I had my academic year nine class for the first time today and had a lot of fun. I had been warned about a few students, but they were arms deep in the trenches having a good go.
I took an experimental approach today with the class examining how to multiply and divide powers of 10. The idea was to create algorithms in student terms for solving simple equations.
We started with simple examples using whole numbers
5 x 10 = ...
"When multiplying by 10, 100, 1000... count the zeroes and put them on the end of the number you are multiplying."
25 ÷ 10 = ...
This time students considered the position of the decimal point:
"Count the zeroes in the number after the division symbol [divisor] and move the decimal point right of the other number [the dividend] that many digits"
We then looked at the case
2.5 x 10 =
and discovered our first algorithm didn't work as by our first algorithm 2.5 x 10 = 2.50
This lead us to a similar algorithm as for our division case:
"Count the zeroes in the multiplier and move the decimal point left of the other number [the factor] that many digits"
Using the whole number cases gave students an additional method of multiplying powers of ten than the messy loops moving decimal places method. The idea of this lesson was not to deny them mathematical language - but to give them an opportunity to explore a mathematical concept before formal language was introduced. It was a lot of fun for me and engaged them during the lesson.
We then looked at a few cases where the multiplier and divisor were not powers of 10. This exposed that students had difficulty with long division and long multiplication and were over dependent on calculators - which has the possibility of causing issues in non-calculator sections in upper school. We'll now go own to examining factor trees and ease into indices.
We also looked at 250 ÷ 10 where we converted the expression to a fraction and cancelled the zeroes - although we didn't consider why this works and will need to revisit it later.
Wednesday, February 2, 2011
Monday, January 31, 2011
National Curriculum confusion reigns
National curriculum continues to be a source of confusion for teachers. New words such as engage (have a look at it), implementation (sort of run a class with it) and significant implementation (meaning whatever you want it to but it needs to be done by 2014 in WA and 2013 everywhere else). Never mind that curriculum description dot points are vague even to DoE experts.
If you manage to implement something by getting past inhibitors in your school you then have to decide how to grade what you have done. Proper grade descriptors are non-existent, vague C grade descriptors give little idea what an A or a B is. Administration are scared witless that any implementation will impact negatively on NAPLAN scores, especially where they have been good in the past.
Overcoming the urge to use classroom distributions as solutions for behaviour management problems threatens academic programmes. Small class cohorts gives fewer opportunities to distribute difficult students between classes. Teachers need to closely examine classlists to ensure that troublesome or low ability students are found classes to which they can perform. Finally we have some acceptance that heterogenous classes with wide distributions are not optimal teaching or learning environments.
I read the dreaded innovative solutions mantra for the first time this year in a department missive. Give me a solution or identify an opportunity to solve a problem. The wait and see at the moment is becoming generational.
It seems ok for a whole school to get D's and E's if that's all the students can produce despite their best efforts. Just create an alternate school based criteria to distribute to parents at the same time.
The frustrating thing is that NCOS is working ok and this new system is degenerating into a debacle of epic proportions. Yay for our minister putting on the brakes a little. It will be interesting to see how the final implementation is delayed again if ACARA can't get a handle on this monster.
The only positive out of all of this is a push for more academic classes and more protection and attention for our gifted students. For this at least we can be thankful.
If you manage to implement something by getting past inhibitors in your school you then have to decide how to grade what you have done. Proper grade descriptors are non-existent, vague C grade descriptors give little idea what an A or a B is. Administration are scared witless that any implementation will impact negatively on NAPLAN scores, especially where they have been good in the past.
Overcoming the urge to use classroom distributions as solutions for behaviour management problems threatens academic programmes. Small class cohorts gives fewer opportunities to distribute difficult students between classes. Teachers need to closely examine classlists to ensure that troublesome or low ability students are found classes to which they can perform. Finally we have some acceptance that heterogenous classes with wide distributions are not optimal teaching or learning environments.
I read the dreaded innovative solutions mantra for the first time this year in a department missive. Give me a solution or identify an opportunity to solve a problem. The wait and see at the moment is becoming generational.
It seems ok for a whole school to get D's and E's if that's all the students can produce despite their best efforts. Just create an alternate school based criteria to distribute to parents at the same time.
The frustrating thing is that NCOS is working ok and this new system is degenerating into a debacle of epic proportions. Yay for our minister putting on the brakes a little. It will be interesting to see how the final implementation is delayed again if ACARA can't get a handle on this monster.
The only positive out of all of this is a push for more academic classes and more protection and attention for our gifted students. For this at least we can be thankful.
Labels:
national curriculum
Sunday, January 30, 2011
Being proud of those making a difference
I'm the first one to say, teachers have a pretty good wicket to play on. The pay is getting better, the holidays aren't bad and when you have a supportive administration, teaching is a lot of fun. There are a lot of teachers taking advantage of this, it's true.. but there are also many going way past what is required, doing what is necessary.
