Beyond a Blackboard

 This morning I taught maths to a large group (around 21) of Y7/8 students performing well below in maths. In Geometry (our current focus), most of these students were around a year three level. Perfect for my intervention! I was excited by the opportunity to teach a full lesson in the style of my intervention. With a range of activities and videos up my sleeve I devoted the full 80 minutes to teaching the students about the properties of shapes. Some of our investigating included: A triangle is still a triangle if it is 'upside down' and 'sideways' There are different types of triangle A square has to have the same length sides or it is a rectangle  A rhombus is not a wonky square Not every 5+ sided shape is a hexagon - there's a name for each! The students actually loved learning these things! I was so pleasantly surprised by their level of engagement and willingness to ask questions when all of the tasks were at their level and presented in different ways. At one

 Towards the end of term 2 I had a rude awakening: I had a term left of my inquiry before starting maternity leave!! Due to this, I needed to fast track my intervention. It was really tempting to fall back on my 2017 dissertation, in which I had a hugely successful intervention in maths that really changed my practice for the better. As I critiqued my current practice, I could feel myself falling back on this. It was hard not to examine myself through a narrow lens; what am I not doing now that has worked well in the past? Obviously it is important to use past inquiries - 'don't throw the baby out with the bath water'. But simply going back to an old intervention felt like a cop out. I had to at least build on it and adapt it. As I identified a weakness in my practice for teaching early maths knowledge and strategies, I decided to try something different. I investigated the style of teaching - the teaching process in our new entrants hub. Key Learnings - When the maths itse

 After consulting research about what could be considered 'best practice' in teaching mathematics, I need to compare my findings with my current practice. After looking at my planning/ class site, student blogs and chatting to my students, there are a few things I can see I have strengths in and some that I need to work on. PROS Curriculum knowledge This has always been one of my strengths. I was real nerd at university and have attended a fair bit of PD over the years to ensure I have a good understanding of what is expected at each level of the curriculum. As such, I can offer students content that is appropriate for their level of learning. A lot of the content I have historically made covers level 4 achievement objectives - appropriate for year 7 and 8. Hill, Rowan and Ball (2005) identify that teachers knowledge directly affects their students achievement. It has been a common theme I have seen across literature, but there is a lot more to teaching maths. Basic Facts I hav

 At a recent inquiry meeting, Clarelle mentioned that her testing revealed that her students gaps were like a sieve; each child had different gaps in different areas with little overlap.  I can definitely say the same about my class; the gaps have common themes but differ with each child. A common theme I have found; the difference between my year sevens and eights is huge. My year eights consistently outperform my year sevens and have fewer gaps, except for in extenuating circumstances (e.g. two girls whose attendance was below 50 percent for years of their schooling).As such, I am going to do almost a year level split in my class in terms of my grouping. Another common theme is that my year sevens tend to have strengths in number, but their strand and ratio knowledge is massively lacking.  After dedicating almost ten weeks to filling in all number and ratio gaps, I now have to attend to the gaps that the children have in strand. Like I mentioned before, while I can generally say the

 After reading about how Irish and Swedish teachers facilitate more memorisation of facts than in New Zealand, I decided to read a little further about 'rote learning'. I found this article with information about the rote learning of basic facts. While it contains some things I am already familiar with - the fact that knowledge of basic facts such as times tables frees up cognitive load and enables children to solve more complex problems. The level of memorisation required by students is automaticity - they need instant recall. For example, do you know off the top of your head, do you know the 15th letter of the alphabet? What about 4 x 8? 8,16... is not automatic - it needs to be something that comes straight to mind. Otherwise there is still some cognitive load. In order to reach this level of automaticity, it seems like a variety of approaches is needed. Students need to be exposed to basic facts in different contexts, multiple times to commit them to memory. I think this i

This week I had a go at creating a hands on create activity - a video to teach other students the three times tables. This was at the end of teaching three weeks on the three times table.  Times tables are another aspect of maths that my students are behind on. My advanced year eights could do them in their sleep, but for my 'at' or below students and all of my year sevens, they are a real struggle! I hope by exploring concepts in different contexts my learners will master them!