I am a big believer in the brain governing a lot of what goes on in our minds. I think it determines so much of our personalities and our processing of information (I'm not a neurologist so I can't put it eloquently!). What I know is that I am better at math now than I was when I was supposed to learn it, and I chalk that up to to the fact I'm no longer a 12 or 13 year old girl (and even so, I'm not good at it).
Specifically, I think what has changed is my ability to not let a math problem overwhelm me and make me want to quit. So, am I better at math, or am I better at not giving up? I'm not sure. I think maybe I have learned what it means to have a productive struggle in other areas of life (as one of the articles suggested we need to teach kids to have productive struggles by way of providing emotional support) and this lesson has trickled over into other, more specific tasks, like math. The key, I think, is the emotional support component. My dad does not have the most patience in the world, and I remember when I was in middle school, he got so frustrated that I couldn't understand whatever my math homework was that he was helping me with that he threw the pencil down on the table in frustration, himself. I am certain this did not bode well for my future performance in math (and I probably remember it because I read somewhere once that we remember things that have an emotional experience attached best).
Anyway, the article that debunks the idea that, as far as reading goes, the earlier the better, was interesting. I did not have trouble learning to read and consider myself more of a language arts person than a math person (how's that for categorizing people--there was an article critiquing the "learning styles" theory, saying that they "categorize kids, not celebrate their differences"). Whether that is because I am a female or my parents read to me a lot as a child, I have no idea. But I think, too often, people want to completely rid society and education of its stereotypes. I think we need to work WITH them and believe, not in a world without stereotypes, but in the power of the brain (and good teachers) to change the ones we don't want to prove correct. In my experience, most girls I know are much better at communicating than they are at solving a math problem. It is what it is--but it doesn't have to spell trouble if we work with it.
I also appreciated this point from one of the articles:
"...You hear this rhetoric about there being this and that type of learner, but no one really gives students the opportunity to learn in different ways in the math classroom."
In my first week in the classroom, I started to show a kid (4th grade) how to add two 3 digit numbers using the "traditional, U.S." algorithm" (stacking the numbers and "carrying" the tens value) and was told not to do that because they hadn't learned it yet. What the heck, I thought! How can you tell a person not to teach a kid something? I thought it was ridiculous and insulting to the kid, honestly. So to answer the second question, I don't think it's a sensitivity to learning styles or multiple intelligences that leads to a teacher's understanding of his or her students, but a sensitivity to the fact the kid isn't something to categorize and be afraid of, essentially. I never even understood the idea of a kid being a "kinesthetic" learner--I always thought of that being the kid who likes gym. If we were to give that idea credit, how would you have a kinesthetically intelligent child learn to read? At some point, you have to just pick up a book. I just don't think you can subscribe to one very linear idea and let it guide your entire teaching. -Lauren
Lauren, I like your very thoughtful comments and the fact you related so much to yourself. I hope you can develop a strategy to help your students "not quit." That would be very positive! BTW, of my 3 children, 2 girls and a boy, my girls are the ones who got math much more quickly, so don't let stereotypes get in your way! Nancy
My own experiences in literacy and math vary greatly. I loved math as a child because to me, math problems were a logical question with a straightforward answer you could figure out. By using helpful strategies and tools, you could find the correct answer. However, I felt very differently about literacy. Reading was not something I liked to do, and had to be bribed by my parents each night, weekend and summer vacation to get some type of reading done. Thus, I have learned that stereotyping boys and girls into math and literacy wizards is not appropriate for anyone to assume.
I believe teachers need to challenge students who love math by giving them harder problems, and they need to spend time with students who do not love math by teaching them strategies to get to the answer. Similarly with literacy, some students need to be challenged with comprehension questions and writing prompts, and others need to learn phonemic tricks to de-code words so they can understand the text. However, it is the job of the teacher to make sure each student gets appropriate exposure to both math and literacy. Any student regardless of their gender can excel in any subject, but they need the support and confidence to make it happen.
As for various learning styles and Howard Gardner’s idea of multiple intelligences, I do believe people learn in different ways. However, when you learn a new concept, there is a lot that goes into processing the information (i.e. visual and auditory). Thus, I believe it is the role of the teacher to incorporate all types of learning styles into delivering instruction; so all students can access the information. For example, teachers can incorporate kinesthetic movements into math and interpersonal skills into a small group science lesson. By incorporating all these methods of learning, the hope is each teacher can reach all of his/her students.
I agree with everything you said. Do you like reading now?
I never "got" Gardner's view, but it does have research behind it. I think you reach your students however you can, even if it means letting them do more of what they like than what is expected/required. Nancy
First off, and more as an aside, I will say how notable it is to read, yet again, that some theory about something has been debunked or challenged. As we learned from the various articles, some researchers now contend that catering to various learning styles does NOT bear a role on actual learning and some researchers now contest the emphasis on cultivating early reading. Be it because the methods of the studies were flawed or new information/revelations uncovered, it’s amazing how fleeting the “answers”.
In any event, when I reflect on my own experience with learning reading and math, I don’t have much to plumb. Alas, I don’t remember ever really struggling with reading but I do remember not being particularly excited by it. I recall going to library class while in elementary school and always walking about listlessly trying to find something that I liked. Similarly, I remember walking into the “Book Mobile” bus that would occasionally come to school, and having no idea where or for what to look. To further thwart my interest in reading, books were not a big focus in my home.
In spite of this, after college, I did occasionally get into a good book and was a member of many a book club in my 20’s but my interest and enthusiasm could never be sustained. However, much to my surprise, a love of reading did finally blossom in my early 30’s via a chance encounter with the book by John Krakauer, Into Thin Air. (My roommate was reading it and it was left on the kitchen counter.) After reading this true account about a man’s death-defying ascent of Mount Everest, I started reading every narrative non-fiction book about adventure that I could get my hands on. A few years later, I started gravitating to non-fiction crime and then to historical non-fiction. A true passion for reading was unexpectedly born.
