Today our math coach has set up an exchange between sixth grade teachers at the Middle School and fifth grade teachers from the three elementary schools. During the day we'll visit the current three different leveled math classes and then we'll have a chance to meet at the end to ask questions and exchange information and ideas.
At first, I wasn't going to attend this day because my sons have previously attended the Middle School so I have a parent perspective of the math program. Also the Middle School sends fifth grade teachers an update every year to let us know how our former students are doing. This information helps me to gauge the program I teach as well as how I coach individual students. Generally students have made a positive transition from the fifth grade program to the sixth grade math program.
Once the coach relayed the schedule, however, I asked to sign up because the schedule is not a visit alone, but instead an exchange which is an opportunity for all of us to talk deeply about the ways we teach students math. I know that the Middle School team is devoted to teaching mostly math all day and that they began a standards-based approach last year. I know that they are continually updating their program so I'm interested in the ways that they are employing current research to lift their program. I'll also look forward to seeing last year's students, and observing the many ways that the sixth grade teachers run their classrooms.
I really enjoy the ability to teach a subject with greater depth which is what the shared teaching model affords. It will be a profitable day.
Showing posts with label Math Coach. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Math Coach. Show all posts
Thursday, October 20, 2016
Wednesday, October 19, 2016
Teach Math Well: Are We Asking the Right Questions?
Emails circulated about the value of using an online unit assessment versus the paper/pencil unit assessments of the past. It's a good question, and one that should be posed and discussed. Personally, I'm a fan of using multiple formal and informal formative and summative assessments, and I support the use of online assessments as part of that overall assessment approach.
I also believe that we have to be mindful to have a good assessment balance and not make teaching and learning all about the test--we have to make space for children to enjoy their learning. While it's important to discuss assessment types and the role of assessment when teaching math, there are also many more questions that beg our attention and discussion.
For example, one of the greatest math question that we face in our standards-based school communities, and how do we continually uplift and teach the students who are one or more years behind the expectations. Of course, I believe that math education should be progressive where every child is moving ahead from where he/she is and that the focus should be on that movement rather than if everyone is at the same level. For example if I have students at fifth grade who are testing at a second grade level and others who are testing at a seventh grade level, they all should be working to move up. I don't want those "seventh grade level" fifth graders to think they've achieved all there is to know in math and sail along without a good challenge, and I also don't want those "second grade level" fifth graders to get discouraged and always feel behind. So the question, How do we challenge all in positive, proactive ways resulting in good math growth, engagement, and knowledge?, is a great question to ask and discuss amongst peers.
Another good question to discuss in math is what are the best ways for specialists, assistants, coaches, and classroom educators to work together to maximize math teaching and learning for all. We have instituted Responsive to Intervention in creative ways that help in this regard. We also differentiate during core instructional times. The way we collaborate matters when it comes to uplifting children's skills, knowledge, and concept.
Further we can ask questions about content specific teaching and learning. For example, at a recent meeting, it was acknowledged that teaching the "behavior" of the base ten place value system is challenging. Students at fifth grade find it difficult to grasp that numbers increase by X10 as they move up each place in the place value system and decrease by 1/10 as they move down in value place by place. Fluency with that concept takes time.
Time is an important consideration. Many on the outside would like teachers to work like soldiers and be at the same place in teaching at the same time. This, in many ways, negates the where students are at and what they need. It also disregards the need for educators to make the curriculum their own and teach it with the artistry, experience, and analysis needed. Good teaching is not a robotic function, and good teaching makes good use of time. Unlike a robotic response, good teaching analyzes deeply and maximizes the use of time to teach all well.
Too often we spend time talking about questions that don't matter that much in education. Instead we should dig a little deeper and spend time discussing what matters--the big, deep questions that truly impact what we can do to better teach all children.
I also believe that we have to be mindful to have a good assessment balance and not make teaching and learning all about the test--we have to make space for children to enjoy their learning. While it's important to discuss assessment types and the role of assessment when teaching math, there are also many more questions that beg our attention and discussion.
For example, one of the greatest math question that we face in our standards-based school communities, and how do we continually uplift and teach the students who are one or more years behind the expectations. Of course, I believe that math education should be progressive where every child is moving ahead from where he/she is and that the focus should be on that movement rather than if everyone is at the same level. For example if I have students at fifth grade who are testing at a second grade level and others who are testing at a seventh grade level, they all should be working to move up. I don't want those "seventh grade level" fifth graders to think they've achieved all there is to know in math and sail along without a good challenge, and I also don't want those "second grade level" fifth graders to get discouraged and always feel behind. So the question, How do we challenge all in positive, proactive ways resulting in good math growth, engagement, and knowledge?, is a great question to ask and discuss amongst peers.
