In chapter 3, Buehl brings up many
different strategies on teaching many different subjects, but in this blog
post, I am going to focus on the math aspect, since it is my discipline.
Buehl starts off the section for
math by saying “Matchup issues with reading mathematics texts rank among the
most severe in disciplinary literacy” (Page 101). As a math person, I have
never really struggled until I started hitting more advanced classes but I have
noticed the classmates struggling around me. All throughout high school and
different classes I have taken here at UIC, there have been really two types of
math students (there are other cases, but I’m just pointing out what I have noticed
myself as a student). There are the students who actually understand and
internalize the text and there are others who just learn what they need to know
to pass tests and quizzes. The second type of student never really learn what
is going on. They just learn what is on the surface. Those who internalize it
are considered the “math people” and the others are “not math people”, which in
all honesty, isn’t always the case. Math
textbooks aren’t the easiest to read. There are so many different symbols and
notation that looks like a whole different language at first. Buehl suggested
that identity has a lot to do with students in math. He had said that many
students identify that they are not good in math.
When talking about identity,
Buehl references Willingham’s (2009) argument that “’Virtually everyone is
fully capable of learning the numeracy content and skills required for good citizenship:
an understanding of arithmetic procedures, algebra, geometry, and probability
deep enough to allow application to problems in our daily lives’ (pp. 14-15)” (page
102). Math is all around us and no matter how you identify as a learner, you
can still do it everyday life. But many students don’t recognize the everyday
application of math. Many math textbooks never really address the real world
applications. I know from personal experience; it wasn’t until I was in a
statistics class that math was actually applied to the real world. There are
many real-world scenarios in statistics and that makes the text easier to learn
and connect to. Buehl references The National Mathematics Advisory Panel (2008)
saying that “the panel notes that such an approach demonstrated a positive
impact on certain types of problem solving” (page 103).
When it comes to math, there are
many types of learners and many approaches that can be positive to these
learners. I think how you identify is important to how you learn, and how you
apply yourself is important to how efficiently you learn.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteMelissa,
ReplyDeleteYour last statement really caught my attention. You stated that “I think how you identify is important to how you learn, and how you apply yourself is important to how efficiently you learn.” This statement relates to my experience in Physical Chemistry II which I’d like to share. As a Chemistry person, I have never struggled when reading chemistry texts until I started to learn about quantum mechanics in Physical Chemistry II. Reading about quantum mechanics for me was like reading a foreign language. I wasn’t able to understand it or understand its symbols and concepts. I believe that I am one of those students you talked about who usually internalize the text they read and not only read to pass the test. However, quantum mechanics was one of the subjects that was a struggle for me to read from the text. What added up to my problem that the instruction in the class honestly was not helpful at all. Even though I was able to pass the class without understanding the material, I withdrew from the class because passing the class wasn’t what I wanted. This comes back to your statement that “how you identify is important to how you learn”. I identify myself as a Chemistry person who look forward to be a teacher, so I need to feel that I am competent in Chemistry, and that I am able to understand any Chemistry text to be able to teach it. This is what I wanted, honestly, I wanted to understand quantum mechanics not pass the class. I wish that the instructor at least taught us some strategies to read quantum mechanics from the text. I wish he gave us some real-life applications that could motivate us to learn the material because the concepts of quantum mechanics were so abstract and difficult to learn. As you pointed out helping students to recognize the real life application of a subject makes it easier to learn.
Melissa,
ReplyDeleteYour blog made some valid points on students who are learning about Math and this can be also applied to other subjects. Every student has a class they don't like and Buehl mentions that it's because we don't have any connections in the real world for the class. For example, science has never been a strong point for me. I was constantly struggling on the coursework and even terms, so in a way I was on the outside of the learning but give me Math and I could do it in a breeze. As you mentioned I was able to "understand and internalize the text", but there is always the question what are other ways to see Math as a use in the world?
I remember in middle school building a clinometer,in where we actually got to go outside and find the heights of buildings, trees etc. So when reading Buehl, he mentioned the text-to-self this activity came to mind. So in the end finding ways to get students involved with real life scenarios can give them an understanding of why we use Math.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteMelissa,
ReplyDeleteInteresting post. I like your theory about there being "two types of math people." and that some students do not actually learn content but just memorize what they need to pass quizzes and tests. I am sure there are many combinations of the two but I generally agree with this. Unfortunately, however, I think that this theory applies to other subjects as well, not just Math. In science I have seen this and experienced it personally. I have always been more interested in the science I can "see" and experience which is mainly why I chose to study environmental science in my undergraduate. was required to take chemistry, physics and cell biology classes but it was always much harder for me to build an interest in these subjects in comparison to ecology, evolution and environmental science. For some of these classes I would have been coined as a "non science person" because I only memorized what I needed to to pass exams. Unfortunately later in my studies I payed for this by having to review basic knowledge I was assumed to know.
I also agree that from my experience, math textbook do a poor job in relating math to real life applications. This is where I think as teachers we need to be creative. When I was a sophomore in high school I took Geometry and as a major part of my grade myself and a group at to make a video explaining multiple real life applications for geometry. I found this project very fun and engaging I really think I got a lot out of it. I think Math teachers as well as teachers in all disciplines need to be creative and incorporate more of these types of projects into their curriculum to make sure their students stay interested and engaged.
Hey Melissa, great post - I really enjoyed reading it.
ReplyDeleteI agree that taking a look at the identities students assume when working with mathematics texts is important. In conjunction with that, though, I think Buehl makes a very good point by bringing up the fact that many educators, for one reason or another, offer students concise and conceptually-loaded statements, using examples to elaborate on them, as opposed to more interaction with mathematical texts. I think that this practice and many students' lack of a 'math person' identity likely plays a part in their having trouble with 'building up' mathematical knowledge, which requires a strong conceptual understanding of preceding concepts.