- This topic has 1 reply, 2 voices, and was last updated 11 years, 8 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
4.OA.5 Generate a number or shape pattern that follows a given rule. Identify apparent features of the pattern that were not explicit in the rule itself. For example, given the rule “Add 3” and the starting number 1, generate terms in the resulting sequence and observe that the terms appear to alternate between odd and even numbers. Explain informally why the numbers will continue to alternate in this way.
I don’t understand how the example given in this standard fits into the standard itself. Specifically:
“Explain informally why the numbers will continue to alternate in this way.”
The verbs in the standard are ‘generate’ and ‘identify’, so this seems inconsistent to me.
So, just to make sure I understand the question, is the issue that the example’s requirement to explain goes beyond the standard’s requirement to identify? I guess it depends on what you count as an identification; I might detect what seems to be a pattern, but without at least an informal explanation for it I can’t be sure the pattern goes on forever. The gist of the example is that the process of identifying a pattern goes beyond the simple discovery phase.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.