Another good question to discuss in math is what are the best ways for specialists, assistants, coaches, and classroom educators to work together to maximize math teaching and learning for all. We have instituted Responsive to Intervention in creative ways that help in this regard. We also differentiate during core instructional times. The way we collaborate matters when it comes to uplifting children's skills, knowledge, and concept.
Further we can ask questions about content specific teaching and learning. For example, at a recent meeting, it was acknowledged that teaching the "behavior" of the base ten place value system is challenging. Students at fifth grade find it difficult to grasp that numbers increase by X10 as they move up each place in the place value system and decrease by 1/10 as they move down in value place by place. Fluency with that concept takes time.
Time is an important consideration. Many on the outside would like teachers to work like soldiers and be at the same place in teaching at the same time. This, in many ways, negates the where students are at and what they need. It also disregards the need for educators to make the curriculum their own and teach it with the artistry, experience, and analysis needed. Good teaching is not a robotic function, and good teaching makes good use of time. Unlike a robotic response, good teaching analyzes deeply and maximizes the use of time to teach all well.
Too often we spend time talking about questions that don't matter that much in education. Instead we should dig a little deeper and spend time discussing what matters--the big, deep questions that truly impact what we can do to better teach all children.
Tuesday, September 13, 2016
The Math Year: September Thoughts
Yesterday when I met with our new math coach, we talked about the math year, priorities, and programs. I found it difficult to put into words how I teach math and why I teach math in the many ways I employ throughout the year. I read, research, and write a lot about math, but when faced with explaining who I am as a math teacher and what I do to someone who doesn't know me well as a teacher, it was tough.
Another factor that made it difficult to explain the decisions I make about math teaching and learning is that many of my decisions reflect new research and practice rather than practice of the past. For example, I'm beginning the year with a big focus on teamwork, a start well supported by Boaler's research as well as a lot of reading I've done about teamwork and collaboration. I know this kind of start will create a strong learning community. Further, we'll spend several weeks learning the essential tools, language, and basic elements of the fifth grade curriculum in ways that welcome all learners. This too is integral since it gives the whole community a common ground with which to learn and work together.
Once this team and their knowledge foundation is set we'll move into the curriculum program with strength. Last year I used a similar approach and all in all students did very well.
As the coach and I spoke, however, I did find one area that I felt would be a good target area and that was the area of the struggling learner--the children who come to math class one or more years "behind" the grade-level standards expectations. Often students who fall into this category have a lot of complexity when it comes to learning. The complexity can include any or all of the following factors: less facility with the English language, less academic support at home, health concerns, less experience with math learning, or untraditional/atypical learning strengths and preferences.
I think it will be great for the team to look closely at these students and discuss how we might teach these students better. As we speak, I think we can focus on the following attributes of teaching and learning well:
Another factor that made it difficult to explain the decisions I make about math teaching and learning is that many of my decisions reflect new research and practice rather than practice of the past. For example, I'm beginning the year with a big focus on teamwork, a start well supported by Boaler's research as well as a lot of reading I've done about teamwork and collaboration. I know this kind of start will create a strong learning community. Further, we'll spend several weeks learning the essential tools, language, and basic elements of the fifth grade curriculum in ways that welcome all learners. This too is integral since it gives the whole community a common ground with which to learn and work together.
Once this team and their knowledge foundation is set we'll move into the curriculum program with strength. Last year I used a similar approach and all in all students did very well.
As the coach and I spoke, however, I did find one area that I felt would be a good target area and that was the area of the struggling learner--the children who come to math class one or more years "behind" the grade-level standards expectations. Often students who fall into this category have a lot of complexity when it comes to learning. The complexity can include any or all of the following factors: less facility with the English language, less academic support at home, health concerns, less experience with math learning, or untraditional/atypical learning strengths and preferences.
I think it will be great for the team to look closely at these students and discuss how we might teach these students better. As we speak, I think we can focus on the following attributes of teaching and learning well:
- Adequate support
- Opportunity for practice
- Consistency of instructor, program
- IEP service delivery if that matches the child.
- ELL service delivery
- Culturally proficient teaching
- Meaningful and engaging content
- Scaffolded, differentiated learning approaches
- "Floor-to-Ceiling" project based learning
- Coordination of the many educators involved and service delivery patterns
Boaler's research in her book, Mathematical Mindsets, sheds a lot of light on how to teach all students math well. Also the fact that our broad teaching team which includes special educators, a coach, ESL educators, classroom teachers, and paraeducators have substantial experience which gives us a good starting point when it comes to teaching these students well.
Last year our team made good progress with students who struggle with math, and with a focused start in this area, I'm sure we'll make good progress again and maybe even better progress this year.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)