You are on page 1of 10

Real-World Applications
Michelle-Anne Spring
Walden University

Dr. Mary Robinson

Geometric Thinking & Measure, MATH 6552
September 9, 2014

REAL-WORLD APPLICATIONS

2
Real-World Applications

In this weeks video webcast (Laureate Education, 2013), Mr. Kelley discusses how
students are readily able to understand the impact of learning geometry in the everyday lives. To
solve this problem, I employed the use of two Standards for Mathematical Practice Specifically, I
used Standard one, make sense of problems and persevere in solving them (Van de Walle, Karp
& Bay-Williams, 2013, p. 491) by working to understand the task and creatively attempting to
solve the problem through self-monitoring and self-regulation. In addition, even though I
experienced many challenges in solving this task, I persisted until I had accomplished my goal.
Additionally, I incorporated standard four, model with mathematics (Van de Walle, Karp &
Bay-Williams, 2013, p. 492) by using a geometric formula to calculate the area of the parking
lot, converting to a single measurement, creating a diagram and using estimation strategies to
assist in solving this parking lot problem. Thus, allowing me to be able to accurately articulate
and describe mathematics comprehensively (Noyce Foundation, 2014).
From the original diagram, I observed that there were three rows of 12 parking spaces
each in the Community Research Centers (CRC) parking lot totaling of 36 parking spaces.
Since CRC desired to increase its number of parking spaces by 15, equaling 51, I decided to first
increase each existing row by adding one parking space and then add one additional row of 13
spaces (see pictorial representation of Community Recreation Center parking lot, Appendix A, p.
6). This increased the total number of parking spaces to 52.
At the outset of solving the mathematical task, I understood that since the parking lot was
50 yards long and 40 yards wide, I would need to ascertain whether the dimensions of the
individual parking spaces would fit within the parking structure. To make the problem easier to
solve, I converted all customary measurements from yards and inches into feet. Using the

REAL-WORLD APPLICATIONS
following common units of measurement in the U.S. customary system, specifically, 1 yard = 3
feet (Beckmann, 2014), I was able to calculate that the length would now be 150 feet (50 x 3)
and the width would be 120 feet (40 x 3) and since 12 inches = 1 foot or 1 inch = 1/12 foot, then
4 inches would now be 4/12 or 1/3 foot.
To ensure that the new parking lot design would fit within the existing dimensions of the
parking structure, I allotted 12 feet of space for one-way driving around the two lower aisle of
the parking lot, for a total of 24 feet (12 x 2). Additionally, the problem states that each parking
space has a width of 9 feet and since there are 13 parking spaces in each row, that gives me a
total of 117 feet (13 x 9) in parking spots. The problem also states that the painted lines
separating each parking space must be 4 inches or 1/3 foot wide. Therefore, since there are 14
vertical lines per row (taking into consideration that there are two rows on the lower end of the
parking lot), then I would estimate the product of 28 and 1/3 to equal approximately 9 feet.
Altogether, the total length of the planned parking lot is 24 + 117 + 9 = 150 feet (see pictorial
representation of Community Recreation Center parking lot, Appendix A, p. 6), which still
correlates with the dimensional length of the existing parking lot (150 feet).
Thereafter, I designated the same 12 feet of space for one-way driving around the two
right edges of the parking lot, for a total of 24 feet (12 x 2). Furthermore, I allocated another 24
feet of space for two-way driving down the middle aisle. The problem states that each parking
space has a length of 18 feet and since there are four rows of parking spaces, yielding a total of
72 feet (18 x 4) to cover the number of parking spots. Altogether, the total width of the planned
parking lot is 24 + 24 + 72 = 120 feet (see pictorial representation of Community Recreation
Center parking lot, Appendix A, p. 6). This measurement also fits the dimensional width of the
existing parking lot (120 feet).

REAL-WORLD APPLICATIONS

Therefore, my report to the CRC manager would include the detailed sketch (see pictorial
representation of Community Recreation Center parking lot, Appendix A, p. 6) along with an
explanation that it would be possible to increase the number of parking spaces at the CRC to
include 16 additional space\$, for a total of 52 parking spaces. He got one more space than he
Furthermore, to challenge my students and to assist them in learning how to estimate and
convert measurements from one unit to another, I propose that students solve the following
Claudia bought a 5-pound bag of mixed nuts. She gave 12 ounces of the mixed
nuts to Shane. Then, she put the rest of the nuts into small bags to use for snacks.
If each small bag contained 3 ounces of mixed nuts, about how many small bags
of mixed nuts did Claudia make?

REAL-WORLD APPLICATIONS

5
References

Beckmann, S. (2014). Mathematics for elementary teachers with activities (4th ed.). Boston,
Laureate Education (Producer). (2013). Measurement and geometric thinking: Real-world
Noyce Foundation. (2014). Common core state standards for mathematical practice. Retrieved
from http://www.insidemathematics.org/index.php/standard-1
Van de Walle, J. A., Karp, K. S., & Bay-Williams, J. M. (2013). Elementary and middle school
mathematics: Teaching developmentally (8th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.

