I was scrolling through Facebook this morning when I came across the following post: The PC government's new math curriculum is failing Alberta students. Alberta's performance in international testing is plummeting and it's because the PCs have foisted so-called "discovery math" on our students. Instead of learning the fundamentals of mathematics – like memorizing the multiplication tables – students are encouraged to invent their own strategies and techniques to solve math problems. Here is an example of what the “new math” looks like, compared to what used to be taught. Visit http://wildro.se/1vq to sign a petition to oppose the new math and ‘LIKE’ and ‘SHARE’ if you think kids should learn the basics first. I find this post and posts like them problematic for many reasons…
First of all, all of this is really not a question of “old math” vs. “new math” as much as it is a question of teaching how to successfully perform a mathematical procedure compared to teaching towards an in depth understanding of mathematical concepts. In a nutshell, “…many of the older methods do not teach math, they teach procedures.” (A quote from Brett Seatter’s previous blog “New Math, or Real Math?”) Knowing that I need to line numbers up in a certain way, start adding on the right, carry the one, add the next column, etc. does not necessarily equate to having an understanding of what is happening when that procedure is performed. What the “new math” encourages is the development of higher order mathematical thinking skills and a thorough understanding of the concepts being taught. The benefit is that when a true and in depth understanding is developed, those concepts can be transferred and applied to novel situations in the future. This particular Facebook post implies that the “new math” doesn’t teach the “fundamentals of mathematics” and that couldn’t be further from the truth. The “new math” continues to expect that elementary students will learn their “basic facts” (multiplication tables, etc.). education.alberta.ca/media/8394320/q-a_teach_eng.pdf The one thing that the post does get right is that students are encouraged to be creative problem solvers and to use strategies and techniques that work for them. Our classrooms are filled with unique and diverse students. The “new math” provides flexibility for students who learn and understand concepts in a variety of ways. Rather than saying to students “You must do it this way, this is the only way”, we are offering them a variety of strategies, encouraging them to try them all (including the “old way”), and then allowing them to choose the strategies that make the most mathematical sense to them. As a parent, and as a teacher, it thrills me to know that my children and students are in an environment where innovative and creative thinking are being fostered and not stifled. “Old math” vs. “new math” has recently become a political speaking point that isn’t based on mathematical pedagogy or a sound understanding of it. Instead, certain political parties are using this particular issue to attack their rivals in a time of political unrest. Obviously, political parties are trying to attract potential voters based on this issue. The unfortunate thing is that there are massive misconceptions among the public about what the “new math” really is, and oversimplifications, such as the image in the above post, only compound the problem more. Imagine what would happen if political parties got involved when a new medical procedure is being implemented… At first glance, it wouldn’t make any sense at all to suggest that entering the body via the groin could repair a heart valve, or that it would be the most effective and efficient way. It would be easy to suggest that this is a ridiculous and convoluted solution to the problem. Common sense would say that repairing the heart should be done by accessing it directly through the chest… after all, the heart is right there in the chest. However, the truth is that doctors are generally in a much better position to determine the most effective methods and procedures for repairing the body than either the public or the politicians are, as they are the professionals who have given their life to the study of medicine. Of course there needs to be checks and balances in the system, but a certain level of respect can and should be afforded to the professionals in the field. In the world of education, the relationships between parents and teachers, as well as the public and the teaching profession, needs to be one of mutual respect. Both parents and teachers (and the public and the profession) have vested interests in the students that are involved and in the long-term outcomes of their education. Most members of the public, including parents, were educated under the “old math”. Because of that, and through no fault of their own, that is what their experience is limited to. Admittedly, if your background is in the “old math”, the new math can seem convoluted and confusing and appear to require a lot of unnecessary extraneous steps to solve what appears to be a straightforward problem. Herein lies the responsibility of teachers and the educational system; we need to clearly explain what it is that is being done and what is achieved by doing this. We need to show understanding and be willing to offer explanations when there are questions. We need to remember that at some point the “new math” was new to us too and that we had questions of our own. The reality is that the “old math” vs. “new math” issue is not unique to Alberta; mathematical education is shifting elsewhere as well, and along with the change comes questions. The questions should be welcomed! The questions cause us all to pause and think and make sure that we are headed in the right direction. Ultimately we likely all want the same thing; students who are learning what they need to learn in order to be successful and contribute to society in a positive way. Kendra Seatter
1 Comment
