I have to admit that this is not a topic I am personally brilliant at. Every time as a department we did a mock paper there would always be a heightened anxiety I had if there was an angles in parallel lines question on the paper. I am not great at spotting F and Z angles. I struggled with it at school. I was taught it as F and Z angles and they’re no longer allowed as descriptions! It’s just not my kind of topic, I have a brain that means I have to work harder with shape space and measure topics! I have some great lessons to demonstrate alternate and corresponding angles and I heavily rely on these to be clear in my demonstrations. I have to admit in my early years of teaching I had my fingers crossed that all the students would get on board with it and there wouldn’t be many questions! As the years have gone on I am more confident to field the questions that learners have on the topic but I can’t help but empathise with those learners that just don’t get it!
Have you ever sat in a training session thinking, nope no idea where this is going, what time is lunch? You can see that look on learners' faces sometimes and I see it more often than not in angles on parallel lines. One year I had a learner who was in a bridging provision, not quite an alternative provision but not a mainstream school placement, she just couldn’t grasp angles in parallel lines. I went back to teaching angles on a straight line and recapped that. She turned and looked at me and said “yeah what’s that got to do with this stuff though?” and I thought, oh yeah she’s right! It made me think. What is the best way to sequence angles on parallel lines? I wasn’t sure I had it right? I went back to the exam boards scheme of work. I then checked another exam boards scheme of work and both indicated angles in polygons and angle facts on lines were the building blocks to angles in parallel lines. So yes, what did it have to do with this new topic of angles in parallel lines?
I questioned myself. I know it is 2 sets of lines and angles facts but why do I teach it as an abstract standalone topic? Was it because of my previous lack of knowledge in the topic? Was I projecting my fears onto my learners? So being brave and taking the risk with my next group of learners I taught angle facts on straight lines and around a point then in the lesson on angles in parallel lines I left it as a challenge for them to calculate missing angle values in parallel lines. Unsurprisingly with their existing knowledge they were able to answer the problems. Obviously their reasons weren’t alternate and corresponding angles but their numerical value answers were correct. I then taught my usual lessons edited a bit so that we covered the reasons for parallel lines in the following lesson.
Now I teach GCSE resit to 16+ learners. I teach 16-18 and 19+ learners and as you can imagine both groups require different approaches. I find that 19+ often crave the knowledge for perfect answers and will tackle angles in parallel lines with greater ease than 16-18 learners. 16-18 learners have sat the exam already, if not more than once. They have seen angles in parallel lines in many forms already, they’ve learnt F and Z to help them remember but then had that crutch taken away and ‘should’ know how to calculate missing angles in parallel lines with reasons. However they haven’t achieved a grade 4 and have to sit the exam again and what if they still ‘can’t’ calculate angles in parallel lines? So I now teach it as 2 sets of angles on a straight line problem and that the angles repeat. For example:
When you look at the mark scheme, the majority of the marks are for the numerical values,
This is taken from Edexcel Foundation Paper 2 2018. ¾ marks are for numerical calculations. This example had an isosceles triangle included as well as parallel lines. I have now, almost, enjoyed teaching angles in parallel lines this way. I find that if their angle fact knowledge is secure I can introduce the labels on top for alternate and corresponding angles easier.
You may not have the difficulties I had with angles on parallel lines, you may not even teach maths! My point is had I not been challenged with “but what does that have to do with this stuff though?” I would never have looked at my sequencing on the topic. Perhaps you have a topic that often falls flat in class? It may be worth re-evaluating your sequencing up to that point, does it make sense, almost ask yourself, yeah so what? Why am I teaching it this way? I don’t need to remind you if you are in education of the need for impact impact, IMPACT! If you taught it this way what would be the intended impact and if you taught it that way what would be the intended impact? What is the actual impact? Can you trial both ways?
We must, as educators evaluate where we have been on the learning journey in order to guide our learners to their intended destination. We don’t often have the time or prioritise the time to undertake such evaluations but hopefully this post inspired you to take a moment and think?