My memories about math are no more vivid. I remember really liking it and excelling at it up into the 5th grade. I have a memory of me sitting in math class, looking at my teacher, Mrs. O’Neill, and struggling with some problem she was explaining and thinking “Oh my God, I don’t like math anymore.” Even though I continued to do fairly well in it and took rigorous courses, my zest for it was never regained.
According to Plomin, “Genetic influence on IQ becomes more pronounced during development.” Moreover, there seems to be a “genotype-environment correlation: as children grow up, they increasingly select, modify, and even create their own experiences, partly on the basis of their genetic propensities. A child genetically inclined toward high verbal skills might choose to read more, enhancing those skills.”
This made me think about the role that chance plays (that was not touched-upon). For me, with reading, I came upon a certain genre of book that I had never really read (adventure narrative non-fiction) by chance and it became the gateway to my interest in reading. With my decreased excitement in math, who knows, maybe the teacher wasn’t very good and squelched my interest? What would have been my experience if I had had a different teacher?
Finally, I appreciated the last sentence of Plomin’s article. “The relationship between knowledge and value is complicated, but there is nothing to be gained by pretending human differences do not exist.” There is so much (understandable) sensitivity around not labeling kids but at the same time, how do we effectively differentiate our teaching if we do not differentiate learner’s aptitude?
1. I found the brain research articles very interesting. The idea that our brains do not depend on our biology is difficult to believe at first, but the article offers legitimate examples of how this type of brain exercise works and the effects that it has on people. It’s hopeful to believe that students who struggle in school can exercise their brain and be better equipped to learn to read, do math, etc. As a young student (elementary-middle school), I didn’t really struggle in school. Reading came easily to me, and math wasn’t too great of a challenge. I continued onto high school and college, reading and writing were my strengths. However, as I got older, I really had to work hard in math and foreign languages. I felt at times that one of the reasons that I struggled in these disciplines was because of the memorization that was required, something that was not my strong point. Perhaps this says something about my way my brain is made up, but perhaps it’s just who I am. This brain research is exciting and interesting, but I wonder if there are downfalls with interfering with where students have strengths and who students are as learners and as members of our society.
2. I think that including multiple learning styles into a curriculum can help teachers understand their students better. They have the opportunity to find out what kind of activity or delivery of content motivates and engages each individual student. Beyond getting to know individual students, and beyond the question of whether or not learning styles are legitimate, I feel that it’s important for teachers to present curriculum content through as many mediums as possible. As students experience the curriculum topics in more than one way (for example, using auditory and kinesthetic techniques) they can begin to understand such topics more deeply. It may or may not be true that some students are definitively auditory, visual, or kinesthetic learners, but the fact remains that including different types of activities into the curriculum can only provide a fuller investigation of curriculum topics.
1. I have always found the research on the brain and its link to education completely fascinating. What I really connected with from the articles I read for this class and in my own research is how much physical movement is important and essential to brain activity. As a dance major in college, I was well aware of this concept and always tie it into my teaching. Another topic I have a sincere interest in is the Multiple Intelligences and studying students based on where their strengths and weaknesses are in terms of MI makes complete sense to me. I remember in my own schooling, whenever instruction in reading and mathematics was taken from the approach of MI, I strived. I did not do well with rote memorization, but when I could visually see and touch math manipulatives and have scaffolding through auditory assistance with reading, my engagement and learning increased significantly. I struggled in both reading and math as a student but when instruction was taken from the multiple perspectives that appealed to me, I began to succeed. It is so important to present teaching from a multiple modality perspective, as students are able to get excited and truly understand their learning. 2. I absolutely believe that an emphasis on learning styles or multiple intelligences adds to a teacher’s understanding of his or her students. When teachers take the time to really find out how their students take in, process, and understand material through whatever modality that may be, teachers are able to reach and truly teach students. There are so many students who benefit from a MI model of teaching for it brings alive and solidifies information that would normally not connect with them in the same way. Through MI, learning becomes student-centered and begins to develop positive learning experiences.
I enjoyed the readings about the brain very enlightening and interesting. I have always found math a challenge but I agree with the article about saying that in a nurturing environment challenge can be good for students to help foster their own understanding of math. Maybe if I had been in a math environment in which my teachers challenged me but let me try to figure out the math for myself I would have different results. I struggled with reading because of a hearing problem I had as a child, my love of reading was inspired by my father reading to me every night as a child. That made me think of the article about how poverty affects brains, if the parents are unable to read to a child the child may never form a love of reading and may have limited access to books. I do believe that an understanding of multiple intelligences and learning styles is immensely important to teachers. This can help teachers inspire students success by finding and cultivating their learning styles. In the classroom I'm in now, I always notice how the teacher tries to explain things in different ways, by modeling things to students, telling them and writing down directions. She is always trying to figure out what works for students and what doesn't. Test results don't give the whole picture of a student and students need to feel that they can be successful even if its in a completely different way from another classmate.
I really enjoyed reading the Yeung article and was able to make several connections to what I'm seeing now in second grade. It's clear that powering on through your frustration makes the feeling of success afterwards so much sweeter. When my students are having a really hard time with math, I try to guide them toward other ways of solving the problem. There are many kids who can solve everything in their heads, but there are a decent number of kids who rely on snapcubes and other manipulatives, or drawing (making dots or lines to signify numbers and then adding more, or crossing them out to subtract). The problem is, most of them need to be constantly reminded that they can do these things. Usually, they stare at the worksheet and get so upset that they can't figure out the answer, and call me over to say they don't get it. Once I say, “Okay, now what are some ways you know that we can figure this out?” they start to remember that there's a stack of hundreds charts on the table, or a box of snapcubes they can use. It's frustrating for me, though, that they never seem to remember these options, even though they just used them yesterday. In this way, I think emphasizing different learning styles is extremely valuable, because not each child is able to do math the same way. If we expected all of the kids to solve problems using the same strategies, half the class wouldn't be able to do it. I just learned this week that we're not teaching our kids to “carry the one” anymore in second grade. This was very hard for me to comprehend because I feel like I have to retrain myself to do math now. I have to relearn addition and subtraction the way it's being taught so that I don't send any mixed messages. It's also an issue because parents who learned the standard algorithm like we did are teaching it at home, and the kids come in and are totally confused because it's not being reinforced in school. I wonder if we should be communicating with families so they are aware of how their children are being taught math in school. Many of the parents who want to help don't realize how and what their kids are learning. I haven't encountered many kids who don't like math. So far, the lessons are full of enough games and manipulatives to keep it fun for them. The biggest problem I've seen is students getting bored with doing the same things regularly. Usually, there's an introduction to the lesson followed by a few pages of work in their Investigations books. When they're done, they can choose math activities like games with their friends, number scrolls or graph art to fill the rest of the time. Some students need all of the time to do their book work, but the ones who consistently finish quickly are getting bored with the options because they don't change very often. I'm not sure how to fix this situation, because I'm usually helping the kids who have difficulty with the problems in the book. I'm still trying to figure out how to balance my time so the students who don't have trouble don't feel ignored or under-challenged.
