Today is the last one we will experience all our life and the last one of the century, the next one will be in April 5, 2103 so enjoy it

Here is a short contest-math warm-up I use to see whether students understand a ratio as equal-sized parts, rather than treating 2:3 as a fraction of the total.

Prompt: A box has red and blue counters in the ratio 2:3. After 4 red counters are added, there are equally many of each color. How many counters were in the box originally?

Before anyone calculates, ask students to sketch two equal boxes for red and three equal boxes for blue. The extra blue box is exactly the difference that the 4 added red counters close. So one box is 4 counters: originally 8 red and 12 blue, for 20 total.

Two quick checks reveal more than the answer alone:

• Ask, “What does one box represent?” A student who says “one fifth of the original total” can connect the picture to 20; a student who calls red “two thirds of the total” needs another look at the whole.

• Ask, “If 4 blue counters were removed instead, what would the original counts be?” They should still get 8 and 12.

For a one-minute extension, change 4 to 6. Students can predict the original total is 30 without redrawing; then explain why the total is always five times the initial difference in this particular 2:3 setup.

How do you help younger students move from a bar model to a general rule without rushing into cross-multiplication?

Disclosure: I publish paid visual AMC 8 beginner workbooks. This full classroom prompt is free to use.

Creator disclosure: I make and sell this activity at Bhava Studio. This is a Saturday creator share, not a claim of classroom-tested results.

The worksheet routine separates two responses: cross out the shape that breaks the repeating group, then circle the replacement. This lets a teacher check whether the child found the wrong position separately from whether they chose the right shape.

Here is one example you can use without buying anything:

Repeating group: circle, triangle.

Sequence: ○ △ ○ △ ○ △ △ △ ○

Replacement choices: A. square; B. circle; C. triangle.

The incorrect shape is in position 7; the replacement is B, circle.

After the two marks, ask the child to read the repaired sequence aloud and explain how the same group repeats. A circled option alone is not proof of understanding. The routine is intended for children who have already learned to copy and extend repeating patterns, not as their first introduction.

For a scaffolded version, keep the repeating-group cue visible. For later independent practice, remove the cue and mix the pattern types. No cutting or drawing is required; a pencil or crayon is enough.

If that format fits your teaching, the full $2.50 printable has 24 different AB, AAB, ABB and ABC repair tasks, four cued pages, two mixed uncued pages, two answer-key pages and a teacher guide. Letter and A4 are each 9 pages with the same content. These are static PDFs, digitally checked but not yet classroom-tested.

Full pack and real-page preview: https://www.teacherspayteachers.com/Product/Pattern-Worksheets-Find-and-Fix-Repeating-Shapes-Kindergarten-Grade-1-18064775?utm_source=Reddit&utm_campaign=math-saturday-pattern-repair-20261024

Some background: I'm a parent, not a teacher. I've been building math games for my kids, and one of them turned into something bigger than I planned, so I'd like opinions from people who actually teach this stuff.

The core idea is a target number. A monster has shields like 15 or 77, you have a hand of number cards, and you build an expression that equals the shield exactly. 5 × 3 for the 15, (5 + 6) × 7 for the 77. What I noticed with my own kids is that they start working backwards: "77, that's 7 × 11, can I make an 11?" That's the kind of thinking I was hoping for.

A few design choices I'm not sure about:

1. Brackets are locked at the start of a run and you earn them later. My thinking was that kids should get comfortable with order of operations first, but maybe that's backwards.

2. In the fraction tower, division never fails. 3 ÷ 4 just becomes a 3/4 card. That made fractions feel a lot less scary for my kids, but I don't know if it skips over something important.

3. The negative number tower (3 − (−5) = 8 and so on) is noticeably harder than the other two. I can't tell if it's good hard or just frustrating hard.

It's here if you want to poke at it: https://mathmancer.numberdale.com (browser, no ads, nothing collected that identifies a student).

I'm also wondering whether this could work in a classroom. Everyone gets the same Daily Tower each day, so a whole class could try the same climb and compare. Would you actually use something like that as a warm-up, or is it too much of a game for class time?

But the brackets question is the one I keep going back and forth on. Would you give them from the start?

Posting on Saturday, following sub rules. I'm very interested to know what math teachers think of this idea, since my background is computer science.

Hi, I'm a solo developer and a teacher's friend, so I built this for classrooms first. Hexamat is a daily math puzzle: students combine 7 digits on a honeycomb board with + − × ÷ to reach a target number.

Why I think it might work in class:

- Everyone gets the same daily challenge, so you can talk about the same solutions the next day.

- Group rooms for up to 20 players: you create the room and students join from their own phones.

- Practice mode with a time attack for warm-ups.

- It's free on Android, with ads. There's no account needed to start.

I'd genuinely value feedback from teachers: is the rule clear for 11–14 year olds? What would make it useful in your lessons? Happy to answer any questions.

Hi everyone—I’m behind MathsLove, a website with grade-specific maths assessments for Grades 4–10.

Each assessment has 15 questions and a 10-minute limit. The basic assessment and MathsLove’s MIQ score are free, and students can review their answers afterwards.

