After concluding the final chapter of the text, there were a number of issues circling around the same idea that stood out to me as very important.
A students education is potentially centered on a number of possible methods, however it remains a constant that teachers are the nucleus of a child’s learning.
So, if students fail to produce ideal results, who is to blame? Is it the teachers? Is it the methods they are using? Is it the student at fault? It appears as though through this text, the methods used by each school were scrutinized, regardless of results. Phoenix Park not only created a successful, but open ended, interactive, learning environment for it’s students. And even though these students did better on their exams than those of Amber Hill, the method used to achieve these great results was reprimanded. The teachers of Phoenix Park also took time in collaborating with other teachers and researching interesting projects and examples for their students to complete-what else can teachers do in order to make a successful classroom method, and have it approved by boards. Are teachers today placed in a situation that they simply cannot conquer? I guess it’s an on going quest for perfection. And although yes the classroom is a place that continues to grow and expand, and yes no method is perfect and yes there is ALWAYS room for improvement-where is the recognition for teachers that have begun to expand their own practices?
This book provided me a great deal of insight in terms of the different methods of teaching mathematics, and the impact it has on students. It is truly amazing to consider the impact our way of teaching can shape a young student, not only in one subject area, but how it can shape a students perception of learning. I think this book taught me the importance of striving to keep mathematics interesting for all, and incorporating differentiation of methods so that every child can reach their full level of potential.
Thursday, December 1, 2011
Monday, November 28, 2011
ABILITY GROUPING: FRIEND OR FOE
This weeks reading from chapter 10 was really interesting for me and made me reevaluate my own thinking on the topic of ability and mixed grouping.
To think that we the teachers could create such a social barrier between students, and even initiate the social stigma of a lower class within our classroom is quite scary.
Mixed ability, although yes maybe difficult to present material for all students, and at a level all students can benefit from is not the only way students learn. By differentiating work and knowing your students well enough to know who needs more help and who can work just as well independently is part of our jobs and this is how we will succeed in a mixed ability classroom.
Schools are a much more difficult environment then they were 10 years ago, and bullying is now more than ever a huge issue within schools. I do not see any separation for any reason among students having a positive benefit. By separating students we are giving them more reason to be “against” one another, potentially creating more room for bullying to take place.
Although both methods of grouping have both positives and negatives, it is our job as teachers to determine which works best for our students and provide a positive learning experience for all.
To think that we the teachers could create such a social barrier between students, and even initiate the social stigma of a lower class within our classroom is quite scary.
Mixed ability, although yes maybe difficult to present material for all students, and at a level all students can benefit from is not the only way students learn. By differentiating work and knowing your students well enough to know who needs more help and who can work just as well independently is part of our jobs and this is how we will succeed in a mixed ability classroom.
Schools are a much more difficult environment then they were 10 years ago, and bullying is now more than ever a huge issue within schools. I do not see any separation for any reason among students having a positive benefit. By separating students we are giving them more reason to be “against” one another, potentially creating more room for bullying to take place.
Although both methods of grouping have both positives and negatives, it is our job as teachers to determine which works best for our students and provide a positive learning experience for all.
Monday, November 21, 2011
Gender and Math
As noted in my previous posting, I have a number of questions and inquires, especially when it comes to gender in mathematics.
After reading a couple of different resources it seems as though the idea of boys being superior to girls in the subject area is an outdated idea, which is coming to a halt. A mere result of “social engineering”, we have actually constructed this false concept ourselves, by giving boys the greater opportunity to succeed in math or abstracting our research under unfair circumstances.
“According to new research published in the journal Science, the "gender gap" in math’s, long perceived to exist between girls and boys, disappears in societies that treat both sexes equally” (Lipsett, 2008). The stereotype exists that males are “better” at math than females, so many do not want to “waste time” on females who are primarily over seen by their male peers. Placing both genders on an equal playing field to start gives each an equal opportunity to succeed.
Another potential cause for a wide range of test scores between males and females is female’s lack of response to competitiveness. It has been recorded that females do not perform as well as males in competitive test taking environments. It only makes sense that males would produce better results, but not from just math intelligence alone, but also being placed in a comfortable environment.
“We find that the response to competition differs for men and women, and in the examined environment, gender difference in competitive performance does not reflect the difference in non competitive performance” (Niederle &Vesterlund, 2009).
I think the most important reminder from this weeks discussion was the importance of placing all students on the same playing field. As educators, we need to ensure equal opportunities are provided to all students-regardless of their race, gender, socioeconomic status, etc. The situation we choose to place our students in always has an effect on their learning.