I was told my reply was too long for one post! Here's the rest of it:
On a personal note, the Richardson article cracked me up because my father told me and my brother at least 10,000 times that we should have “a sound mind in a sound body.” He's in his 60s now and still goes to the gym almost every day. We used to find it so irritating that he was always pushing us to exercise when we felt like being lazy, but now I realize how important it is. When I exercise in the morning, I always have a more productive day. I feel quicker and sharper, and my self-confidence is high. Similarly, I've noticed that after Gym, students are more likely to settle down for Writing Workshop faster and are more able to concentrate on the task at hand. I wish they could go to Gym more than twice a week because to me, it seems much more beneficial than something like Music, which they all complain about. I know that it's important for them to learn to use computers, but they also seem to get bored and complain about feeling sleepy in the computer lab, which is stuffy and dark. I wonder if going to Gym during those times instead would have a positive impact.
Great thoughts and comments on the readings. I agree with your feelings of exercise. I'm impressed with your father because it certainly was not understood in my or my parents generation, so he must be very young in spirit!
I wish my students had gym twice a week! They have gym once a week, the last period on Friday, and every other week they have class game time in the afternoon as well. I wonder whether it would be possible for you, during your takeover weeks, to take your students on short neighborhood walks instead of going to the computer lab. It could be an opportunity for students to observe people/plants/animals in the surrounding school area, or if there is some park or something with an art piece in it, it could be a walk to that destination, where you all, as a class, examine, talk, and/or copy/draw that artwork on sheets of paper. I firmly believe that fresh air and natural light are good for students!
Just a few thoughts on the articles: I found the article on the "myth" of different learning styles a bit surprising. Throughout most of our time at Lesley we have learned about different learning styles and alternate approaches to reach kids. I found it interesting that an article would try to debunk that theory
I like the idea of exercise stimulating the brain, and of schools encouraging more physical activity. It promotes all around healthy living of body and mind.
When I worked at a summer camp I developed a plan to have the kids write their own comic book. We learned about the development of a hero, we learned about the "problem" of the story or the conflict and we learned about resolution. It was a great way to keep the kids engaged and even allowed time to draw the scenes from the story.
Recently in math, we started a unit called Field Trips And Fundraisers. It was started to enhance students' learning of the concept of fractions. The whole class is given a problem of how to divide--let's say--17 subs among 21 students. The teacher's role is to pose the problem, and allow the students to come up with their own strategies to solve the problem. Even if they are wrong we step back and allow them to talk amongst themselves to continue with the work.
I think understanding different learning styles is important in a teacher's growth as an educator. Regardless of whether or not you will implement different teaching strategies it is important to have those available to you. It will help us differeniate and it will help us come up with new lessons to excite and engage students.
I have thought a lot about our society's desire to teach our children to read and write at younger and younger ages, primarily because of my experience teaching in a preschool for the past 3 years. Some parents wanted their children to be more academically challenged, while others primarily wanted their children to learn social behaviors and emotional skills. As my preschool had been play-based, we would have to explain why certain games or modes of playing were teaching the children solid foundations for later academic work--their work was to play. My coworkers and I often shared articles relating to the development of a child's brain and academic skills. We honed in (of course) on those articles which supported our play-based philosophy. A coworker read an article that discussed the rising population of young children needing to wear glasses, and related it to the push for preschoolers to be focusing their eyes on texts and screens before their eye-brain connection was developmentally ready. There have been many articles published on the topic of Finland's educational policy of explicitly NOT teaching reading and writing until the age of 7, and their students rank among the best in the world. The article "Brain Research May point to Changes in Literacy Development" seems to support the articles I have read previously. Specifically, the statement, "New brain-imaging technologies and a spate of recent studies suggest that reading aptitude is better understood as a spectrum of abilities related to biological architecture than as a universally acquirable skill," makes me question the push towards ensuring that all students are beginning to read by the end of kindergarten. I know that personally, I did not learn how to read until first grade. I never thought anything of it until a few years ago, having noticed preschoolers decoding sounds on their own and kindergarteners reading independently. When I asked my mom about it, she stated that I had been busy learning other skills. I was very focused on playing with my younger brother (he's about 18 months younger) as well as navigating my first friendships, and had grown up the first 2 years or so of my life bilingual, which meant i was, in some ways, slightly delayed with my English vocabulary. I do remember that, in elementary school, we thought the students who had learned how to read at age 4 must be especially smart (coincidentally (or not?) the girl who had learned at an early age also wore glasses). On the other hand, my younger sister (8 years younger), was especially motivated to learn how to read, as her playmates (my brother and I) could read very well.
I definitely agree with the article that discusses having flexibility during math lessons to allow students to struggle and learn how to solve mathematical problems in their own way. My mother has told me how my first grade year, I never seemed to grasp math. My brother and I were then put in a montessori school for my second grade year, and through the montessori manipulatives and methods, I was able to become a solid math student. I cannot say that I was especially great at math after that, primarily because it did not hold an interest for me, but after that year, I was able to consistently grasp new concepts and theories and succeed (my desire was always in getting the answer so that I could move on, while those who do enjoy math enjoy the process of solving the equation).