9 ft.

REAL-WORLD APPLICATIONS

6
Appendix A

Pictorial representation of Community Recreation Center (CRC) parking lot.

(Not drawn to scale)

9 ft.

9 ft.

Walden University M.S. in Education Program

Formative Evaluative Criteria for Applications and Reflective Essays
Quality of Work
Submitted
Work reflects
critical, analytical
thinking.

Assignment
Expectations
The extent to
which work meets
the assigned
criteria.

Assimilation and
Synthesis of Ideas
The extent to
which the work
reflects the
students ability to1. Understand
the
assignment
s purpose;
2. Understand
and

A:
Exemplar
y Work
A = 4.00;
A- = 3.75
All of the
previous,
to the
following:

B:
Level Work
B+ = 3.50;
B = 3.00;
B- = 2.75
All of the
previous, in
the
following:
Assignmen All parts of
t exceeds
the
expectation assignment
s,
are
integrating completed,
with fully
material
developed
and/or
topics.
informatio
n.
The work is
presented in
Assignmen a thorough
t
and detailed
demonstrat manner.
es
exceptional Assignment
demonstrate
and depth. s appropriate
depth.
Demonstra Demonstrate
tes the
s a clear
ability
understandin
intellectual g of the
ly to
assignments
explore
purpose.
and/or
implement
key
Includes
instruction specific
al
information
concepts.
from course

C: Minimal
Work
C+ = 2.50;
C = 2.00;
C- = 1.75

Most parts of
assignment
are
completed.
Topics are
not fully
developed.
Assignment
demonstrates
minimal
depth and

F: Work
Submitted
but
Unacceptabl
e
F = 1.00

Does not
fulfill the
expectations
of the
assignment.
Key
components
are not
included
Assignment
and depth.

Shows some
degree of
understandin
g of the
assignments
purpose.

Shows a lack
of
understandin
g of the
assignments
purpose.

Generally
applies
theories,
concepts,

Does not
apply
theories,
concepts,

9 ft.

analyze
material in
videos,
and
discussions
;
3. Apply
presented
strategies
**May include,
but are not limited
to, scholarly
articles, collegial
discussions;
information from
conferences, in
service, faculty
development,
and/or meetings.
Outside sources
also may include
materials from
previous Walden
MSED courses,
videos, and
arent currently
being used in this
course) In
may refer to the
course
Webliography,
course reference
list (Bibliography),
and the theoretical
foundations, all of
which are located
on Course
Home in
BlackBoard..
Written
Expression and
Formatting

videos or
Demonstra required
tes
exceptional support
inclusion
major
of major
points.
points,
using
creditable
sources**, Provides
to course
consideratio
videos or
n of key
required
instructional
concepts.
Demonstra
tes
insightful
reflection
and/or
critical
thinking.

Represents
scholarly
writing in a
correct

Work is well
organized
with correct
APA

and/or
strategies
correctly,
with ideas
unclear
and/or
underdevelo
ped
Minimally
includes
specific
information
from course
videos or
required

Somewhat
represents
mature,
scholarly,

and/or
strategies

Does not
include
specific
information
from course
videos or
required

The quality
of writing
and/or APA
formatting

The extent to
which scholarly,
critical, analytical
writing is
presented in APA
format;
Standard Edited
English ( i.e.
correct grammar,
mechanics).

APA
format.

formatting
throughout.

Work is
unified
around a
central
purpose
with welldeveloped
ideas,
logically
organized
in
paragraph
structure
with clear
transitions.

Ideas are
clearly and
concisely
expressed.

Effective
sentence
variety;
clear,
concise,
and
powerful
expression
are
evident.
Work is
written in
Standard
Edited
English.
No
prominent
errors
interfere
with
A:
Exemplar
y Work
A = 4.00;
A- = 3.75

Elements of
effective
communicati
on such as
an
introduction
and
conclusion
are included.
Work is
written in
Standard
Edited
English with
few, if any,
grammatical
or
mechanical
errors

B:
Level Work
B+ = 3.50;
B = 3.00;

with APA
generally
followed.
Ideas are not
clearly and
concisely
expressed.
Elements of
effective
communicati
on such as an
introduction
and
conclusion
are not
included.
Work
contains
more than a
few
grammatical,
or
mechanical
errors.

C: Minimal
Work
C+ = 2.50;
C = 2.00;
C- = 1.75

are not
acceptable
level work.
Major points
do not reflect
appropriate
elements of
communicati
on.
No effort to
express ideas
clearly and
concisely.
Work is not
written in
Standard
Edited
English.
Contains
many
grammatical
or
mechanical
errors

F: Work
Submitted
but
Unacceptabl
e

All of the
previous,
to the
following:

B- = 2.75
F = 1.00
All of the
previous, in