- Excerpts from the ADLC AISI Cycle 5 Project When teachers traditionally think about supporting our most at risk learners, those with various learning needs such as learning disabilities (LD), English language learners (ELL) and First Nation, Metis and Inuit (FNMI) students, it is unlikely that we think about teaching them at a distance. It is true that some of the best interventions and supports that schools have for students with special learning needs involve proximity to a caring adult. Schools often focus on providing specific, one-to-one interventions designed to close the achievement gap and promote academic growth. The traditional correspondence method of distance education may have lacked support for some of our most at risk students. Fortunately, times have changed for the better in distance delivery and in the best interests of all unique learners. Over 90 years ago, Alberta Education entered into a service agreement with The Alberta Distance Learning Centre to serve the distance education needs of the students and teachers of Alberta. Over the years, this service agreement has taken on many forms. However, the mandate remains the same: to provide high quality learning resources and services to the students and teachers of Alberta. This includes students with exceptional learning needs and learning disabilities. ADLC registers students from urban, rural, and remote community schools from across the province in facilitated or independent learning programs. ADLC students may also be homeschooled. ADLC's students are as diverse as Alberta's populations with various learning needs including FNMI, ELL, Children in Care, and Learning Disabilities. When thinking about distance education as a means to meet the needs of learning disabled students, it is important to examine four core factors: the universality of online course offerings; the ability to differentiate instruction; flexibility in time, pace and place; and online supports for skills remediation including specialized online courses. Universally Designed Online Courses Over the past ten years, many students accessing distance learning resources have made a shift from traditional print correspondence to online learning. As a result, the opportunities for creating universally designed, online learning resources increased. This became the mission of ADLC; to design courses and learning opportunities that are universal (providing access to all learners) and that engage students in authentic learning experiences. Many students have difficulty understanding concepts that are presented primarily in text and may benefit by online course materials that consider different learners, using the Universal Design for Learning (UDL) principles. Visual and auditory supports implemented in the ADLC online courses aim to provide students with opportunities to learn using lesson materials incorporating audio, video, imagines and text-to-speech software. As well, an additional UDL strategy of providing students with options to express their understanding from various alternative assessments in a benchmark of all new ADLC courses. By implementing UDL, instructional materials and processes ADLC courses and resources are designed to allow students with diverse needs to engage, interact, and learn from them (Abell, Jung, and Taylor, 2009). The UDL learning principles frame ADLC course design by providing choice of alternative assessments and assistive technologies, such as video and text-to-speech software, in online courses for all learners. “The UDL perspective looks to create flexible instruction, engagement, and assessment options that reduce barriers at the outset of the learning process” (Messinger-Willman and Marino, 2010, p. 9). Differentiation of Instruction Differentiated instruction essentially is the understanding of the learning needs of our students and differentiating content and process to support those needs. To differentiate, teachers must be able to pick and choose from a myriad of tools to support student learning. Alberta Distance Learning Centre resources provide classroom teachers with supports to meet the needs of their diverse learners. Teachers have the ability to make strategic choices as to how content will be delivered, what process students will come to understand and make sense of this content, and how the students will be required to show what they know (Tomlinson, 2003, 2005, 2012; Turville, 2008, Strickland, 2009). Teachers can differentiate ADLC content and assessments that are already created to curriculum standards and with UDL principles in mind. ADLC course content also contains assistive technology such as; engaging videos that have both captioning and transcripts, font can be easily changed and enlarged, audio and text-to-speech tools. Most importantly, the content and assessment can be self-paced to go as fast as students can but as slow as they must. This is the essence of differentiation. Teachers and students working with ADLC resources do not have to proceed in a lock step, group fashion. There are multiple entry points for students to receive the appropriate pacing and interventions required to promote learning. ADLC course materials support differentiated instruction and personalized learning. Flexibility in Time, Pace and Place Many of our most at risk learners seek to be at a distance: at a distance from peers who may not accept their differences, at a distance from teachers who are overwhelmed by the demands of our classrooms, and at a distance from those very supports that schools work so diligently to provide. Many students in distance education programs self-identify as having a learning disability. As students become aware that the ways in which they learn may be different or unique to their peers, many students realize that they need flexibility in time, pace and place in order to effectively learn. In our busy, full classrooms, providing this flexibility is difficult. Students come to the Alberta Distance Learning Centre in order to meet their learning needs. Whether it is to upgrade or accelerate, to access courses that are not offered by their community schools, or to allow for flexibility in schedules, ADLC provides students with the access they need. Students who choose to take ADLC courses benefit from student-centred programs and customized instruction to meet their individual needs, where learning can happen at any time, at any place, and at any pace. Skills Remediation
