I was challenged on Twitter as I shared a host of tweets from a math conference. The statements were challenged and defined as platitudes. "Platitudes," I wondered, "Why?, The last thing I want to do is tweet trite, meaningless statements."
I thought more about this challenge with the idea that there's usually some (or a lot) of truth in a naysayer's statements. I asked for further clarification and received some specifics, but not too much of a response. Then with further analysis, my thoughts led me back to a discussion I had a short while ago with a leader from a major United States company. He lamented that new engineering graduates he works with lack estimation and process skills. Then yesterday I queried a nuclear engineer who supported the first leader's comments, and further commented that new hires need to understand the math more--the relationships and the ability to estimate and design. As we conversed, I stated, "So you're telling me that good math teaching is about learning the math, and understanding it well?"
He responded that students need to build that foundation up step-by-step with a firm understanding and facility of one step before moving to the other, then he cited that early acquisition of facts and computation leads to confidence and efficiency when learning about and solving more complex problems. He felt that online models and real-world applications were good tools and approaches to learning the math too, and he supported actions which move students forward as they are ready rather than waiting until they advance to the next grade. Also, at a Googleplex conference in the winter, a leading venture capitalist in the science field affirmed this approach as he told the story of his son who passed an ap calculous exam in 5th grade. That child also had the good fortune of a small experienced teacher-student (1:2) ratio and responsive course of study.
So what does all of this conversation say to me as a fourth grade teacher who is interested in teaching children well? First, these conversations point me in the direction of learning the math well--knowing as much as possible about math as a teacher of young children. Often courses for elementary school teachers focus more on the teaching process than the subject content itself. Yet we know that a solid, strong understanding of the content supports worthy teaching. Hence, I'll read a math text this summer--a book that reminds me, and synthesizes for me, the essential math concepts from early learning to calculus. What titles would you recommend in this regard?
Next, I'll look for structures and tools to solidify students' foundation skills and move students forward as they are ready. I'll work to utilize tech tools and other materials to individualize the math classroom as much as possible so that each child is growing with skill, concept, and knowledge in steady, worthwhile ways. Finally, I'll focus on process and collaboration too as students work with each other to both learn the math and problem solve with meaningful, real-world math problems and projects. As you can imagine, I could spend the entire two months of the summer just focused on this topic and teaching focus.
This discussion brings me back to an earlier discussion about the role of generalist in the elementary school. While I like the fact that as a generalist I am able to know each child well and teach in a targeted, personalized, and integrated way, I am also well aware of how much there is to learn and know in each subject area as information becomes more accessible and students more diverse and facile at the same time. At our fifth grade, teachers team. One teacher focuses on math and science, and the other teacher focuses on English language arts and social studies. That model streamlines the teacher's needed area of expertise, but that model also doubles the teacher's responsibility to 50 students, rather than 25.
I'm not eager to adopt that model as I'd rather move to a menu approach of education where teachers' responsibilities are streamlined with new structures, routines, and models for education. I don't think more of the same is the answer. The engineer I spoke to yesterday agreed with this, and pointed to the many years, dollars and efforts spent on improving education--he recommended using engineer's "course correction" efforts to improve our craft and move schools forward.
Now this post is starting to jump all over the place, hence I'll summarize with yet another set of priorities for the new school year including the following:
I thought more about this challenge with the idea that there's usually some (or a lot) of truth in a naysayer's statements. I asked for further clarification and received some specifics, but not too much of a response. Then with further analysis, my thoughts led me back to a discussion I had a short while ago with a leader from a major United States company. He lamented that new engineering graduates he works with lack estimation and process skills. Then yesterday I queried a nuclear engineer who supported the first leader's comments, and further commented that new hires need to understand the math more--the relationships and the ability to estimate and design. As we conversed, I stated, "So you're telling me that good math teaching is about learning the math, and understanding it well?"
He responded that students need to build that foundation up step-by-step with a firm understanding and facility of one step before moving to the other, then he cited that early acquisition of facts and computation leads to confidence and efficiency when learning about and solving more complex problems. He felt that online models and real-world applications were good tools and approaches to learning the math too, and he supported actions which move students forward as they are ready rather than waiting until they advance to the next grade. Also, at a Googleplex conference in the winter, a leading venture capitalist in the science field affirmed this approach as he told the story of his son who passed an ap calculous exam in 5th grade. That child also had the good fortune of a small experienced teacher-student (1:2) ratio and responsive course of study.
So what does all of this conversation say to me as a fourth grade teacher who is interested in teaching children well? First, these conversations point me in the direction of learning the math well--knowing as much as possible about math as a teacher of young children. Often courses for elementary school teachers focus more on the teaching process than the subject content itself. Yet we know that a solid, strong understanding of the content supports worthy teaching. Hence, I'll read a math text this summer--a book that reminds me, and synthesizes for me, the essential math concepts from early learning to calculus. What titles would you recommend in this regard?
Next, I'll look for structures and tools to solidify students' foundation skills and move students forward as they are ready. I'll work to utilize tech tools and other materials to individualize the math classroom as much as possible so that each child is growing with skill, concept, and knowledge in steady, worthwhile ways. Finally, I'll focus on process and collaboration too as students work with each other to both learn the math and problem solve with meaningful, real-world math problems and projects. As you can imagine, I could spend the entire two months of the summer just focused on this topic and teaching focus.
This discussion brings me back to an earlier discussion about the role of generalist in the elementary school. While I like the fact that as a generalist I am able to know each child well and teach in a targeted, personalized, and integrated way, I am also well aware of how much there is to learn and know in each subject area as information becomes more accessible and students more diverse and facile at the same time. At our fifth grade, teachers team. One teacher focuses on math and science, and the other teacher focuses on English language arts and social studies. That model streamlines the teacher's needed area of expertise, but that model also doubles the teacher's responsibility to 50 students, rather than 25.
I'm not eager to adopt that model as I'd rather move to a menu approach of education where teachers' responsibilities are streamlined with new structures, routines, and models for education. I don't think more of the same is the answer. The engineer I spoke to yesterday agreed with this, and pointed to the many years, dollars and efforts spent on improving education--he recommended using engineer's "course correction" efforts to improve our craft and move schools forward.
Now this post is starting to jump all over the place, hence I'll summarize with yet another set of priorities for the new school year including the following:
- Renewed efforts related to writer's workshop and teaching writing well.
- Greater study and prep for the upcoming year of math teaching.
- Learning design research that results in a learning design template.
Teaching children well is a job with limitless potential and paths, and as I've stated again and again, this task demands thoughtful collaboration, prioritization, and direction as we move towards serving every child with strength and purpose. With this in mind, the question remains: How will we structure school routines, roles, and responsibilities to maximize our impact with regard to teaching each child well?