It was good to read about how important physical movement is to our brain activity. I know that I feel slower in my brain when my body has not had much movement, and I have even started trying to add more exercise into my weekly routine, because I have noticed I am more alert and active when I have been physically active. I see the same trend with my students. Those students who stay in for recess often have even more trouble after recess in sitting still and focusing. When the whole class did not get their full recess time (which happens, more often than not, because the transitions from class to hallway to gathering the three 1st grade classes to finally going outside take too much time), the students struggle behaviorally, as well as academically. It is my hope, during my own takeover weeks, to ensure that all students get out for recess every day.
I was also pleased to read the report about debunked learning styles. It never made sense to me that one learned primarily visually, auditorily, or kinesthetically, as I knew I could do all three, and hated when others would say they couldn't understand unless they had it in one the three styles. Howard Gardner's theory about the multiple intelligences still makes sense to me, as I considered the different intelligences to be more similar to personality traits. That means, in my view, that there will be topics and ways of learning that come more naturally because we are more naturally interested in them. It does not mean that we exclude an intelligence because we are not strong in it. As with anything, to fully understand an idea or topic, one has to approach it from multiple perspectives. This is where I feel that the creative arts modalities are essential to learning and teaching. Using the arts forces teachers and students to approach lessons with new perspectives and interest. I know that personally, my education growing up allowed me to learn within the multiple art modalities, and I know I learned a lot through them, since I can remember them so clearly.
I found the article about student learning styles being bunk to be fascinating. It prompted me to do a bit more research and I found a really great blog posting written by a PhD student and seasoned teacher on the topic,Tracy Rosen, titled "I no longer believe in learning styles. You?"*
Formerly an ardent proponent of the importance of getting to know the learning styles of one’s students in order to improve their learning in the classroom setting, she now sees things quite differently. She writes, “I have stopped testing for learning styles in my classroom. What I used to see as proof that the individual learning styles existed I now see as proof that learning happens when we have a variety of stimuli or input methods. I focus more on making sure there is a diversity of input – that the material I am presenting is being presented in a variety of manners. Rather than thinking of each students as having a dominant learning style, I think of how multiple forms of input help to solidify learning in everyone.”
Ultimately, she argues that teaching in various modalities is the right way to go “BUT that the decision to do so is about good teaching and not about accessing the preferred learning styles of students”.
I think this makes very good sense. The outcome doesn’t change (teachers should still differentiate and vary their teaching methods) but they should do so because it augments the general learning experience for everyone. It’s a subtle shift in thought, but I feel important and in some ways liberating because it could mean getting to know every student’s particular learning style (if that can even be measured) is not necessarily the best use of a teacher’s time.
1. I found the "Learning, Adaptations..." article very interesting to read because it really made me think about how I performed in math and reading as a young student and how that changed throughout the years. From second grade all the way up to junior year in high school, I despised reading. I was that student that had no interest in reading whatsoever because I felt "stupid" because I struggled with reading and also because I was not as fluent as the other students in my class. Junior year in high school I had an English teacher who loved reading! He pushed our class to read a novel every two weeks. With the practice (and of course a few books that really caught my interest in reading), I found a love for something I always hated. Today, I consider myself a good reader… and that leaves me wondering if my “training” in high school helped my white matter form connections.
I always enjoyed math as a child. However, when I got to algebra in 8th grade I really begun the struggle. The last quote of the “Kids Master Mathematics…” article helped tell it all:
"Motivation is a key aspect of achievement that we often ignore in math; it's the missing link," Schorr says. "We need to provide kids with conceptually challenging math problems in an emotionally safe environment, and the teacher plays a critical role in that. Kids can view frustration as an opportunity for success instead of an indication of failure, but that won't happen without teachers letting the students experience productive struggles."
I never felt like I was in a “safe emotional environment” in this classroom. We were expected to do problems the way our teacher taught them and we were never able to explore different ways of learning. I would go home every night in tears to my dad, who is really good at math, and he would go over the same problems with me and allow me to explore different methods and let me express my frustrations over each problem. At the end of every session with my dad, I felt good because I felt successful although I struggled. It is important to me as a teacher to allow my students in math to feel the same way my dad made me feel. I never want my students to feel frustrated, and unsafe like my teacher did.
2. I do believe exploring Multiple Intelligences and the different modes of learning are very important in understanding your students. By using the different methods, a teacher can investigate and reflect on where the students do their best work. If a teacher is able to engage the students and allow them to explore their best learning styles, learning for the students will be less of a struggle and more of a success.
Math was always a struggle for me. Even though it came easily to me, I convinced myself that I was terrible at it. At the same time, I was telling myself that I was more of a literacy-minded student, even though inferential comprehension and decoding strategies came slower for me than other students. Even though I have always considered myself to be creative (something that excelling in math would not imply), my strengths always showed in math and science. I believe, like the articles said, that this has something to do with my biology. I also believe that this was because math problems have a right answer and a wrong answer. No matter what, I was given instant feedback when I solved math problems. I knew immediately whether something was right or wrong. Being a child who did not want to take advice from anyone, the idea of producing something that did not have a right or wrong answer must have not sat right with me. Although I thrive on creativity as an adult-which I would like to believe is true for my child self-the idea of being wrong scared the crap out of me.
I don't think that it is a question as to whether or not multiple intelligences exist. Instead, I think the question is how we, as educators, can cater to those intelligences equally, so as to provide a balanced method of learning. The best part of having multiple intelligences, is that we can do so much with these differing perspectives. However, we are not allowing our students to explore these intelligences unless we can create a learning environment where different activities and subjects re engaging these multiple intelligences.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI am a big believer in the brain governing a lot of what goes on in our minds. I think it determines so much of our personalities and our processing of information (I'm not a neurologist so I can't put it eloquently!). What I know is that I am better at math now than I was when I was supposed to learn it, and I chalk that up to to the fact I'm no longer a 12 or 13 year old girl (and even so, I'm not good at it).