I'm one of those that is very proud of what my school is and does; and I refuse to be negative about what we achieve. Our kids do not come to high school ready with all the skills they require. They have parents that work 2 jobs, many are abused or neglected, have poor nutrition and health, have few positive role models outside of school, have strong negative peer influences, have access to little help outside of the classroom, have few aspirations, no career guidance, already work long hours to help families make ends meet, have low expectations of their own ability and performance, limited access to resources, few options for subject selection.
Yet every year, up to half of our year twelve cohort goes to university. Not just goes, but are ready and skilled to perform at the highest level. Another group enters TAFE, starts apprenticeships and pre-apprenticeships. Another enters the workforce and starts the gradual climb to owning their own home and financial independence.
There's also the hidden statistics, the kids that are the first in their families to get to year 10 for the first time. The kids that raise their attendance from sporadic to regular. The parents that gain an interest in their children's performance. The kids that succeed despite low expectations (or ability) through the intervention of a teacher or two. The kids that get that positive work ethic and attitude that will carry them through hard times. Those that conquer substance abuse in their homes and turn their backs on criminal activities. Those that succeed despite physical and mental handicaps.
As a teacher, I look at the results of year 12 and take pleasure being a part of an education equation. If my kids get opportunities as a result of finishing school, staff at all levels of the organisation should take pleasure, no one teacher made the difference. We as a school have achieved something.
The Aussie battler is not just a person in the bush, it's kids and organisations that do things despite the odds, with limited resources and where others are trying to take advantage of them (yes I'm looking at you IPS staffing!). Our principal, administration and teaching staff are giving it a good go, and for my mind last year succeeded in many areas. If we keep our eye on the ball and support each other, we'll do it again.. and again...
Cheers to that!
Oh, and DoE take note.. support your low socio-economic schools or you will end up with these kids unsupported in large mid socio-economic schools with teachers that cannot cope nor want them. If you create a permanent underclass be prepared to be named as the cause when it happens.
I'm one of those that is very proud of what my school is and does; and I refuse to be negative about what we achieve. Our kids do not come to high school ready with all the skills they require. They have parents that work 2 jobs, many are abused or neglected, have poor nutrition and health, have few positive role models outside of school, have strong negative peer influences, have access to little help outside of the classroom, have few aspirations, no career guidance, already work long hours to help families make ends meet, have low expectations of their own ability and performance, limited access to resources, few options for subject selection.
Yet every year, up to half of our year twelve cohort goes to university. Not just goes, but are ready and skilled to perform at the highest level. Another group enters TAFE, starts apprenticeships and pre-apprenticeships. Another enters the workforce and starts the gradual climb to owning their own home and financial independence.
There's also the hidden statistics, the kids that are the first in their families to get to year 10 for the first time. The kids that raise their attendance from sporadic to regular. The parents that gain an interest in their children's performance. The kids that succeed despite low expectations (or ability) through the intervention of a teacher or two. The kids that get that positive work ethic and attitude that will carry them through hard times. Those that conquer substance abuse in their homes and turn their backs on criminal activities. Those that succeed despite physical and mental handicaps.
As a teacher, I look at the results of year 12 and take pleasure being a part of an education equation. If my kids get opportunities as a result of finishing school, staff at all levels of the organisation should take pleasure, no one teacher made the difference. We as a school have achieved something.
The Aussie battler is not just a person in the bush, it's kids and organisations that do things despite the odds, with limited resources and where others are trying to take advantage of them (yes I'm looking at you IPS staffing!). Our principal, administration and teaching staff are giving it a good go, and for my mind last year succeeded in many areas. If we keep our eye on the ball and support each other, we'll do it again.. and again...
Cheers to that!
Oh, and DoE take note.. support your low socio-economic schools or you will end up with these kids unsupported in large mid socio-economic schools with teachers that cannot cope nor want them. If you create a permanent underclass be prepared to be named as the cause when it happens.
Labels:
differentiation,
high school
Friday, January 28, 2011
Board games in high school
I am by no means an expert in this topic but I have been experimenting with it a few years. I've avoided traditional games in this list such as Chess, Connect 4, Chinese checkers, Draughts, Backgammon as these form the basis of school games clubs.
Here is my list of alternative games played successfully with students:
Simple Games:
Collossal Arena (~$35, 30 mins, six players) Students bet against gladiators. Students have to evaluate diminishing odds when placing bets and simultaneously use a variety of special abilities to eliminate rival gladiators.
For Sale (~$40, 10 mins, six players) A game where students purchase property at auction and then sell them to each other. Students need to evaluate what is left to be purchased and then try to estimate the best moment to put them on the market.
Set (~$25, 10 mins, six players) Students need to identify sets based on multiple criteria before other students find them. A simple game that uses many of the skills found in visual IQ tests.
Lupus in Tabula (~$20, 10 mins, up to 16 players) Students try and guess who the werewolf is. Students are accused and try and convince others that they are not the werewolf. A great way to introduce polls and tallies within the class.
Apples to Apples (~$50, 30 mins, up to 10 players) Hard to explain but fun if not taken seriously.
