Jessica Till asks a good question on Twitter:

If math is supposed to be discovery-based, what do my fellow math minds think about posted objectives? Do they take away from the opportunity for students to figure things out? @ddmeyer @gfletchy @robertkaplinsky @joboaler #mathchat #math

— Tilli (@JessicaTilli1) September 25, 2018

and Graham's response stood out to me:

Telling students we're going to work on addition and then giving them a problem that requires addition is a license to not think.

— Graham Fletcher (@gfletchy) September 25, 2018

Just because we do it in other subjects doesn't mean it must be done in math. If we effectively close a lesson we can talk about what we learned.

Turning this around (also mentioned by Will Dunn later in the thread), what would happen if we taught a lesson or went through an activity *without* positing the objective and then have students state the learning as an exit ticket or closing discussion. What insight could we glean?

Intentions are important, but implementation is harder.

H/T to Darren Burris and Dan Meyer for showing up in my timeline.