Lipsett, A. (2008) Boys not better than girls at maths, study finds. Education Guardian. Retrieved Nov 12, 2011 from http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2008/may/30/schools.uk1
Niederle, Muriel & Vesterlund, Lise (2009) Explaining the Gender Gap in Math Test Scores: The Role of Competition. Retrieved November 21, 2011 from http://www.stanford.edu/~niederle/NV.JEP.pdf
After reading a couple of different resources it seems as though the idea of boys being superior to girls in the subject area is an outdated idea, which is coming to a halt. A mere result of “social engineering”, we have actually constructed this false concept ourselves, by giving boys the greater opportunity to succeed in math or abstracting our research under unfair circumstances.
“According to new research published in the journal Science, the "gender gap" in math’s, long perceived to exist between girls and boys, disappears in societies that treat both sexes equally” (Lipsett, 2008). The stereotype exists that males are “better” at math than females, so many do not want to “waste time” on females who are primarily over seen by their male peers. Placing both genders on an equal playing field to start gives each an equal opportunity to succeed.
Another potential cause for a wide range of test scores between males and females is female’s lack of response to competitiveness. It has been recorded that females do not perform as well as males in competitive test taking environments. It only makes sense that males would produce better results, but not from just math intelligence alone, but also being placed in a comfortable environment.
“We find that the response to competition differs for men and women, and in the examined environment, gender difference in competitive performance does not reflect the difference in non competitive performance” (Niederle &Vesterlund, 2009).
I think the most important reminder from this weeks discussion was the importance of placing all students on the same playing field. As educators, we need to ensure equal opportunities are provided to all students-regardless of their race, gender, socioeconomic status, etc. The situation we choose to place our students in always has an effect on their learning.
Lipsett, A. (2008) Boys not better than girls at maths, study finds. Education Guardian. Retrieved Nov 12, 2011 from http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2008/may/30/schools.uk1
Niederle, Muriel & Vesterlund, Lise (2009) Explaining the Gender Gap in Math Test Scores: The Role of Competition. Retrieved November 21, 2011 from http://www.stanford.edu/~niederle/NV.JEP.pdf
Wednesday, November 16, 2011
Gender and Math... Initial thoughts
This week’s chapter 9 in the text really sparked my interest on the subject of gender differences in mathematics learning.
I can’t help but wonder, with all the circulating research on gender inequality in mathematics education- boys being the gender of dominance- is this an example where our expectations are creating a reality? Are the affects of society determining our students’ performance in the class? Are we creating the pressures students are feeling to succeed on a level according to their gender and the expectations society is placing on them? Do students feel the pressure to conform to a certain identity that compromise their ability and willingness to learn math?
These are just a few initial questions and thoughts I have on the subject. I will follow up with a post on an article on the subject.
I can’t help but wonder, with all the circulating research on gender inequality in mathematics education- boys being the gender of dominance- is this an example where our expectations are creating a reality? Are the affects of society determining our students’ performance in the class? Are we creating the pressures students are feeling to succeed on a level according to their gender and the expectations society is placing on them? Do students feel the pressure to conform to a certain identity that compromise their ability and willingness to learn math?
These are just a few initial questions and thoughts I have on the subject. I will follow up with a post on an article on the subject.
Tuesday, November 15, 2011
Jack of All Trades, Master of None?
I found the article posted by my classmate Too Many Teachers Can't Do Math, Let Alone Teach It to be very interesting and so I decided to express my concerns and opinions on the subject here. In brief, the article expresses growing concerns with the lack of educating educators in math and how unprepared teachers are in the classroom to teach young students the subject.
I think this article pertains a great deal to the idea of teachers being “jack of all trades, master of none”. And although I did enjoy my undergrad program, I do not feel it fully prepared me for a number of different aspects of the teaching profession. There are such a number of subjects, and a specific number of outcomes per grade per subject. Besides the facts/information presented in each subject, teachers also must juggle many day to day routines- organization, preparation for lessons, along with maintaining an environment which promotes fair and equal opportunities for all, social justice and much more. I am just wondering how and where teachers are expected to get the detailed training for all aspects of this career within their university education?
This being said, one of the biggest points we are taught in our teaching education is to “be prepared for the unexpected”. How can one prepare for the unknown?
Also, quite often, teachers are offered positions in an unfamiliar territory- weather it be in an unexpected grade level, a specialized subject area, or in a multigrade/age classroom. Teachers are expected to adapt to their environment and prevail while
Yes I do agree that in order for teachers to successfully teach students, an established level of familiarization with the information at hand must be established. But are teachers expected to know everything about everything at all times? I think the most we can do is prepare for the unexpected and really make the extra effort in learning it ourselves before we teach.
