Supporting teachers is one thing. Pandering to their superstitions or =
inadequacies is quite another.
You need to tread carefully here because you can undermine students' =
understanding when the "supplement" becomes the main course or adds =
confusion about curricular values, or approaches.
I honestly can't figure out what is missing from the Investigations (or =
Everyday Math) series that needs to be supplemented. I do appreciate =
that it doesn't look like the "Walk Behind Math" some parents expect and =
has been the political target of crackpots, like Mathematically Correct.
That said, I appreciate that you're in a quandary.=20
Therefore, I suggest books by Marilyn Burns and some of the others =
listed in the following two links from the Constructivist Consortium =
Book Store:
=
http://astore.amazon.com/constructivistconsortium-20?_encoding=3DUTF8&node=
=3D19
=
http://astore.amazon.com/constructivistconsortium-20?_encoding=3DUTF8&node=
=3D37
I hope this helps,
Gary
On May 26, 2010, at 4:54 AM, Terry Dash wrote:
> Hi Gary,
>=20
> I posted the original message, and I couldn't agree more with what you
> say. I worked for 5 years at a large education think-tank that =
supported
> districts nationally as they implemented the TERC and other NSF-funded
> curricula, I believe fully in the choice that TERC made to focus on
> mathematical thinking rather than algorithmic thinking.
>=20
> However, my question still stands, and I think it's a legitimate
> perspective from which to inquire. Things aren't all-or-nothing in our
> classrooms, and many good teachers with kids' mathematical thinking in
> mind believe that a little more exercise in fluency might help
> mathematical thinking, and help kids create meaning "from the inside." =
If
> you find that confusing, I'd be happy to discuss more (perhaps =
offline?).
>=20
> So ... If you're supplementing TERC, please don't hesitate to write. I
> could use your help.
>=20
> All best,
> Terry
>=20
>=20
> A forum for independent school educators <ISED-L@LISTSERV.SYR.EDU> =
writes:
>> This is a fairly common concern, usually rooted in insecurity on the =
part
>> of teachers or parents.=20
>>=20
>> However, with all due respect, the concern about "lagging behind =
teaching
>> standard algorithms and math facts" is not a responsible quest for
>> "balance," but an assault on student learning and mathematical =
thinking.
>>=20
>> Numerous studies and researchers such as Constance Kamii demonstrate =
that
>> when children are "taught" algorithms they are often deprived of =
actual
>> mathematical understanding. The quest for speed is silly and =
potentially
>> destructive. How fast is fast enough? Why does thinking and problem
>> solving need to be quick?
>>=20
>> Piaget teaches us that it is the teacher's job to create contexts in
>> which children correct themselves from the inside. There is scarce
>> evidence, if any at all, that drilling math facts or less =
constructivist
>> approaches to math curricula and pedagogy are more successful than =
what
>> your school is already doing.
>>=20
>> I would suggest that your school have more patience and support =
teachers
>> in using the TERC materials with greater confidence rather than =
undermine
>> student learning.
>>=20
>> Gary Stager, Ph.D.
>>=20
>> On May 25, 2010, at 11:49 AM, Terry Dash wrote:
>>=20
>>> Hi -
>>>=20
>>> This question is intended for elementary schools using TERC's
>>> Investigations mathematics curriculum -
>>>=20
>>> The Pike School uses TERC in grades K-5. We like the program's
>>> constructivist approach but know that it lags behind in areas such =
as
>>> teaching standard algorithms and math facts/fluency. We are =
therefore
>>> looking into activities that supplement TERC in these areas.
>>>=20
>>> If you are currently using TERC and you are supplementing in the =
areas
>> of
>>> standard algorithms or math facts/fluency...
>>>=20
>>> * What supplementary materials are you using? Did you develop these
>>> materials yourselves, or are they publicly available?
>>>=20
>>> * How do you use the materials? (10 minutes/day? weekly? in some =
units
>>> only?)
>>>=20
>>> * If you are using software or online resources as part of your
>>> supplementary materials, what sites are you using?
>>>=20
>>> Thanks in advance,
>>> Terry
>>>=20
>>> . . .
>>> Terry Dash
>>> Director of Technology
>>> Pike School
>>> 34 Sunset Rock Road
>>> Andover, MA 01810
>>> 978.409.6623
>>>=20
>>>=20
>>> [ For info on ISED-L see
>> https://www.gds.org/podium/default.aspx?t=3D128874 ]
>>> Submissions to ISED-L are released under a creative commons,
>> attribution, non-commercial, share-alike license.
>>> RSS Feed, http://listserv.syr.edu/scripts/wa.exe?RSS&L=3DISED-L
>>=20
>> [ For info on ISED-L see =
https://www.gds.org/podium/default.aspx?t=3D128874
>> ]
>> Submissions to ISED-L are released under a creative commons, =
attribution,
>> non-commercial, share-alike license.
>> RSS Feed, http://listserv.syr.edu/scripts/wa.exe?RSS&L=3DISED-L
>>=20
>=20
>=20
>=20
> [ For info on ISED-L see =
https://www.gds.org/podium/default.aspx?t=3D128874 ]
> Submissions to ISED-L are released under a creative commons, =
attribution, non-commercial, share-alike license.
> RSS Feed, http://listserv.syr.edu/scripts/wa.exe?RSS&L=3DISED-L
[ For info on ISED-L see https://www.gds.org/podium/default.aspx?t=3D128874 ]
Submissions to ISED-L are released under a creative commons, attribution, non-commercial, share-alike license.
RSS Feed, http://listserv.syr.edu/scripts/wa.exe?RSS&L=3DISED-L
