Sometimes it’s the littlest things that make a big difference

A friend of mine teaches kindergarten. She’s an amazing and engaging teacher. I was, literally, just hanging out in her classroom one day while she was teaching her math lesson. When I asked what concept she would be teaching, she replied “lesson 1.8 from the KA book” – yep she’s that organized.

After the lesson, she asked me for two yeahs and two hmmms from her lesson. When I observe teachers, I try to focus more on the students’ understanding during a lesson and how that relates to what the teacher was doing. Put on the spot then, I mentioned that sometimes she spoke too quietly. I think the students missed some of the discussion. Right away, I knew that was a lame thing to say. When I do teacher observations, I typically take time reflect before sharing my thoughts. So the next day I went back with better insight.

Her lesson had been strong. There was a focus on the key concept of sorting objects into groups, manipulatives were used (stuffed animals and school supplies), there were opportunities for extension. Overall, it was a well-planned lesson. And yet, the students weren’t as engaged as I would have expected. I typically use the 5 Whys technique to get me quickly to the root of a problem. As I reflected on the lesson, my internal dialogue was:

  1. I noticed that the teacher sometimes speaks too quietly for the kids to hear her. Why?
  2. Well, actually, she’s speaking loudly, then softly. She’s trying to be very engaging to a class of new kindergarteners. Why is she working so hard?
  3. She can see the kids are wiggly and having trouble focusing. Why are they having this trouble?
  4. They are sitting at their tables, spread out across the room,  four to a table, facing each other. They are focusing on each other, instead of the teacher. Why are they at tables?
  5. They’re at tables because they are going to work in their workbooks after the discussion part of the lesson. Aha!

So I say to the teacher:

What if the discussion (or teacher-directed) part of the lesson, with the stuffed animals and the school supplies, took place on the rug? Isn’t that where you do most of your other critical, ‘Hey kids, I need your attention work’ with the students? Then, when you are done discussing the concept, in this case, sorting objects into groups, the students can go back to their tables for the guided practice part of the lesson, and work in their workbooks.

“Doh!”, says my friend,” why didn’t I think of that? I always introduce lessons and give directions on the rug. You have changed the way I am going to teach math, forever” and then we had a High Five! moment. Because she is a friend, after all and sometimes we tend towards hyperbole…. Not all observation discussions are as full of love and happiness.

Take note, though. This teacher ASKED for feedback from a random lesson I had wandered in on and was open to ideas to improve a pretty good lesson.

And when put on the spot, I gave an analysis I might otherwise have not. Reflecting on the lesson led us to dig deeper into the what was really happening in the classroom. In the end, it yielded an “aha!” moment that will change the way the students experience this teacher’s  math lessons.

 

Share:

One School’s Challenges with Singapore Math

D.C.’s Bruce-Monroe school faces challenges as it tries Singapore math method
The Washington Post 6/6/2011

If you’ve been wondering what the difficulties are when implementing Singapore math, look no further. This school in D.C. has them all; school closures, lack of enough professional development, mobile student and teacher population, and it’s a dual-language school. Standardized test scores dropped significantly after the change to Singapore math.

The story  evoked responses from many in education. Joane Jacobs mused:

The fact that it ( Singapore Math) requires elementary teachers to understand math well has to be a serious obstacle.

In a letter to the editor dated June 14, 2011, Dr. Alan Ginsburg suggested that the problem at Bruce-Monroe may be bigger than just the Singapore math adoption. He pointed out that the school’s reading scores

declined by 15 percentage points in a single year, and Hispanic students’ scores declined by 21 percentage points.

Bill Jackson, in another great Daily Riff article (Going Beyond Singapore Math: Resisting Quick Fixes), ennumerates the complex issues behind plunking a program like Singapore math into the American classroom.

While most educators familiar with Singapore math agree that it is not the oft-quoted “silver bullet”, Jackson reminds us that:

if we keep throwing out promising ideas just because they don’t immediately improve scores on tests whose quality is questionable at best we’re doomed to repeating the haphazard and fragmented reform efforts that got us here in the first place.

He closes with a word to schools that are currently using Singapore math:

I would like to say that you are definitely moving in the right direction. There will be challenges along the way but they are the same ones you would face with any math program and they can be overcome if you understand the bigger issues behind effective math teaching and learning.

Faced with so many challenges, it’s impressive that Bruce Monroe’s  instructional coach, Nuhad Jamal remains upbeat about the school’s Singapore math adoption.

 

Share:

Singapore Math School Videos

Two videos were recently published by schools that adopted Singapore math programs last school year.

Melrose Elementary School Mathematics/Science/Technology Magnet has seen impressive results with its new Singapore Math program, Primary Mathematics. Math Coach Lacy Endo-Peery announced:

We had a 32% increase in students who were advanced or proficient in Math last year. Our students went from 43% to 75 % in one year!

The school has put together an informative 8-minute video about their experiences with Singapore Math. It’s always helpful to hear teachers sharing the reasons why Singapore math works with their students, the importance of sustained training, and why the school selected Singapore math.

[vimeo]http://vimeo.com/25362323[/vimeo]

Singapore math materials tend to be light on practice for mastering math facts. To compensate for that, many schools supplement using the activity in the video referred to as a math sprint. These were designed by Professor Yoram Sagher (also in the video) and are used widely in U.S. schools. While sprints are designed to help students become fluent with computation, they are not a part of the Singapore math curriculum. (Sprint books for teachers are available at SingaporeMath.com.)


Reynolds School District in Fairview, Oregon is expecting student achievement to rise with their adoption of the Math in Focus version of  Singapore math materials. Before the adoption, the 12 elementary schools in the district were using different curricula, which was an issue for students that changed schools within the district. In the video, both teachers and students report how much they like the visual component of the materials.

[vimeo]http://vimeo.com/25147891[/vimeo]
Share:

Bar Model Method challenges

Photo taken in a third grade classroom using Primary Mathematics. The teacher had posted the question on the board and students recorded the question and their solution in a math journal.

Discuss.

Share:

Experts weigh in on Singapore Math

I found some interesting interviews with noted mathematics experts, James Milgram and Ze’ev Wurman in a new blog called Math Experts – Q & A. The host, Pascal Blacque, asks mathematicians their opinions on current education trends.  Blaque states upfront that he is “concerned about the ‘reform math’ program” in his daughter’s school.

Here’s Milgram on Everyday Math:

There is a pretty good program hidden inside EM.  But no more than 1 in 500 teachers are capable of locating and delivering it.  However, that one teacher would almost certainly be able to do better on her own.

Both Milgram and Wurman are pretty warm and fuzzy on Singapore Math, though.  From the interview with Milgram (full interview):

Q&A: If you had to pinpoint two/three main deficiencies in EM (Everyday Math) and Singapore, what would they be?
JM: There are no major deficiencies in the Singapore program, just a few points where it could be better than it is.  On the other hand, the recommended lessons in EM are mostly useless.
From the interview with Wurman (full interview):
Q&A: If you had to rate EDM (Everyday Math) vs. Singapore Math in achieving real math proficiency, what would be your ranking on 1-10 scale (10 being best) for each program?
ZW: Proficiency is hard to define. I would use the preparation for an authentic Algebra 1 course (Nat’l Advisory Math Panel definition) instead.
TERC = 2,
EDM = 4,
Saxon = 7 or 8,
Singapore (Primary Math) = 10
Both interviews are informative reads.
Enjoy!
Share: