What do we mean when we say we are a class for ALL KIDS? This is a very popular question when we are making presentations. It is easy to say but hard to do. In the past, the discussion always centered on kids making a choice (or someone else making it for them) about whether they are non-college or college bound. Research is telling us to think about students being post-secondary ready….a much better term and concept. I believe there are fallacies in our past assumptions and I was one of those teachers that believed that the two groups of students could not coexist in the classroom. Career and college preparation are not mutually exclusive. It is not an “either or” choice. It is a “both and” choice. The solution is not to water down the math but to change how we teach. The reminder of this article is based on my experiences as I changed from a traditional math teacher to a contextualized math teacher.
For me to make a successful change, I had to examine each part of my instruction. I had to risk and do what research was telling me about instruction. I had to stop blaming previous teachers, counselors, parents, students, and the educational system for the failures in my classroom. I had to remember that I only control 2 things: what I teach and how I teach it. Simply, I had to reinvent myself and then to keep myself from returning back to what I was comfortable with (the status quo). Yes, it was a risk to change what I had done in the classroom, especially in this day and age of high stakes testing. So what did I learn from reinventing myself? Below are a few thoughts about what I experienced.
1. Teachers can no longer be the only dispenser of knowledge in the increasingly large classroom of today. We are one resource but not the only resource. Early on I knew I needed to make better use of cooperative groups. Other students can provide another level of support for students that struggle. Some of my students needed more one-on-one time to learn the material. Why not make better use of other students who could provide tutoring. Lots of good learning occurs as students verbalize their mathematics while explaining to their peers. As the teacher, I had to trust that students are very capable of teaching if an appropriate classroom structure is in place.
Often I hear math teachers tell me that their students work in groups. However, upon further probing, they put students together without training, and hope and pray they work. Many times this can lead to teacher frustration because the students are not doing what they are suppose to do. Then it is easy to revert back to rows and silence in the classroom. Before that happens, these questions need to be posed. Am I as the teacher providing too much support during homework time? Am I as the teacher rewarding good group behavior? Have I as a teacher demonstrated what good “help” looks like in the classroom? Do I answer too many of their questions? Do I stop groups for the entire class because of the actions of a few students?
2. Teachers need to look at their delivery system of instruction. Lecture is a very time efficient way to get the facts across….but is it the best? Learning style research is everywhere but it was not in my classroom. I had to change. This is why I now use activities at least 50% of the time to help students “do their mathematics” in Geometry in Construction. Students need to be active in their own learning. Do labs and activities take more time? Yes. Research shows that as few as 10% of high school students learn best by auditory learning yet 80% of the instruction in high school is lecture (University of Illinois). If students learn best by seeing and doing, then I had to change how I was teaching whether it was time efficient or not. Yes, such instruction takes more classroom time.
Many times teachers and administrators tell me that I do not understand their situation. The conversation goes something like “I must cover all of the objectives in order for the students to score well on the state test and I don’t have time for activities.” I too, had that question personally. I had to ask “is what I am doing currently with lectures working for all kids?”. My answer was a solid NO. It was not working for my students. I personally had to gamble with what research said, teach fewer topics but be more in depth. So, that is what I did. I did throw out some minor topics so I could spend more time on the major topics. I then implemented more activities, not more lecture.
3. Closely tied to learning styles is scaffold learning. Whenever possible, teachers need to introduce lessons from a very concrete approach and then move on to the abstract. This provides students various entry points into their new learning. For me, I had to back off of the theoretical introductions to new material. My students do not need the theory. I had to find ways to introduce material from an experiential approach. Not an easy thing to do but contextualization provides avenues for this to happen.
4. The terms “high achieving and low achieving” that I was using were wrong. Many of these labeled “low achieving” students have learning styles that I was not addressing. See #2 above. Many times these students need to know how the math is going to be used (contextualized mathematics). Students need to have direct experiences with their mathematics, giving them a “hook” to attach their new learning on. I found students (and adults) do not make the connections between book mathematics and application mathematics readily. My job as a teacher is to help students make those connections. In giving students a reason to know where the math is used, I can help struggling students. I have found that “struggling students in the classroom” can be the superstars in applying the math topics out on the job site.
5. Providing additional academic support for students who are behind is crucial to success. One of the ten tenets of the “High Schools that Work” model is for teachers/schools to provide structured extra help for struggling students. We are fortunate that we are able to provide additional help in the math classroom using former Geometry in Construction students. These peers can work alongside students that need extra help. In addition, we provide before/after school help as well as a study night (using the Advance Placement idea) before each unit test. Remember, this is in addition to having students work in groups.
6. I provide second chances. All of us make poor choices, have bad days, or just don’t get it at some point in our lives. Students are not exempt. I offer retest for students that did not get it the first time. I offer learning contracts to students that fail semester 1. Does this require extra work as a teacher? Yes. However, I want my students to believe I am on their side and that I want them to succeed as much as they do.
7. Parent communication is critical. Early in the year, I establish weekly emails to each parent, letting them know what is coming up next week. This is in addition to the access they have to grades (what most school districts supply). These emails focus on the positive. By establishing good communication early, it opens the door for me to contact them with concerns regarding their student later. This is a 15 minute per week commitment. I believe the return is greater than the time cost.
8. Creating a classroom culture where we are purposeful in being accepting of ALL students whether they are college bound or not. I want my students to feel valued. As I review my previous math teaching experience, I peppered my class discussions with statements like “you will need this for college”, “when you get to college”, “what college are you going to”, etc. In making those statements, I realized I was not very welcoming of students who were not planning on going to college. I did not intend to be one sided, but I was. Also, if I brought in a guest speaker, it was always a college educated person. Again I was guilty of only showing one side. So, when I started Geometry in Construction, I was very purposeful in talking about the need for post secondary training….not college. I made a point of defining post-secondary as any training after high school (military, apprenticeship, community college, 4 year college, etc). In addition, I scheduled about half our guest speakers to represent college bound careers and the other half representing non-college bound careers.
9. Rigorous mathematics has different meanings for different people. For some, it is simply more math problems or doing 8-10 more sections (topics) in a year. For others, it means doing “Problem Set C. In fact, many of the honor classes pride themselves on one of the above definitions. One of the more accepted meanings for rigor comes from the work of Bill Daggett’s Model Schools. Rigorous math is math that is applied across disciplines. Being able to apply the mathematics in new situations is considered high level “Quadrant D” thinking. ”. I knew I wanted my students to apply their mathematics and our state test reinforces the need. Geometry in Construction asks students to apply their mathematics throughout the process of building of a home. Food for thought: Isn’t this what we ask engineers to do?
Combining all of the thoughts above into one class is not easy and is not for every teacher. Do we have 100% passing? No. However, my classroom went from 20%-30% failure rates to less than 10%. My personal job satisfaction also increased because of the improvement. When my attitude improved, so do that of my students. I believe I am doing what is best for ALL KIDS. But, for me, it took reinventing myself as a teacher.
No comments:
Post a Comment