LE2: refactor RREF discovery to align with @davidaustinm #teamforwardsubstitution #856
Conversation
🚀 Preview available 🚀https://394413e4.tbil.pages.dev
|
🚀 Preview available 🚀https://b9910d9d.tbil.pages.dev
|
🚀 Preview available 🚀https://7880ebd9.tbil.pages.dev
|
🚀 Preview available 🚀https://39d7d71f.tbil.pages.dev
|
🚀 Preview available 🚀https://43e7db6a.tbil.pages.dev
|
🚀 Preview available 🚀https://083d6471.tbil.pages.dev
|
|
I think I like this well enough. Though I have to comment that I'm covering this topic irregularly: because I'm out of town next week, I've pushed all fluency building there with the substitutes, and just did the scaffolded exploration with my students this week. Tagging @jkostiuk for friendly criticism or suggestions. |
|
Just gave this a look through, but I think it might be helpful to talk through goals of such an edit. The current draft is what I'd call a "minimal" edit in the sense that we didn't define what an REF is (in contrast to an RRE), or what forward/backward substituting is. Instead, we're putting our a thumb on the scale a bit to nudge them into doing this in the Gauss-Jordan algorithm. I guess my question is: do we want to be more deliberate about introducing the REF so that we can maybe talk about LU-decomposition later and, if so, how should this be done? One option is to rework the in-class activities to tease out the REF as a (non-unique) intermediate step, provide the definition and distinction between RREF/REF, and clarify forward/backward substitution. Another option is to draft a mathematical writing exploration that expand on what your current draft does. Given that, from this point on, students mostly use the RREF function, I'm inclined to pursue option 2. In addition to the math writing exploration that seems ripe for LE2, I can imagine coming up with some additional ones in later sections (for instance, in most of the EVs, a math-writing exploration that explores what we can do with an REF instead of an RREF). |
Closes #854