I think this article pertains a great deal to the idea of teachers being “jack of all trades, master of none”. And although I did enjoy my undergrad program, I do not feel it fully prepared me for a number of different aspects of the teaching profession. There are such a number of subjects, and a specific number of outcomes per grade per subject. Besides the facts/information presented in each subject, teachers also must juggle many day to day routines- organization, preparation for lessons, along with maintaining an environment which promotes fair and equal opportunities for all, social justice and much more. I am just wondering how and where teachers are expected to get the detailed training for all aspects of this career within their university education?
This being said, one of the biggest points we are taught in our teaching education is to “be prepared for the unexpected”. How can one prepare for the unknown?
Also, quite often, teachers are offered positions in an unfamiliar territory- weather it be in an unexpected grade level, a specialized subject area, or in a multigrade/age classroom. Teachers are expected to adapt to their environment and prevail while
Yes I do agree that in order for teachers to successfully teach students, an established level of familiarization with the information at hand must be established. But are teachers expected to know everything about everything at all times? I think the most we can do is prepare for the unexpected and really make the extra effort in learning it ourselves before we teach.
Saturday, November 5, 2011
Math from the Past
When asked to describe a memorable math experience from my grade school past, I was unable to recall just one that stood out to me. I can say that I do remember activities where we used manipulatives such as those wooden pattern blocks, connecting blocks, place value charts, fake money, etc. For me, like many others, it was using these types of resources that would make math concepts much more tangible.
One thing I do not recall ever having to do much of, especially compared to know, is explaining and giving reasons to support your answers. I was teaching in a class last week where one of the questions was ended with “explain how you know”. Almost every student in the class had to correct answer, knew how they did (in terms of correctly carrying out the right formula) but they could not put into words how they did it. I think this is a great addition to the curriculum, as students will not just have to plug in formulas and move on. Instead, students will be forced to think about and reason why they did what they did, making more sense out of the problem. I think this is something students at Amber Hill did not have to do much of. If they did maybe they would have been able to understand what they were doing, and would not have developed such a resentment towards math. Just a thought ☺
One thing I do not recall ever having to do much of, especially compared to know, is explaining and giving reasons to support your answers. I was teaching in a class last week where one of the questions was ended with “explain how you know”. Almost every student in the class had to correct answer, knew how they did (in terms of correctly carrying out the right formula) but they could not put into words how they did it. I think this is a great addition to the curriculum, as students will not just have to plug in formulas and move on. Instead, students will be forced to think about and reason why they did what they did, making more sense out of the problem. I think this is something students at Amber Hill did not have to do much of. If they did maybe they would have been able to understand what they were doing, and would not have developed such a resentment towards math. Just a thought ☺
Thursday, November 3, 2011
The Contents of Today's Curriculum
While trying to research articles to correspond with the text, “teach for the test” is one common phrase that continues to make an appearance. It appears as though it is a vicious cycle- teachers strive for their students to be the best (or have the top grades), but being the best is only recognized if certain material is taught and not necessarily easily transfered education into real life for students, but aren’t we supposed to have our students best interest at heart, etc etc.
So where does this problem stem from? Do school boards understand the pressure teachers and students are faced with when it comes to testing and curriculum contents in education today? Do they realize the difficulties students are having in translating this information into the real world? Do we need to revise our curriculum into one which could be more useful for students? What is the purpose of an "education" if it cannot be used in the outside world? To me, this seems like an issue of what is the educational value of material being taught? And what is more important, the quantity of material vs the quality. Students are beginning to recognize the lack of relevance information, they are learning, has in their everyday lives, soon they will probably loose interest altogether, forcing even more lack of interest in the classrooms. I think we need to reevaluate what and why we are teaching and keep students our top priority, and not the test.
So where does this problem stem from? Do school boards understand the pressure teachers and students are faced with when it comes to testing and curriculum contents in education today? Do they realize the difficulties students are having in translating this information into the real world? Do we need to revise our curriculum into one which could be more useful for students? What is the purpose of an "education" if it cannot be used in the outside world? To me, this seems like an issue of what is the educational value of material being taught? And what is more important, the quantity of material vs the quality. Students are beginning to recognize the lack of relevance information, they are learning, has in their everyday lives, soon they will probably loose interest altogether, forcing even more lack of interest in the classrooms. I think we need to reevaluate what and why we are teaching and keep students our top priority, and not the test.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)