Last Saturday I attended the 25th annual Primary Maths Association conference at the beautiful Waipuna Conference Center. Though I don't recall it being said (that of course, doesn't mean it wasn't said) there was a clear theme running throughout the day: Proportional thinking. Now this doesn't necessarily mean proportions, ratios and percent - but it does refer to multiplicative thinking. This, according to many speakers, is something we need to focus on as many learners are yet unable to think this way.
The keynote speaker, Shelley Dole, spoke of a three-step process of representing mathematical thinking for learners. The first is enactive - acting out the problems. This is probably something that is lacking in my practice at the moment. In the week since, I've tried to bring this back into my problem solving. The second is iconic - using diagrams or manipulatives that represent real life things. For example, this would be using things like counters, place value cubes, etc. I've been doing this to a degree, though including diagrams is something that I will work on adding (pun intended). The last is symbolic - which is using numbers and symbols to represent those mathematical ideas. This is something that we rely on quite a bit, and while necessary, it's important to remember that that doesn't have to be the only thing we do.
To be honest, a few of the big ideas in the sessions were not new to me, but it's always good to get a reminder of these things AND there were some practical things that I can use in my teaching.
One session I attended, called Learning Through Play, had a few ideas of things we as educators could use to make the learning of our learners more interesting. There was a lot of talk about using literacy to connect with mathematical ideas. A lot of this was about using stories to create math investigations. I like this idea, though it was very juniors based (read: Year 2 or under). It did remind me of the wonderful (American) resource of the Math Start books. Despite the obvious issues with the currency books, these are really great. I've brought my set back into school and am planning to share them with my learners shortly.
Another really important tip that was shared in this session was that learners should be encouraged to answer their questions in full sentences - not just in one-word answers. The facilitator mentioned that this can have wonderful effects across all learning areas.
The last session of the day included a massive amount of practical real world maths problems. The facilitator gave us heaps of example questions using ratios and proportions that are real world problems. What I liked best about this session was that we had time to go around and have a go at solving them (note to any presenters out there: get us doing stuff or at some point, most of us will just tune out).
It was a good day to spark some thinking in me. I've always enjoyed math as a student, though that can be a challenge when it comes to teaching learners who don't share my excitement. I hope to use a good deal of the ideas in the coming weeks!
Friday, March 31, 2017
Friday, March 17, 2017
Down With Rainbow Vomit!
Recently, I read an article online about how much decoration on classroom walls is useful. It has been a long-standing observation that the majority of learners, while they do notice things occasionally on the walls, don't really care too much whether or not they are decorated in what can colourfully be described as rainbow vomit (a term which was not coined by me, but by a former colleague of mine - also, that pun was completely intended).
I wouldn't say that I've been one for a classroom full of white, bare walls. No, I think every learning area does have to feel inviting and warm. But often, I feel like there is a lot of pressure to make things look good, just for the sake of them looking good and bright and shiny. Style over substance, in other words.
As someone who can easily get distracted, the main points in the article are very relevant to me. Too much visual stimulation (or auditory stimulation for that matter) can actually make it difficult for learners (or in my case, adults) to stay focused on the task at hand. The researches actually tested this theory and had two sets of children in two classrooms - one bare and one decorated. Their initial findings were that the children in the bare walls room retained more of the information given during the lesson. Obviously this needs to be replicated on a bigger scale, but it makes sense.
For what it's worth, I've taken a multitude of approaches when it comes to what's on the walls in my classroom (sadly, though, I don't have many pictures of these to share and those that I do have are hidden away in the maze that is my file structures on Google Drive and my external hard drive). I've had the big displays to get children interested. I've tried individual spaces on the wall for learners to display what they've wanted to display (which turned out to be a lot of work for me as many of those spaces were in inaccessible spots or too high). I've put up work in progress.
My personal opinion, based on my patented logical thinking and looking at the situation from many angles is that anything put on the walls has to have a purpose - and that purpose begins and ends with the learners who are in the environment. Everything put up has to be for them. Not for leadership, not for the parents, not for ERO.
I think walls should be always changing, with the learners taking ownership of the majority of things on them. Obviously there needs to be organizational things on them, but that shouldn't take up too much space. The environment should be clean and welcoming. One thing I'd like to add is plants, or other calming things. Leaner made art should be put up (though I would argue that if you have 25 or so copies of almost the exact same thing, it's not really art).
This has come at an interesting time when we're trying to decide collectively as a team what to put up in our Habitat. This has certainly given us something to think about.
I wouldn't say that I've been one for a classroom full of white, bare walls. No, I think every learning area does have to feel inviting and warm. But often, I feel like there is a lot of pressure to make things look good, just for the sake of them looking good and bright and shiny. Style over substance, in other words.
As someone who can easily get distracted, the main points in the article are very relevant to me. Too much visual stimulation (or auditory stimulation for that matter) can actually make it difficult for learners (or in my case, adults) to stay focused on the task at hand. The researches actually tested this theory and had two sets of children in two classrooms - one bare and one decorated. Their initial findings were that the children in the bare walls room retained more of the information given during the lesson. Obviously this needs to be replicated on a bigger scale, but it makes sense.