ReplyDeleteSpecifically, I think what has changed is my ability to not let a math problem overwhelm me and make me want to quit. So, am I better at math, or am I better at not giving up? I'm not sure. I think maybe I have learned what it means to have a productive struggle in other areas of life (as one of the articles suggested we need to teach kids to have productive struggles by way of providing emotional support) and this lesson has trickled over into other, more specific tasks, like math. The key, I think, is the emotional support component. My dad does not have the most patience in the world, and I remember when I was in middle school, he got so frustrated that I couldn't understand whatever my math homework was that he was helping me with that he threw the pencil down on the table in frustration, himself. I am certain this did not bode well for my future performance in math (and I probably remember it because I read somewhere once that we remember things that have an emotional experience attached best).
Anyway, the article that debunks the idea that, as far as reading goes, the earlier the better, was interesting. I did not have trouble learning to read and consider myself more of a language arts person than a math person (how's that for categorizing people--there was an article critiquing the "learning styles" theory, saying that they "categorize kids, not celebrate their differences"). Whether that is because I am a female or my parents read to me a lot as a child, I have no idea. But I think, too often, people want to completely rid society and education of its stereotypes. I think we need to work WITH them and believe, not in a world without stereotypes, but in the power of the brain (and good teachers) to change the ones we don't want to prove correct. In my experience, most girls I know are much better at communicating than they are at solving a math problem. It is what it is--but it doesn't have to spell trouble if we work with it.
I also appreciated this point from one of the articles:
"...You hear this rhetoric about there being this and that type of learner, but no one really gives students the opportunity to learn in different ways in the math classroom."
In my first week in the classroom, I started to show a kid (4th grade) how to add two 3 digit numbers using the "traditional, U.S." algorithm" (stacking the numbers and "carrying" the tens value) and was told not to do that because they hadn't learned it yet. What the heck, I thought! How can you tell a person not to teach a kid something? I thought it was ridiculous and insulting to the kid, honestly. So to answer the second question, I don't think it's a sensitivity to learning styles or multiple intelligences that leads to a teacher's understanding of his or her students, but a sensitivity to the fact the kid isn't something to categorize and be afraid of, essentially. I never even understood the idea of a kid being a "kinesthetic" learner--I always thought of that being the kid who likes gym. If we were to give that idea credit, how would you have a kinesthetically intelligent child learn to read? At some point, you have to just pick up a book. I just don't think you can subscribe to one very linear idea and let it guide your entire teaching.
-Lauren
Lauren,
ReplyDeleteI like your very thoughtful comments and the fact you related so much to yourself. I hope you can develop a strategy to help your students "not quit." That would be very positive! BTW, of my 3 children, 2 girls and a boy, my girls are the ones who got math much more quickly, so don't let stereotypes get in your way!
Nancy
My own experiences in literacy and math vary greatly. I loved math as a child because to me, math problems were a logical question with a straightforward answer you could figure out. By using helpful strategies and tools, you could find the correct answer. However, I felt very differently about literacy. Reading was not something I liked to do, and had to be bribed by my parents each night, weekend and summer vacation to get some type of reading done. Thus, I have learned that stereotyping boys and girls into math and literacy wizards is not appropriate for anyone to assume.
ReplyDeleteI believe teachers need to challenge students who love math by giving them harder problems, and they need to spend time with students who do not love math by teaching them strategies to get to the answer. Similarly with literacy, some students need to be challenged with comprehension questions and writing prompts, and others need to learn phonemic tricks to de-code words so they can understand the text. However, it is the job of the teacher to make sure each student gets appropriate exposure to both math and literacy. Any student regardless of their gender can excel in any subject, but they need the support and confidence to make it happen.
As for various learning styles and Howard Gardner’s idea of multiple intelligences, I do believe people learn in different ways. However, when you learn a new concept, there is a lot that goes into processing the information (i.e. visual and auditory). Thus, I believe it is the role of the teacher to incorporate all types of learning styles into delivering instruction; so all students can access the information. For example, teachers can incorporate kinesthetic movements into math and interpersonal skills into a small group science lesson. By incorporating all these methods of learning, the hope is each teacher can reach all of his/her students.
I agree with everything you said. Do you like reading now?
DeleteI never "got" Gardner's view, but it does have research behind it. I think you reach your students however you can, even if it means letting them do more of what they like than what is expected/required.
Nancy
First off, and more as an aside, I will say how notable it is to read, yet again, that some theory about something has been debunked or challenged. As we learned from the various articles, some researchers now contend that catering to various learning styles does NOT bear a role on actual learning and some researchers now contest the emphasis on cultivating early reading. Be it because the methods of the studies were flawed or new information/revelations uncovered, it’s amazing how fleeting the “answers”.
ReplyDeleteIn any event, when I reflect on my own experience with learning reading and math, I don’t have much to plumb. Alas, I don’t remember ever really struggling with reading but I do remember not being particularly excited by it. I recall going to library class while in elementary school and always walking about listlessly trying to find something that I liked. Similarly, I remember walking into the “Book Mobile” bus that would occasionally come to school, and having no idea where or for what to look. To further thwart my interest in reading, books were not a big focus in my home.
In spite of this, after college, I did occasionally get into a good book and was a member of many a book club in my 20’s but my interest and enthusiasm could never be sustained. However, much to my surprise, a love of reading did finally blossom in my early 30’s via a chance encounter with the book by John Krakauer, Into Thin Air. (My roommate was reading it and it was left on the kitchen counter.) After reading this true account about a man’s death-defying ascent of Mount Everest, I started reading every narrative non-fiction book about adventure that I could get my hands on. A few years later, I started gravitating to non-fiction crime and then to historical non-fiction. A true passion for reading was unexpectedly born.
My memories about math are no more vivid. I remember really liking it and excelling at it up into the 5th grade. I have a memory of me sitting in math class, looking at my teacher, Mrs. O’Neill, and struggling with some problem she was explaining and thinking “Oh my God, I don’t like math anymore.” Even though I continued to do fairly well in it and took rigorous courses, my zest for it was never regained.
