Saturday, March 21, 2015
Meaning to Mathematics
I think this article is a fitting way to close our class and our program for that matter. One of the guiding principles of our entire program has been the integration of engineering practices into all curricular areas. We have discussed and put into practice a variety of ways to do this in our own classrooms, and have all experienced positive results. While my school is just beginning to introduce the design process (solely in 3rd grade as of now), I have hope of my school integrating design challenges into all grade levels, so that by the time they get to third grade they will be well familiar with the process. It seems that Jamerson, has already seen the benefit of such integration. They speak of higher test scores after integrating this curriculum. Unfortunately I don't think that test scores can simply be improved by this type of curriculum. I do agree that it is meaningful for students to make real life connections to mathematics, but hands on types of activities do not guarantee test score hikes. I am dealing with this within my own classroom. While my students engaged in hands on mathematics lessons involving conceptual thinking, real life integration, cross curricular connections and problem solving, in our last unit on fractions, their summative test scores were terrible across the grade level. It has been really frustrating to teach what I believe is best practice and then watch my students fail on the assessments. Thoughts?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
As we sat through class last week, I was thinking about how math instruction has changed in past couple years. I was reflecting on our zeal for showing kids to multiple ways of solving problems. You spoke of best practices and how students are still failing. I feel to a large extent that there a few kids who come up with out of the box methods for problem solving. The vast majority struggle with just one method or one method suits their purposes just fine. We are forcing multiple methods of problems solving for kiddos who struggle with one algorithm or methodology let alone multiple processes. I agree the hands on process is useful for remediation and building conceptual development. I am very concerned this multiple methods approach is symptomatic of what we doing in teaching. Many things mediocre instead of a few things well
ReplyDeleteIn my opinion, it may not be necessarily your instructional approach but the way we assess student learning. I say that if you were to give student in your grade level, including the ones That haven't had hands-on experience, a performance-based task in which they had to use her hands and/or explained their solution, the hands on approach students would perform better. Not only that, but they will remember that experience so much more then let me out of a textbook.
ReplyDeleteErica,
ReplyDeleteI agree that this article was a fitting way to close our program and course. If there has been one take away idea from our time in this master's program it has been that of engaging students in hands-on, cross-curricular STEM projects.
I agree with Jorge that as our teaching practices change we also need to change our manner of assessment. Until then, maybe there is a way to find a happy medium between teaching for deep understanding and in a manner that produces great standardized test results.
Erica,
ReplyDeleteI agree that this article was a fitting way to close our program and course. If there has been one take away idea from our time in this master's program it has been that of engaging students in hands-on, cross-curricular STEM projects.
I agree with Jorge that as our teaching practices change we also need to change our manner of assessment. Until then, maybe there is a way to find a happy medium between teaching for deep understanding and in a manner that produces great standardized test results.