Thanks for letting me investigate the Karawhiua process that happens in your room. You have done so much with it in such a small amount of time!
I was wondering what your view was of Maths interchange in a classroom that uses Karawhiua as its teaching model? Is there still a place for this or could/should we look at not having maths interchange anymore? What are the teaching implications of this and what about the effect this would have on the Special Needs team?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I have been thinking about your question Toby. My feeling is that there is every possibility of teaching maths using Karawhiua. I have set up writing workshops and I am working through a process in teaching to the needs by basing workshops around them. Currently I have reading workshops. I have displayed the times during the week when I see certain groups and the class timetable in the times that are relevant to them. This could definitely be used for maths as well. Benefits to this would be that you would keep you class and have a better understanding of where the all the children in the class are with their maths. Also after workshopping with groups, the children themselves can choose the best time to follow up with the consolidation from the concepts taught that day. It does become hard to monitor and trust in the children completing what is expected for the day - however this is part of empowering the students and giving them the opportunity to understanding themselves as learners. I still have lots more to say and share on this, but am still thinking about pro's, con's, logistics and monitoring/tracking quality work.
ReplyDeleteHere is my response to Tobyís request for me to consider the pros and cons of ceasing maths interchange in the middle team.
ReplyDeleteHaving had time to consider todayís discussion on the pros and cons of maths interchange within the Middle team, I have come to the conclusion that it should continue in its current format until the end of the year. I appreciate that I am possibly in the minority within the team but, as I was asked to investigate the pros and cons of ceasing maths interchange, it seems best to put views out to the team so that we can all know what will be happening next term with the teaching of maths.
Firstly, maths interchange has been running all year and has been the agreed method of organising maths at Fendalton for some time, and certainly for the entire time that 5 of the current Middle Team have been in post. Therefore, it seems to be an unnecessary disruption to try and alter this structure purely for the last term, especially as interchange is unlikely to run beyond the start of December if previous yearsí precedent is followed. This would allow teachers time to experiment with a karawhiua approach to maths towards the end of the year with a view to 2010.
This year has amply demonstrated the stress and pressure that is felt by staff when a system is hurriedly introduced and training is either insufficient or ineffective. I cannot see how it is possible to train all the staff involved in the karawhiua process adequately in the time between now and the beginning of next term.
ReplyDeleteAs a school, we pride ourselves on knowing our children. Having had a certain group of children for maths for the entire year, we are now in a position to have a strong relationship with them mathematically. Although we know our own class well personally, there will inevitably need to be time taken to find out about them on a mathematical basis. With an already pressured timetable, is it really an effective use of time to make such a fundamental system change?
The special needs programme supports our teaching and learning very strongly. The disruption caused by a change to this system may have consequences far beyond purely getting the right support to the right children. I wonder if we value the support we get as much as we should, and furthermore, do we ensure that they are aware of their value? It would be hard to argue that a change in our system, and therefore a disruption to a well organised and planned support programme, will be seen as progress to staff whose goodwill has been sorely tested at times.
The move away from a clearly defined maths programme is inherently full of risks to the quality, consistency and coverage necessary to fulfil our obligations to the learner. Although I am happy to concede that elements of maths can be used in our inquiry, I am also aware that in order for skills to be applied they must first be learnt. In order to do this effectively, maths needs to be taught as a discrete subject. Whilst other core subjects, such as reading or writing, can be taught within an inquiry model, maths cannot. For the use of maths to be effective in inquiry, the focus must be on the outcome, not the process. When, then, will the process be taught?
Coverage also becomes an issue. The very nature of inquiry means that the journey is unpredictable. How can we ensure that the demands of the curriculum are met through inquiry if we donít know where the children want to go with it? The suggestion of keeping a class for 2 years to make sure they get through a cycle has merit, but I expect both parents and teachers would have mixed attitudes. I enjoyed my class last year but I expect I would have had a breakdown of some sort if I had the same mix for another year. Familiarity breeds contempt.
ReplyDeleteThe issue of learning report papers being difficult to manage seems to be a minor reasons for discontinuing interchange. I would suggest that childrenís sheets are kept accessible in their maths room for both children and adults and, when required, the children bring their learning reports to maths and transfer their papers. They can be easily returned to their maths room after the SLC.
I am quite happy to discuss these issues with you all, but can we please agree that the final decision must be made before the end of this term and for everyone to be made aware of what that decision is.
ìWe spent so long wondering if we could, we never stopped to think if we should.î
Ian Malcolm, Chaotician
Having pondered on our discussion many weeks ago, the implementation of karawhiua in the junior end of the school presents a few challenges. I have been intiating my year one class in various ways giving them more room to take more control of their learning. Generally this is in a grouped learning consolidation activity scenerio where the students can choose from a range of appropriate activities. They tend to start off doing the activity in the previously taught fashion but with extended time and frequency there is a strong tendency to experiment with the game or equipment in ways that are not focused on the learning intention that was intended. This is not necessarily a bad thing as developmentally, children of this age are expected to learn through experimentation, but this does seem to distract from goal of the lesson at first glance. I think an intiation at this level is a good start and plants the seed to be nurtured as they develop through their time at school.
ReplyDelete