According to Plomin, “Genetic influence on IQ becomes more pronounced during development.” Moreover, there seems to be a “genotype-environment correlation: as children grow up, they increasingly select, modify, and even create their own experiences, partly on the basis of their genetic propensities. A child genetically inclined toward high verbal skills might choose to read more, enhancing those skills.”
This made me think about the role that chance plays (that was not touched-upon). For me, with reading, I came upon a certain genre of book that I had never really read (adventure narrative non-fiction) by chance and it became the gateway to my interest in reading. With my decreased excitement in math, who knows, maybe the teacher wasn’t very good and squelched my interest? What would have been my experience if I had had a different teacher?
Finally, I appreciated the last sentence of Plomin’s article. “The relationship between knowledge and value is complicated, but there is nothing to be gained by pretending human differences do not exist.” There is so much (understandable) sensitivity around not labeling kids but at the same time, how do we effectively differentiate our teaching if we do not differentiate learner’s aptitude?
1. I found the brain research articles very interesting. The idea that our brains do not depend on our biology is difficult to believe at first, but the article offers legitimate examples of how this type of brain exercise works and the effects that it has on people. It’s hopeful to believe that students who struggle in school can exercise their brain and be better equipped to learn to read, do math, etc. As a young student (elementary-middle school), I didn’t really struggle in school. Reading came easily to me, and math wasn’t too great of a challenge. I continued onto high school and college, reading and writing were my strengths. However, as I got older, I really had to work hard in math and foreign languages. I felt at times that one of the reasons that I struggled in these disciplines was because of the memorization that was required, something that was not my strong point. Perhaps this says something about my way my brain is made up, but perhaps it’s just who I am. This brain research is exciting and interesting, but I wonder if there are downfalls with interfering with where students have strengths and who students are as learners and as members of our society.
ReplyDelete2. I think that including multiple learning styles into a curriculum can help teachers understand their students better. They have the opportunity to find out what kind of activity or delivery of content motivates and engages each individual student. Beyond getting to know individual students, and beyond the question of whether or not learning styles are legitimate, I feel that it’s important for teachers to present curriculum content through as many mediums as possible. As students experience the curriculum topics in more than one way (for example, using auditory and kinesthetic techniques) they can begin to understand such topics more deeply. It may or may not be true that some students are definitively auditory, visual, or kinesthetic learners, but the fact remains that including different types of activities into the curriculum can only provide a fuller investigation of curriculum topics.
1. I have always found the research on the brain and its link to education completely fascinating. What I really connected with from the articles I read for this class and in my own research is how much physical movement is important and essential to brain activity. As a dance major in college, I was well aware of this concept and always tie it into my teaching. Another topic I have a sincere interest in is the Multiple Intelligences and studying students based on where their strengths and weaknesses are in terms of MI makes complete sense to me. I remember in my own schooling, whenever instruction in reading and mathematics was taken from the approach of MI, I strived. I did not do well with rote memorization, but when I could visually see and touch math manipulatives and have scaffolding through auditory assistance with reading, my engagement and learning increased significantly. I struggled in both reading and math as a student but when instruction was taken from the multiple perspectives that appealed to me, I began to succeed. It is so important to present teaching from a multiple modality perspective, as students are able to get excited and truly understand their learning.
ReplyDelete2. I absolutely believe that an emphasis on learning styles or multiple intelligences adds to a teacher’s understanding of his or her students. When teachers take the time to really find out how their students take in, process, and understand material through whatever modality that may be, teachers are able to reach and truly teach students. There are so many students who benefit from a MI model of teaching for it brings alive and solidifies information that would normally not connect with them in the same way. Through MI, learning becomes student-centered and begins to develop positive learning experiences.
I enjoyed the readings about the brain very enlightening and interesting. I have always found math a challenge but I agree with the article about saying that in a nurturing environment challenge can be good for students to help foster their own understanding of math. Maybe if I had been in a math environment in which my teachers challenged me but let me try to figure out the math for myself I would have different results. I struggled with reading because of a hearing problem I had as a child, my love of reading was inspired by my father reading to me every night as a child. That made me think of the article about how poverty affects brains, if the parents are unable to read to a child the child may never form a love of reading and may have limited access to books.
ReplyDeleteI do believe that an understanding of multiple intelligences and learning styles is immensely important to teachers. This can help teachers inspire students success by finding and cultivating their learning styles. In the classroom I'm in now, I always notice how the teacher tries to explain things in different ways, by modeling things to students, telling them and writing down directions. She is always trying to figure out what works for students and what doesn't. Test results don't give the whole picture of a student and students need to feel that they can be successful even if its in a completely different way from another classmate.
I really enjoyed reading the Yeung article and was able to make several connections to what I'm seeing now in second grade. It's clear that powering on through your frustration makes the feeling of success afterwards so much sweeter. When my students are having a really hard time with math, I try to guide them toward other ways of solving the problem. There are many kids who can solve everything in their heads, but there are a decent number of kids who rely on snapcubes and other manipulatives, or drawing (making dots or lines to signify numbers and then adding more, or crossing them out to subtract). The problem is, most of them need to be constantly reminded that they can do these things. Usually, they stare at the worksheet and get so upset that they can't figure out the answer, and call me over to say they don't get it. Once I say, “Okay, now what are some ways you know that we can figure this out?” they start to remember that there's a stack of hundreds charts on the table, or a box of snapcubes they can use. It's frustrating for me, though, that they never seem to remember these options, even though they just used them yesterday. In this way, I think emphasizing different learning styles is extremely valuable, because not each child is able to do math the same way. If we expected all of the kids to solve problems using the same strategies, half the class wouldn't be able to do it.