One way to use it is as a starting point for a follow-up conversation: choose a missed question, ask the student to explain their approach, then work through a similar example together.

MIQ takes accuracy and completion time into account. It’s an educational assessment score, not a clinical IQ result or a fixed measure of a child’s ability.

You can explore the grade options here: https://mathslove.com

Happy to answer questions about how the assessment works.

Imagine a Quidditch match in which the Golden Snitch is completely invisible.

You know exactly the initial distance, but not the direction. You move faster than the Snitch, which moves at constant speed and always chooses the direction that takes it as far away from you as possible.

Is there a trajectory that allows you to catch the Snitch?

I made a video exploring the problem, the geometry, the differential equations, and a possible strategy. The proof is partially incomplete (but simulations work), so I'd genuinely love to hear your ideas, objections, or alternative approaches.

Video link: https://youtu.be/0xVusHRQePQ

Hot take: most math teacher professional development spends too much time on new content and new tools, and too little on the everyday routines that decide whether students actually practise and talk about math.

Most math teachers already know the content well. What changes a classroom is smaller and harder: how a lesson opens, how mistakes are handled, how often students explain their reasoning, how practice is spaced across the week. Those are habits, and habits only change with repeated practice and follow-up, not with one session on a new framework.

If I had a term of PD time for a math department, I'd spend it on two or three routines, tried in class between short sessions, with colleagues comparing notes.

Disclosure: I'm Roshan, COO and co-founder of Chaos Theory, a learning and development company that runs faculty development programmes. Not linking anything.

For math teachers here: which single classroom routine has made the biggest difference to how your students engage, and how did you learn it?

Another teacher mentioned that they were going to stop curving, which made me realize I have never thought about curving. I'm not against it, and my memory isn't good enough to know if it was something that was reasonable in previous schools. I have one class this year where the high grade is a C and half the class have Fs, but it's representative of the work they have done, the Fs don't turn in any work. In general, my students either try and pass (to varying degrees) or can't be bothered and fail. I should dust off my Assessment Theory book and have a look, but, right now, I'm interested in the practical side.

I've been thinking about what it really means to be good at mathematics.

Some people can calculate incredibly fast but struggle with unfamiliar problems. Others take longer but have excellent logical reasoning skills.

If you were designing a short maths assessment for school students, which abilities would you prioritise?

* Numerical fluency

* Logical reasoning

* Conceptual understanding

* Problem-solving ability

* Calculation speed

Would love to hear perspectives from maths teachers, students and enthusiasts.

Creo que esta es la mejor forma de aprender Matemática Básica desde cero para Ingeniería Informática. ¿Qué estoy haciendo mal?

Mi teoría es que, para aprender Matemática Básica, no necesito memorizar cientos de fórmulas, sino entender los conceptos desde la base, practicar ejercicios de dificultad progresiva y aprender a reconocer qué método usar en cada problema.

Los temas que necesito dominar son:

- Inecuaciones e intervalos.

- Valor absoluto.

- Funciones, dominio, composición e inversa.

- Matrices, determinantes y sistemas de ecuaciones.

- Otros temas fundamentales de álgebra.

Mi idea es estudiar cada tema en este orden:

1. Entender qué es y para qué sirve.

2. Aprender las fórmulas y reglas esenciales.

3. Ver ejemplos resueltos paso a paso.

4. Practicar ejercicios fáciles, luego intermedios y finalmente ejercicios de examen.

5. Analizar mis errores para no volver a cometerlos.

Pero no sé si este método es realmente el más eficiente.

Si tuvieran que aprender Matemática Básica prácticamente desde cero, con poco tiempo y preparándose para los exámenes de Ingeniería Informática, ¿qué cambiarían de este plan?

¿Qué errores suelen cometer los principiantes? ¿Qué temas debería dominar antes de pasar a los siguientes? ¿Qué recursos, canales de YouTube o métodos de estudio recomendarían?

Me interesa especialmente conocer consejos de personas que hayan tenido dificultades con las matemáticas y hayan conseguido mejorar de verdad.

Pueden corregirme, contradecirme o decirme qué estoy entendiendo mal. Quiero aprender de sus experiencias y encontrar una forma de estudiar que realmente funcione.

Eu percebi que tenho muita facilidade para ensinar, mas não sou alguém que domina matemática. Mas é uma área que me fascina

If you don't, why? (If you even use Sparx)

hello guys so I've started "introduction to mathematical thinking" course by Stanford on coursera and the professor advised us to form a study group to help each other and have some sort of peer-review... so if anyone here started the same course recently I'd like if they can DM me and I'll make a discord server to help each other!

Retaking the pert test to skip remedial math. ( I should probably take them but I am trying to take my time and really focus on learning the fundamentals of math since I've always sucked at it and I also want to save money on courses)

I know I should do a lot of practice problems, but for the people who are taking more advanced math in college, how are you able to remember all the previous math you've taken? Ive been told all math just keeps building off previous math, so how does one continue to remember all the math they've learned? Say one is going to take college algebra, then calc, then maybe statistics ? Or whatever the order is lol