Mathematics Investigation and Problem Solving Inquiry Project

Factoring the quadratic trick

Imagine a scene in an algebra classroom. Students are being taught a strategy to

factor a quadratic where a≠1. The teacher presents the following strategy on the
board using the example 10x2+x-21. He writes the following set of steps on the
board.

10x2+x-21

x2+x-21*10

x2+x-210

x+15x-14

x+1510x-1410

x+32x-75

2x+35x-7

At the second line, I was thinking, “Wait! What is going on? These re not equivalent!
What is he doing?” By the fifth line I was floored, thinking “Whoa! How can you only
divide one part by 10? Is this the same 10 from before? What is he doing?” By the
final expression, my thoughts had little evolved, but I was thinking “How can this
be? Does this always work? Why? How can kids possibly understand this?”

I was both blown away and furious. Why would the teacher teach something like
this that violates rules of equality? If I cannot follow this strategy and I am unsure if
it is true, how can students make sense of this strategy? Is factoring supposed to be
just tricks, or have underlying meaning and relate to the properties of real
numbers? What is the underlying mathematics going on here?

Thus, my inquiry project was to both prove that this strategy is always going to
work, that it is a valid algorithm. So, I first had to specify what the general algorithm
is. It is described below in general terms.

ax2+bx+c

x2+bx+ac

x-px-q where pq=ac and p+q=-b

x-pa(x-qa)
 rx-rpa(sx-sqa) where rs=a

So, my first step was to prove this strategy produces a valid algorithm. Let
ax2+bx+c be any quadratic where a≠1 and a, b, c ∈Z. Let y=ax.

aax2+bx+c=(ax)2+bax+ac=y2+by+ac

I now have a quadratic expression in the same form as the first step in the
algorithm. Given the Fundamental Theorem of Algebra, we know that if b2-4ac≥0,
then there are primitive factors y-t(y-u) with t, u∈R. The quadratics formula gives t,
u as -b±b2-4ac2. Thus,

y2+by+ac=y--b+b2-4ac2y--b-b2-4ac2

=ax--b+b2-4ac2ax--b-b2-4ac2

Since ax2+bx+c=1a(y2+by+ac),

1aax--b+b2-4ac2ax--b-b2-4ac2

=x--b+b2-4ac2aax--b-b2-4ac2

=ax--b+b2-4ac2ax--b-b2-4ac2a

=rsx--b+b2-4ac2ax--b-b2-4ac2a

=rx-r-b+b2-4ac2asx-s-b-b2-4ac2a

Based on the quadratic formula, we know that this last statement is true. Thus to
connect to the general strategy, let p, q=-b±b2-4ac2.

pq=-b+b2-4ac2-b-b2-4ac2=b2-b2-4ac4=ac

p+q=-b+b2-4ac2+-b-b2-4ac2=-b.

So, to review the general strategy,

ax2+bx+c

x2+bx+ac

x-px-q=x--b+b2-4ac2x--b-b2-4ac2

x-pax-qa=x--b+b2-4ac2ax--b-b2-4ac2a

rx-rpasx-sqa=rx-r-b+b2-4ac2asx-s-b-b2-4ac2a
 where rs=a

So, now I am convinced the method is valid and have proven the equivalence of the
ends of the process. However, I am still concerned that the method is “magical” for
students and not based in meaning-making. The algebraically intense proof needed
to understand the validity of the steps is beyond the student who needs such a trick
in order to factor this problem. The justification for this algorithm is to reduce the
cognitive load by removing the leading coefficient. However, the process as written
violates the general mathematical convention that subsequent steps are equal to
the previous step. However, the initial expression and the re-written expression in
the second line are not equal to one another. Also, the step where one divides the
constant by a is not a valid mathematical move.

Using a version that hews more closely to the actual proof, however, could
introduce students to notions of substitution, similar to those used in calculus. Thus,
substituting y for ax and re-writing the expression as y2+by+ac and showing the
actual steps with valid mathematical moves. However, as previously noted, any
student who could follow the logic and make meaning of this notationally dense
expression could have factored the expression without this “trick” in the first place.