ReplyDeleteI just learned this week that we're not teaching our kids to “carry the one” anymore in second grade. This was very hard for me to comprehend because I feel like I have to retrain myself to do math now. I have to relearn addition and subtraction the way it's being taught so that I don't send any mixed messages. It's also an issue because parents who learned the standard algorithm like we did are teaching it at home, and the kids come in and are totally confused because it's not being reinforced in school. I wonder if we should be communicating with families so they are aware of how their children are being taught math in school. Many of the parents who want to help don't realize how and what their kids are learning.
I haven't encountered many kids who don't like math. So far, the lessons are full of enough games and manipulatives to keep it fun for them. The biggest problem I've seen is students getting bored with doing the same things regularly. Usually, there's an introduction to the lesson followed by a few pages of work in their Investigations books. When they're done, they can choose math activities like games with their friends, number scrolls or graph art to fill the rest of the time. Some students need all of the time to do their book work, but the ones who consistently finish quickly are getting bored with the options because they don't change very often. I'm not sure how to fix this situation, because I'm usually helping the kids who have difficulty with the problems in the book. I'm still trying to figure out how to balance my time so the students who don't have trouble don't feel ignored or under-challenged.
I was told my reply was too long for one post! Here's the rest of it:
ReplyDeleteOn a personal note, the Richardson article cracked me up because my father told me and my brother at least 10,000 times that we should have “a sound mind in a sound body.” He's in his 60s now and still goes to the gym almost every day. We used to find it so irritating that he was always pushing us to exercise when we felt like being lazy, but now I realize how important it is. When I exercise in the morning, I always have a more productive day. I feel quicker and sharper, and my self-confidence is high. Similarly, I've noticed that after Gym, students are more likely to settle down for Writing Workshop faster and are more able to concentrate on the task at hand. I wish they could go to Gym more than twice a week because to me, it seems much more beneficial than something like Music, which they all complain about. I know that it's important for them to learn to use computers, but they also seem to get bored and complain about feeling sleepy in the computer lab, which is stuffy and dark. I wonder if going to Gym during those times instead would have a positive impact.
Great thoughts and comments on the readings. I agree with your feelings of exercise. I'm impressed with your father because it certainly was not understood in my or my parents generation, so he must be very young in spirit!
DeleteI wish my students had gym twice a week! They have gym once a week, the last period on Friday, and every other week they have class game time in the afternoon as well. I wonder whether it would be possible for you, during your takeover weeks, to take your students on short neighborhood walks instead of going to the computer lab. It could be an opportunity for students to observe people/plants/animals in the surrounding school area, or if there is some park or something with an art piece in it, it could be a walk to that destination, where you all, as a class, examine, talk, and/or copy/draw that artwork on sheets of paper. I firmly believe that fresh air and natural light are good for students!
DeleteJust a few thoughts on the articles:
ReplyDeleteI found the article on the "myth" of different learning styles a bit surprising. Throughout most of our time at Lesley we have learned about different learning styles and alternate approaches to reach kids. I found it interesting that an article would try to debunk that theory
I like the idea of exercise stimulating the brain, and of schools encouraging more physical activity. It promotes all around healthy living of body and mind.
When I worked at a summer camp I developed a plan to have the kids write their own comic book. We learned about the development of a hero, we learned about the "problem" of the story or the conflict and we learned about resolution. It was a great way to keep the kids engaged and even allowed time to draw the scenes from the story.
Recently in math, we started a unit called Field Trips And Fundraisers. It was started to enhance students' learning of the concept of fractions. The whole class is given a problem of how to divide--let's say--17 subs among 21 students. The teacher's role is to pose the problem, and allow the students to come up with their own strategies to solve the problem. Even if they are wrong we step back and allow them to talk amongst themselves to continue with the work.
I think understanding different learning styles is important in a teacher's growth as an educator. Regardless of whether or not you will implement different teaching strategies it is important to have those available to you. It will help us differeniate and it will help us come up with new lessons to excite and engage students.
I have thought a lot about our society's desire to teach our children to read and write at younger and younger ages, primarily because of my experience teaching in a preschool for the past 3 years. Some parents wanted their children to be more academically challenged, while others primarily wanted their children to learn social behaviors and emotional skills. As my preschool had been play-based, we would have to explain why certain games or modes of playing were teaching the children solid foundations for later academic work--their work was to play. My coworkers and I often shared articles relating to the development of a child's brain and academic skills. We honed in (of course) on those articles which supported our play-based philosophy. A coworker read an article that discussed the rising population of young children needing to wear glasses, and related it to the push for preschoolers to be focusing their eyes on texts and screens before their eye-brain connection was developmentally ready. There have been many articles published on the topic of Finland's educational policy of explicitly NOT teaching reading and writing until the age of 7, and their students rank among the best in the world. The article "Brain Research May point to Changes in Literacy Development" seems to support the articles I have read previously. Specifically, the statement, "New brain-imaging technologies and a spate of recent studies suggest that reading aptitude is better understood as a spectrum of abilities related to biological architecture than as a universally acquirable skill," makes me question the push towards ensuring that all students are beginning to read by the end of kindergarten.
ReplyDeleteI know that personally, I did not learn how to read until first grade. I never thought anything of it until a few years ago, having noticed preschoolers decoding sounds on their own and kindergarteners reading independently. When I asked my mom about it, she stated that I had been busy learning other skills. I was very focused on playing with my younger brother (he's about 18 months younger) as well as navigating my first friendships, and had grown up the first 2 years or so of my life bilingual, which meant i was, in some ways, slightly delayed with my English vocabulary. I do remember that, in elementary school, we thought the students who had learned how to read at age 4 must be especially smart (coincidentally (or not?) the girl who had learned at an early age also wore glasses). On the other hand, my younger sister (8 years younger), was especially motivated to learn how to read, as her playmates (my brother and I) could read very well.
I definitely agree with the article that discusses having flexibility during math lessons to allow students to struggle and learn how to solve mathematical problems in their own way. My mother has told me how my first grade year, I never seemed to grasp math. My brother and I were then put in a montessori school for my second grade year, and through the montessori manipulatives and methods, I was able to become a solid math student. I cannot say that I was especially great at math after that, primarily because it did not hold an interest for me, but after that year, I was able to consistently grasp new concepts and theories and succeed (my desire was always in getting the answer so that I could move on, while those who do enjoy math enjoy the process of solving the equation).
