Last week we met with Bruce Moody again for another round of PL.
From the previous round of PL there had been much discussion about how and what to test for math for SEA, and for 20 week testing, as well as in the older junior classrooms.
There was quite a bit of confusion, to me it seemed to be from a number of things:
1. peoples knowledge, prior and present
2. the amount of documents that had been made and presented on the math we were learning about - too many documents, sometimes contradictory information, some people had the docs, some didn't....
This all was leading to confusion, coupled with differing expectations.
For me I felt overwhelmed with all the information, and not having any formal 'training' on teaching maths, felt really out of my depth with it all. Being from a play based learning environment I was struggling with having to teach instructional math.
I had struggled with the times Bruce had come in to observe me as I was so unsure about what I was doing.
So all of this was leading to me not wanting to do this in the classroom.
The other difficulty was how was I going to find time in the already squashed timetable to teach a group of children. Having 45 children in the class with one other teacher, makes taking a group for instructional learning a challenge. We really had to think hard how to do this is a way which was not stressful.
My colleague talked with Bruce about learning maths through play, and he said no, it cannot be taught that way.
I would disagree to a degree with that, but I can also see how having a small group around the table is more desirable.
This week when Bruce came I feel I really at last got my head around the expectations of what needs to be taught to NE.
Bruce met with the NE teachers for a one on one to answer any questions we had. This was super helpful and I felt at last I had specifically the information I need, or at least I understood it when explained.
From the previous round of PL there had been much discussion about how and what to test for math for SEA, and for 20 week testing, as well as in the older junior classrooms.
There was quite a bit of confusion, to me it seemed to be from a number of things:
1. peoples knowledge, prior and present
2. the amount of documents that had been made and presented on the math we were learning about - too many documents, sometimes contradictory information, some people had the docs, some didn't....
This all was leading to confusion, coupled with differing expectations.
For me I felt overwhelmed with all the information, and not having any formal 'training' on teaching maths, felt really out of my depth with it all. Being from a play based learning environment I was struggling with having to teach instructional math.
I had struggled with the times Bruce had come in to observe me as I was so unsure about what I was doing.
So all of this was leading to me not wanting to do this in the classroom.
The other difficulty was how was I going to find time in the already squashed timetable to teach a group of children. Having 45 children in the class with one other teacher, makes taking a group for instructional learning a challenge. We really had to think hard how to do this is a way which was not stressful.
My colleague talked with Bruce about learning maths through play, and he said no, it cannot be taught that way.
I would disagree to a degree with that, but I can also see how having a small group around the table is more desirable.
This week when Bruce came I feel I really at last got my head around the expectations of what needs to be taught to NE.
Bruce met with the NE teachers for a one on one to answer any questions we had. This was super helpful and I felt at last I had specifically the information I need, or at least I understood it when explained.
NE - count one to one to 5 then 10
Before and after
Across the gap
Bonds to 5
5 and
Transfer the count (I have 5 teddies, how many beds will I need?)
Doubles to 10
Subitizing/patterns to 5
Matching sets to numbers
Direct counting
Equal sharing - eg 12 lollies between 3 friends, there is no one in this problem (not a fractions)
Lunch Time Meeting with Bruce Moody:
School Entry Assessment:
When assessing new entrants on what they know (not what they don't know) start in the middle - can move on or go back
Bruce suggests not to look at symbols at this stage as they can be due to cultural capital/environmental the child may or may not have been exposed to
Child's process of mathematical thinking
Stage 1 - stage 2 boundary
Cognitive framework - symbols are environmental
Can't say because it's about processing
Can introduce symbols after cognitive counting
If can't move the gap smaller, put set together
What chn can do: can count a set to 10, but needs to learn that how to count across a gap (counting can continue when it doesn't look like one set).
If can't count - diagnose? Why?
Issues:
- language, knowing the words,
- 1:1 correspondence, replace with larger objects, really struggling, larger objects, slow the counting down,
- direction - can they only count specific colours, objects, can count on demand
- Too close, double taps when counting, too fast, spread the objects out
Colour differentiation of the blocks doesn't matter
Counting the gap is a precursor to addition
Subitizing - sits parallel to counting the gap, only to five
How many blocks? Not to count, for a set up to 5 no need to count - crucial prerequisite to adding
Hey what do we call it when we put 5 and 2 together? We call it 7
The 5 one colour, the other set another colour
Next:
One more, non symbolic to this stage
The trust of 5, if I give one more it must be 6
Crucial concept - 3 and 1, 1 and 3,
Bonds - is about associations
Once a child can count a set, introduce symbols, put out a selection, which one is 5, 2? Concrete, literal, symbolic
Seriation is important - the start of measuring
Bruce demonstrated 5 and with Jared, Eben and Rudransh:
Using stories in a meaningful context to access the bond. 5+2=7.
Piaget - the fiveness of 5 - remains constant, is always 5.
If I had 5 teddies and they all need to go to bed, how many beds will I need?
Can ask this if children are struggling to count. This is pre-subitizing.
Modelling Books:
- Captures the planning/learning:
Eg T3 Wk 7: Octopus Group
Working on 5 and
Eg ____________ Jared ✓
A tick is not evidence, but what child said, did, made
2. For 3rd party:
- Reliever
- Parent
- Management
Testing:
We are not testing as such but we are reporting and collecting observations.
We should be recording where a child is at eg Jared is able to ……, or has participated in
Build subitizing daily
If child is not consistent with thinking then keep checking
From this information I have created a template to use for SEA information.
I used this the other day with new children and a couple children due for 20 week testing and felt like i knew what I was doing.
Now I am feeling much more confident about gathering data as I teach so I can be much more informed about what children are learning in maths, and then being able to report this.
Comments
Post a Comment