Ticket to Ride Europe (~$70, 1 hr, 5 players) Students build networks of track to connect destinations. Students that build the most effective networks win.
Citadels (~$35, 45 mins, 5 players) Students use roles to build their citadel whilst trying to stop their fellow students from doing the same.
Carcassonne (~$40, 30 mins, 3 players) Students accrue points by laying tiles and selecting optimal point scoring opportunities from multiple options.
Nuclear War (~$50, 30 mins, 5 players) What is better than blowing each other up? Blowing each other up with nuclear weapons.. Beware this game has the worst components ever, be prepared to laminate and find card sleeves.
BattleLine (~$30, 30 mins, 2 players) Two players use poker sets to try and win 5 hands. Special cards change the game in a variety of ways.
Dixit (~$40, 30 mins, 6 players) Players use their imagination to get students to guess which card is theirs. A great investigation into grey areas as black and white answers do not get points.
Say Anything (~$40, 30 mins, 6 players) Similar to Apples to Apples but easier to understand by students. Have to enforce a G rating on answers or the game gets out of control.
More complex games (require multiple sessions):
Space Hulk (~$200, >2 hrs, 2 players) I wouldn't suggest buying this for a class, but if you have a copy the students enjoy it. The miniatures take hours to paint but the end product is well worth it.
Claustrophobia (~$70, 1 hr, 2 players) The game to play when you can't play Space Hulk.
Battle Lore ($100, >2 hrs, 2 players) A skirmish game where students line up two forces and try and defeat each other. Students have to concentrate to get their forces into battle critical moments.
Smallworld (~70, 1 hr, 4 players) Students use a variety of races to control the largest area of a map.
Indonesia ($100, 2hrs+, 4 players) A game where students use stock techniques to manage shipping, mergers and acquisitions of wheat, rice, oil and spice companies.
These games can all be researched further on Boardgamegeek. Many can be purchased locally at Tactics in Perth, or online (cheaper but with shipping delays) at Milsims, from unhalfbricking, or from PinnacleGames.
Russ.
(Updated 24/4/2011)
Here is my list of alternative games played successfully with students:
Simple Games:
Collossal Arena (~$35, 30 mins, six players) Students bet against gladiators. Students have to evaluate diminishing odds when placing bets and simultaneously use a variety of special abilities to eliminate rival gladiators.
For Sale (~$40, 10 mins, six players) A game where students purchase property at auction and then sell them to each other. Students need to evaluate what is left to be purchased and then try to estimate the best moment to put them on the market.
Set (~$25, 10 mins, six players) Students need to identify sets based on multiple criteria before other students find them. A simple game that uses many of the skills found in visual IQ tests.
Lupus in Tabula (~$20, 10 mins, up to 16 players) Students try and guess who the werewolf is. Students are accused and try and convince others that they are not the werewolf. A great way to introduce polls and tallies within the class.
Apples to Apples (~$50, 30 mins, up to 10 players) Hard to explain but fun if not taken seriously.
Ticket to Ride Europe (~$70, 1 hr, 5 players) Students build networks of track to connect destinations. Students that build the most effective networks win.
Citadels (~$35, 45 mins, 5 players) Students use roles to build their citadel whilst trying to stop their fellow students from doing the same.
Carcassonne (~$40, 30 mins, 3 players) Students accrue points by laying tiles and selecting optimal point scoring opportunities from multiple options.
Nuclear War (~$50, 30 mins, 5 players) What is better than blowing each other up? Blowing each other up with nuclear weapons.. Beware this game has the worst components ever, be prepared to laminate and find card sleeves.
BattleLine (~$30, 30 mins, 2 players) Two players use poker sets to try and win 5 hands. Special cards change the game in a variety of ways.
Dixit (~$40, 30 mins, 6 players) Players use their imagination to get students to guess which card is theirs. A great investigation into grey areas as black and white answers do not get points.
Say Anything (~$40, 30 mins, 6 players) Similar to Apples to Apples but easier to understand by students. Have to enforce a G rating on answers or the game gets out of control.
More complex games (require multiple sessions):
Space Hulk (~$200, >2 hrs, 2 players) I wouldn't suggest buying this for a class, but if you have a copy the students enjoy it. The miniatures take hours to paint but the end product is well worth it.
Claustrophobia (~$70, 1 hr, 2 players) The game to play when you can't play Space Hulk.
Battle Lore ($100, >2 hrs, 2 players) A skirmish game where students line up two forces and try and defeat each other. Students have to concentrate to get their forces into battle critical moments.
Smallworld (~70, 1 hr, 4 players) Students use a variety of races to control the largest area of a map.
Indonesia ($100, 2hrs+, 4 players) A game where students use stock techniques to manage shipping, mergers and acquisitions of wheat, rice, oil and spice companies.
These games can all be researched further on Boardgamegeek. Many can be purchased locally at Tactics in Perth, or online (cheaper but with shipping delays) at Milsims, from unhalfbricking, or from PinnacleGames.
Russ.
(Updated 24/4/2011)
Labels:
board games
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)