1. Virden Junior High Friday, February 3 rd, 2012

2. How do we sit in the rest of the world? Based on the most recent PISA results, Canada still sits quite high in terms of the international stage—about 5 th. Manitoba however, sits only above 1 other province in Reading and Math/Science in 2009. All provinces have seen a drop, but while we did sit about 6 th in 2006, we dropped to 9 th in 2009. Locally in Fort La Bosse, we do look at Provincial classroom based data at Grade 3 and 7, and Provincial Standards Tests scores at Grade 12.

3. Why have we seen this drop? I don’t know that we can put our finger on 1 reason, certainly in regards to curricula, we are operating under an identical curriculum to our neighbours. Perhaps some other provinces have more resources than we do? Certainly there is more autonomy for Manitoba teachers and classrooms in regards to “gate-keeping”

4. Trevor Brown—one lesson learned. We need to run our math classrooms more like our ELA classrooms---less isolation/chunks/units, but more immersion. We need for our kids to see the big picture—how it all connects—the skill/arthimetic “stuff” with the conceptual understanding/real world math. We have kids that may know an algorithm or steps, but have no idea when to apply it. Realistically, it’s that tough stuff---the algebra, geometry etc. that our FLB students are lacking in, and consequently its our Pre-Calc and Applied kids that we are seeing the dropping scores---not our Consumer Math stream.

5. Can we realistically hit all strands everyday in Math? Would we ever teach Reading in Sept/October, and then Writing in November/December and Speaking etc.? Can we start every class with oral work? Can we commit to “show me boards”, or some way that we can quickly pull information from kids from all strands? What better way to get a quick gauge or Assessment FOR Learning of where your kids are at?

6. My “Holly-ism”…. I think we in a time where we are torn between two worlds….we don’t think our kids know the calculation like we did, but we still are having trouble buying in to a conceptual/problem solving philosophy? I think we find ourselves in a quandary similar to the days of the Whole Language versus Phonics. And I think our kids are caught in the middle of that scenario. I think we are sending 4 groups of kids onto the high school level…

7. Weak Calculators-Weak Conceptual Knowledge Those are our lower end students…..we all have them, and likely always will. They don’t know their basic facts, they can’t remember steps. They do not have a strong conceptual base either, and are stumped and give up easily when given a problem that involves real thinking.

8. Strong Calculators-Strong Conceptual Knowledge I think we will always have these kids too….you know the ones, that know all of their facts, and just “get it” when you throw out those really difficult, thinking problems. These are the kids that despite any mistakes I might make as the teacher, will be successful despite us.

9. Weak Calculators-Strong Conceptual Knowledge I think this a group we don’t always realize the potential of. They perhaps don’t have strong marks, and don’t necessarily score well on our summative tests. They do however have strong reasoning and problem solving skills. These kids are the ones that may very well go to be very successful, but if we were streaming them, we might not think they have sufficient skills.

10. Strong Calculators-Weak Conceptual Knowledge I think this is a group that we sometimes overinflate their ability and potential. These are the kids that typically score well in our classrooms, complete all assignments, know their basic facts etc. and generally make our life easier. In no way would this be a group of kids that we would ever flag or consider “at risk”. They have very good work habits, and they are quite successful in math. Without a strong conceptual knowledge base however, they may face real difficulties in higher level math courses to come….or real life math problems they face.

11. Can we balance them both? I think we can, and I think right now we have a situation in which we have one foot in each….but are not being successful in either. I think having our kids immersed in problem solving situations…. “making them think” situations will be a great benefit. I think for us as educators, we need to be prepared to accept that we also don’t know the answers to some problems, and that some of our students may be better at it than we are, not unlike our transition to ICT.

12. Open-Ended Problems Is an instructional strategy that creates interest and stimulates creative mathematical activity in the classroom through students’ collaborative work. Emphasizes the process of problem solving activities rather than focusing on the result. Students participate more actively in lessons expressing their own ideas, more opportunities to make use of their mathematical skills and knowledge, and sometimes it may be the students that you least expect that contribute. The experience is rich and encourages discovery rather than us just giving answers.

13. Open-Ended Problems …. Open-ended problems can be one solution, with a multitude of strategies to achieve it. Often some strategies are more or less sophisticated. Or, they can be multiple solutions to one problem. They involve higher-order thinking of our students. Sometimes it’s just a matter of re-wording the problems we already have. It involves group work, so it often is messy and noisy, but the benefits are tremendous.

14. Re-wording problems we have.. From this… Which of the following numbers are prime? 7, 57, 67, 117 To…. Fred thinks that 57 and 67 are prime because they both end in 7, which is a prime number. Dick says he is wrong. Who is correct and why?

15. More examples… From this…. Find the LCM of 18 and 24 To…. Why can't 48 be the LCM of 18 and 24?

16. Can we meet somewhere in the middle? Can we balance our classrooms with both arithmetic and mathematics?