It was good to read about how important physical movement is to our brain activity. I know that I feel slower in my brain when my body has not had much movement, and I have even started trying to add more exercise into my weekly routine, because I have noticed I am more alert and active when I have been physically active. I see the same trend with my students. Those students who stay in for recess often have even more trouble after recess in sitting still and focusing. When the whole class did not get their full recess time (which happens, more often than not, because the transitions from class to hallway to gathering the three 1st grade classes to finally going outside take too much time), the students struggle behaviorally, as well as academically. It is my hope, during my own takeover weeks, to ensure that all students get out for recess every day.
DeleteI was also pleased to read the report about debunked learning styles. It never made sense to me that one learned primarily visually, auditorily, or kinesthetically, as I knew I could do all three, and hated when others would say they couldn't understand unless they had it in one the three styles. Howard Gardner's theory about the multiple intelligences still makes sense to me, as I considered the different intelligences to be more similar to personality traits. That means, in my view, that there will be topics and ways of learning that come more naturally because we are more naturally interested in them. It does not mean that we exclude an intelligence because we are not strong in it. As with anything, to fully understand an idea or topic, one has to approach it from multiple perspectives. This is where I feel that the creative arts modalities are essential to learning and teaching. Using the arts forces teachers and students to approach lessons with new perspectives and interest. I know that personally, my education growing up allowed me to learn within the multiple art modalities, and I know I learned a lot through them, since I can remember them so clearly.
I found the article about student learning styles being bunk to be fascinating. It prompted me to do a bit more research and I found a really great blog posting written by a PhD student and seasoned teacher on the topic,Tracy Rosen, titled "I no longer believe in learning styles. You?"*
ReplyDeleteFormerly an ardent proponent of the importance of getting to know the learning styles of one’s students in order to improve their learning in the classroom setting, she now sees things quite differently. She writes, “I have stopped testing for learning styles in my classroom. What I used to see as proof that the individual learning styles existed I now see as proof that learning happens when we have a variety of stimuli or input methods. I focus more on making sure there is a diversity of input – that the material I am presenting is being presented in a variety of manners. Rather than thinking of each students as having a dominant learning style, I think of how multiple forms of input help to solidify learning in everyone.”
Ultimately, she argues that teaching in various modalities is the right way to go “BUT that the decision to do so is about good teaching and not about accessing the preferred learning styles of students”.
I think this makes very good sense. The outcome doesn’t change (teachers should still differentiate and vary their teaching methods) but they should do so because it augments the general learning experience for everyone. It’s a subtle shift in thought, but I feel important and in some ways liberating because it could mean getting to know every student’s particular learning style (if that can even be measured) is not necessarily the best use of a teacher’s time.
* http://leadingfromtheheart.org/2010/07/20/i-no-longer-believe-in-learning-styles-you/
1. I found the "Learning, Adaptations..." article very interesting to read because it really made me think about how I performed in math and reading as a young student and how that changed throughout the years. From second grade all the way up to junior year in high school, I despised reading. I was that student that had no interest in reading whatsoever because I felt "stupid" because I struggled with reading and also because I was not as fluent as the other students in my class. Junior year in high school I had an English teacher who loved reading! He pushed our class to read a novel every two weeks. With the practice (and of course a few books that really caught my interest in reading), I found a love for something I always hated. Today, I consider myself a good reader… and that leaves me wondering if my “training” in high school helped my white matter form connections.
ReplyDeleteI always enjoyed math as a child. However, when I got to algebra in 8th grade I really begun the struggle. The last quote of the “Kids Master Mathematics…” article helped tell it all:
"Motivation is a key aspect of achievement that we often ignore in math; it's the missing link," Schorr says. "We need to provide kids with conceptually challenging math problems in an emotionally safe environment, and the teacher plays a critical role in that. Kids can view frustration as an opportunity for success instead of an indication of failure, but that won't happen without teachers letting the students experience productive struggles."
I never felt like I was in a “safe emotional environment” in this classroom. We were expected to do problems the way our teacher taught them and we were never able to explore different ways of learning. I would go home every night in tears to my dad, who is really good at math, and he would go over the same problems with me and allow me to explore different methods and let me express my frustrations over each problem. At the end of every session with my dad, I felt good because I felt successful although I struggled. It is important to me as a teacher to allow my students in math to feel the same way my dad made me feel. I never want my students to feel frustrated, and unsafe like my teacher did.
2. I do believe exploring Multiple Intelligences and the different modes of learning are very important in understanding your students. By using the different methods, a teacher can investigate and reflect on where the students do their best work. If a teacher is able to engage the students and allow them to explore their best learning styles, learning for the students will be less of a struggle and more of a success.
Although late, here it is...
ReplyDeleteMath was always a struggle for me. Even though it came easily to me, I convinced myself that I was terrible at it. At the same time, I was telling myself that I was more of a literacy-minded student, even though inferential comprehension and decoding strategies came slower for me than other students. Even though I have always considered myself to be creative (something that excelling in math would not imply), my strengths always showed in math and science. I believe, like the articles said, that this has something to do with my biology. I also believe that this was because math problems have a right answer and a wrong answer. No matter what, I was given instant feedback when I solved math problems. I knew immediately whether something was right or wrong. Being a child who did not want to take advice from anyone, the idea of producing something that did not have a right or wrong answer must have not sat right with me. Although I thrive on creativity as an adult-which I would like to believe is true for my child self-the idea of being wrong scared the crap out of me.
I don't think that it is a question as to whether or not multiple intelligences exist. Instead, I think the question is how we, as educators, can cater to those intelligences equally, so as to provide a balanced method of learning. The best part of having multiple intelligences, is that we can do so much with these differing perspectives. However, we are not allowing our students to explore these intelligences unless we can create a learning environment where different activities and subjects re engaging these multiple intelligences.