For what it's worth, I've taken a multitude of approaches when it comes to what's on the walls in my classroom (sadly, though, I don't have many pictures of these to share and those that I do have are hidden away in the maze that is my file structures on Google Drive and my external hard drive). I've had the big displays to get children interested. I've tried individual spaces on the wall for learners to display what they've wanted to display (which turned out to be a lot of work for me as many of those spaces were in inaccessible spots or too high). I've put up work in progress.
My personal opinion, based on my patented logical thinking and looking at the situation from many angles is that anything put on the walls has to have a purpose - and that purpose begins and ends with the learners who are in the environment. Everything put up has to be for them. Not for leadership, not for the parents, not for ERO.
I think walls should be always changing, with the learners taking ownership of the majority of things on them. Obviously there needs to be organizational things on them, but that shouldn't take up too much space. The environment should be clean and welcoming. One thing I'd like to add is plants, or other calming things. Leaner made art should be put up (though I would argue that if you have 25 or so copies of almost the exact same thing, it's not really art).
This has come at an interesting time when we're trying to decide collectively as a team what to put up in our Habitat. This has certainly given us something to think about.
Friday, March 3, 2017
In Defence of Play Based Learning
Recently a colleague at work shared this ARTICLE with our whole staff and asked for our thoughts. In an act of clear click-baiting curiously titled Why I Don't Like Play Based Learning, the article does not actually have anything against Play Based Learning, but rather against the "hijacking" of the term by some educators.
The problem, the author asserts, is that some educators are making their normal (i.e. boring) tasks more fun by adding games to things such as literacy or numeracy tumbles. This is not play based learning. Play based learning is literally a time or chance for learners to play and explore their world. One of the main things I want my learners to realize is that no matter what they do, they are learning something. I told this once to a class of mine and one boy made a smart-alec remark (admittedly, I see that as a positive), but I turned it back on him and said "You've just learned how I react to silly remarks. Next time, you'll probably stop and think before you do." His expression when I said that was priceless. The point I'm trying to make is that no matter what a human being is doing, they are learning something in the process.
In my opinion this disconnect between actual play based learning and what some educators call play based learning stems from educators wanting to do the "latest thing" but not actually understanding the why behind it or not being willing (or able) to let go of the structure that has been indoctrinated into them. As educators, we need to go deeper and understand why we do what we do - all of it.
I've had some interesting discussions around this idea lately and it has always been something I've thought about as it pertains to my practice. One of the few things I actually remember from my University days is a simple formula (which I may or may not have already shared on this blog):
This is very relevant when it comes to play based learning. If we allow learners to play, that reflection can actually be more powerful than any other direct acts of teaching that we could provide. Yes, they do need some direct acts of teaching, but it is my belief that play can motivate children to want to read. To want to write. To want to learn how to manipulate numbers. Obviously in reality we need to teach these things regardless of desire, but we can use the play to make learners desire.
For our part, I do believe my Oresome School does offer a great assortment of play based learning opportunities for our learners. The pictures throughout this blog show our morning provocations and our loose parts playground.
I think, as educators, we need to make sure that we ask ourselves why we're doing things and then actually make sure that we acting consistently with those reasons.
The problem, the author asserts, is that some educators are making their normal (i.e. boring) tasks more fun by adding games to things such as literacy or numeracy tumbles. This is not play based learning. Play based learning is literally a time or chance for learners to play and explore their world. One of the main things I want my learners to realize is that no matter what they do, they are learning something. I told this once to a class of mine and one boy made a smart-alec remark (admittedly, I see that as a positive), but I turned it back on him and said "You've just learned how I react to silly remarks. Next time, you'll probably stop and think before you do." His expression when I said that was priceless. The point I'm trying to make is that no matter what a human being is doing, they are learning something in the process.
In my opinion this disconnect between actual play based learning and what some educators call play based learning stems from educators wanting to do the "latest thing" but not actually understanding the why behind it or not being willing (or able) to let go of the structure that has been indoctrinated into them. As educators, we need to go deeper and understand why we do what we do - all of it.
I've had some interesting discussions around this idea lately and it has always been something I've thought about as it pertains to my practice. One of the few things I actually remember from my University days is a simple formula (which I may or may not have already shared on this blog):
FUN = ENTERTAINMENT
FUN + REFLECTION = EDUCATION
This is very relevant when it comes to play based learning. If we allow learners to play, that reflection can actually be more powerful than any other direct acts of teaching that we could provide. Yes, they do need some direct acts of teaching, but it is my belief that play can motivate children to want to read. To want to write. To want to learn how to manipulate numbers. Obviously in reality we need to teach these things regardless of desire, but we can use the play to make learners desire.
For our part, I do believe my Oresome School does offer a great assortment of play based learning opportunities for our learners. The pictures throughout this blog show our morning provocations and our loose parts playground.
I think, as educators, we need to make sure that we ask ourselves why we're doing things and then actually make sure that we acting consistently with those reasons.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)