS.  You can’t read everything, learn everything, critically think about everything; but if you read blogs and tweets, then you can collect more of that knowledge than you would alone. So even though I am not participating in the #intenttalk book study/chat (Am I the only one who always thinks it’s Kimmie Schmidt on the cover?), I did see this tweet from Bridget:

I used that method a wee bit this year when I taught inverse functions and a few students really latched onto it. But now I’m thinking of starting this way on day one,  building on it, and tying it into Glenn’s three rules of mathematics. I sat down and played with it a bit for the last few days and all I can say is:

Are you ready for this?  Ok, let’s just dip our toes in:

Flowchart math from megcraig.orgThe main idea being that we think through the equation “forwards” and then work back to the solution using inverses. Another easy one:

Flowchart math from megcraig.orgI like (a) completing the circle of life by checking our answer and (b) each column showing equal values.

How about we try out the shallow end:

Flowchart math from megcraig.org Flowchart math from megcraig.orgYeah, I’m totally digging the two arrows for square root, too.

Flowchart math from megcraig.orgAre your ready to put your head underwater?  Ok, here it is….wait for it…

Flowchart math from megcraig.org

So one place where this method has problems is if there are variables on both sides. But I want to use this more as an introduction in each section, not a method for solving each individual equation. However, we can use the fact that each column is equal to set up the rest of the problem and finish with quadratic formula.

Now I thought for sure this could not work with quadratics. OR COULD IT?

flowchart math from megcraig.orgOk, so the weird thing here is that (a) my new erasable markers don’t like it when you rewrite over something you just erased and (b) we have 2 places that x is involved, so 2 starting points. But then I don’t know how they are going to add to equal 6. But (spoiler alert!) we do know what has to happen if we’re going to multiply to equal zero…

flowchart math from megcraig.orgHere the two back arrows from zero come from the fact we had two x inputs. Pretty powerful, eh?  Let’s try it on some other tricky problems, like rational exponents:

flowchart math from megcraig.orgOk, guys, we’re going to jump into the deep end now….ABSOLUTE VALUE!

flowchart math from megcraig.org

Update: I was so excited about “un-absolute valuing” that I forgot to “un-multiply”. -6 should turn into 3, which would then turn into -3 and 3; and finally -6 and 0 as the answers. Which I probably would have noticed if I followed my own recommendation to circle back through.

Holy cow I’m in LOVE LOVE LOVE with having to “unabsolute value” as a step, because of course to “unabsolute value” you go back to positive or negative.

But wait, what about….

flowchart math from megcraig.orgOk, ok, a little tricky, but not undo-able.

Now I did have trouble with this problem:

flowchart math from megcraig.orgI wasn’t sure if my beginning value should be x or 5. When I tried it with 5, I thought of it as “If I’m at 125, what root would I need to get to 5?  Oh, the third  root. That means the original operation in the top line needs to be the inverse of the third root, which is cubing, which means x = 3.”

But if I keep my beginning value as x, then it leads into a nice intro/need for logs:

flowchart math from megcraig.orgAnd then I went crazy with the log problems!  (Although not pictured is two logs equal to each other, e.g. log (x + 7) = log (2x – 4). I’ll leave it as an exercise for the reader; it really is quite pretty.)

flowchart math from megcraig.orgflowchart math from megcraig.org flowchart math from megcraig.org flowchart math from megcraig.orgThe last one being another case of, “Uh-oh, need to rewrite this as something isn’t so ambiguous.” Another case of that:

flowchart math from megcraig.orgOk, ok, I don’t know why I didn’t have two starting x’s and then divide them, but isn’t it just beautiful how it works out this way?  So I went some more down that path:

flowchart math from megcraig.orgThen I thought of other problems that cause students anguish, and immediately thought of the difference between 2sin(x) and sin(2x):

flowchart math from megcraig.org flowchart math from megcraig.orgAfter this, my brain was pretty much done for the day.  Or at least, I thought it was. Then I had a shower thought (where all problems are solved): hey, wonder if I could tie it to graphing transformations?

flowchart math from megcraig.orgGAH!!!!!  So you go through all the steps, then find your parent function, in this case absolute value. You have to use inverses to get to x (minus three, or in this case three to the left) and OH I SHOULD HAVE PUT = Y AT THE VERY END BECAUSE THEN YOU TRAVEL “FORWARD” (stretch 2, down 4) FROM THE PARENT FUNCTION TO GET TO Y.

Another one?  ANOTHER ONE!

flowchart math from megcraig.orgI don’t know why you would want it, but if you did want all of these examples in one pdf, here you go. Now there are some drawbacks as I’ve mentioned: things need to be simplified first, somethings get a little wonky, how will this work for trickier equations; but I think Kayne sums it up pretty nicely:

Would love any thoughts/opinions/comments/suggestions/epiphanies!