It worked!
Not perfectly. I learned things along the way.
I had 12 (of 17 students) attending class today. Of those 12, only 9 participated in the voting. Not everyone got the prompt to join the voting. I don’t know if this was because they joined the board after the voting started or if it was a setting on their browser. Since this was our first experience with Miro voting, they did not know what to look for or what to ask about. I had not experienced this issue during my testing session, so I struggled to know how to help them.
First I asked them to unroll the ribbon at the bottom right and look for the square with two dots (seen in blue above). They did not have the option. Then, one of my students figured out that if they refreshed the screen, the prompt appeared (at least on their computer.) It happened too late to help others. But this leads to perhaps the foundational axiom when using a new technology: If it doesn’t work, refresh.
(This was equally true at the virtual 2021 JMM using Confex, the virtual 2021 NCMT using showcare, virtual 2021 MAA MathFest using HopIn, and the virtual 2021 NAM MATHFest using Gather (plus virtual MAA Social Hours using Glimpse and Gather). The mantra was refresh, refresh, refresh. )
Looking at the results from today’s activity, you see 100% correct for homogeneous. A majority correct for under– and over- determined systems. Then we had interesting conversations about row echelon form (REF) and reduced row echelon form (RREF).
What I liked best was students putting together different combinations of vocabulary words and asking if they could find examples to fit all the words simultaneously. Next time, I might even throw in consistent and inconsistent systems make make things really interesting. But then, they will definitely need more than 15 minutes for the activity.
Math in the Time of Corona 