As the composition of our classrooms change, to become more and more diverse with students not only with unique learning needs but also with English language gaps, ADLC provides options for skill remediation at a student’s own pace. Many of these tools can be used either inside or out outside of a normal day of instruction. Alberta Distance Learning Centre provides options for teachers, parents and students to remediate these skills at a distance. Programs like Imagine Learning (for English Language Learners) and Successmaker (for skill development in numeracy and literacy) provide remediation in a way that supports both teachers and learners. Alberta Distance Learning Centre offers Imagine Learning, an interactive ELL resource designed to teach English and develop language and literacy skills using an engaging and effective online software program. With Imagine Learning, students complete activities focusing on phonological awareness, fluency, vocabulary and comprehension. This adaptive program provides over 2500 engaging activities. Ongoing assessments are provided throughout the program and can be printed for parents in the student’s first language. Strategic first language support is also available to students within the program, with an option of fourteen languages. SuccessMaker® is another interactive tutorial software used in over 20,000 schools throughout Canada, USA, Great Britain, Australia, and New Zealand. The program presents new skills and concepts in small chunks that help build student confidence. Consisting of sophisticated multimedia mathematics and reading courses delivered through an online management system, SuccessMaker®: enhances math skills, develops elementary math concepts, and increases reading skills. With Successmaker, each student receives an individualized program monitored by a supervising teacher as well as monthly reports that outline progress and changes made to accommodate the needs of each student. Conclusion Implementing Universal Design for learning principles and strategies can make educational environments and materials naturally and seamlessly functional for learners with diverse needs by guiding the selection of flexible, usable, and accessible tools, materials, and surroundings, and the development of learner-centred collaborative and interactive curriculum (Curry, Cohen, and Lightbody, 2006). “By offering UDL-aligned instructional approaches and curriculum materials,... students might begin to show more interest and engage more fully with curriculum materials that are relevant and comprehensible given their own learning style, ability, and interests (Abell, Jung, and Taylor, 2009, p. 182). However, Edyburn (2010) asserts that to understand and meet the special instructional needs of all individuals, researchers and teachers must continue to “seek to understand the impact of various instructional designs on the success of diverse learners” (p. 36). ADLC strives to determine and evaluate UDL instructional processes that increase student learning and performance through sustained engagement and development of expertise (Edyburn). Resources Abell, M., Jung, E., & Taylor, M. (2009). Students’ perceptions of classroom instructional environments in the context of ‘Universal Design for Learning’. Learning Environments Research, 14(2), 171-185. Retrieved March 23, 2012 from Eric Database. Bennett, S. (2009). Including students with exceptionalities.(What Works? Research into Practice: Research Monograph #16). The Literacy and Numeracy Secretariat, Ontario: Ministry of Education. Retrieved March 9, 2012 from http://www.edu.gov.on.ca/eng/literacynumeracy/inspire/research/Bennett.pdf . Center for Applied Special Technology (CAST). (2011). Universal design for learning guidelines version 2.0. Wakefield, MA: Author. Retrieved February 17, 2012 from http://www.udlcenter.org/aboutudl/udlguidelines/downloads . Chen, M. (2009). Influence of grade level on perceptual learning style preferences and language learning strategies of Taiwanese English as a foreign language learners. Learning and Individual Difference, 19, 304-305. Retrieved March 8, 2012 from ERIC database. Curry, C., Cohen, L., & Lightbody, N. (2006). Universal design for science learning. The Science Teacher, 73(3), 32-37. Retrieved February 17, 2012, from ERIC database. Resources Abell, M., Jung, E., & Taylor, M. (2009). Students’ perceptions of classroom instructional environments in the context of ‘Universal Design for Learning’. Learning Environments Research, 14(2), 171-185. Retrieved March 23, 2012 from Eric Database. Bennett, S. (2009). Including students with exceptionalities.(What Works? Research into Practice: Research Monograph #16). The Literacy and Numeracy Secretariat, Ontario: Ministry of Education. Retrieved March 9, 2012 from http://www.edu.gov.on.ca/eng/literacynumeracy/inspire/research/Bennett.pdf . Center for Applied Special Technology (CAST). (2011). Universal design for learning guidelines version 2.0. Wakefield, MA: Author. Retrieved February 17, 2012 from http://www.udlcenter.org/aboutudl/udlguidelines/downloads . Chen, M. (2009). Influence of grade level on perceptual learning style preferences and language learning strategies of Taiwanese English as a foreign language learners. Learning and Individual Difference, 19, 304-305. Retrieved March 8, 2012 from ERIC database. Curry, C., Cohen, L., & Lightbody, N. (2006). Universal design for science learning. The Science Teacher, 73(3), 32-37. Retrieved February 17, 2012, from ERIC database. Toulouse, P. (2008). Integrating aboriginal teaching and values into the classroom. (What Works? Research into Practice: Research Monograph #11). The Literacy and Numeracy Secretariat, Ontario: Ministry of Education. Retrieved March 9, 2012 from http://www.edu.gov.on.ca/eng/literacynumeracy/inspire/research/Toulouse.pdf . Laurel Beaton http://laurelbeaton.wordpress.com/ |
Categories
All
AuthorsThis blog and resources website has been developed through the work of various AISI coaches in PHRD. The lead collaborative teachers for the 2015/2016 school year, Cheryl Frose, Christine Quong and Tammy Tkachuk will continue to update this site. If you have resources you would like to share or would like to contribute to the blog, please contact us. Archives
May 2016
|