LOGO-L> Math Experiment 
Author Message
 LOGO-L> Math Experiment

     Many of the things teachers say they do are very hard to measure.  That not only makes administrators, parents and politicians suspicious and unhappy, but makes it very hard for us to prove we do anything valuable at all.  This is complicated by those teachers who abuse this vagueness.  I keep thinking that there ought to be a way of approaching this that satisfies everyone.
     It seems to me that if teachers focused on student projects (Logo or otherwise) with a lot of freedom as to the details and how the project is approached, then monitors to make sure that progress is made, identify what kind of learning is occuring, and helping with guided questions etc. that a job description might sound something like the following.  The teacher:
1.  establishes the goals of the course,
2.  tests students to see where they are in relation to the subject before they                      
     begin,
3.  provides essential background and definitions so the student can begin,
4.  arranges for equipment, supplies, supervision and help, and
5.  examines students when they are done to see what progress was made
     What do you think?  Is this what Logo instruction looks like?  Is this what all instruction should look like?  What else do we do?  

---------------------------------------------------------------





Mon, 21 Oct 2002 03:00:00 GMT  
 LOGO-L> Math Experiment

 >.....
 > 1.  establishes the goals of the course,
 > 2.  tests students to see where they are in relation to the subject
 >     before they begin,
 > 3.  provides essential background and definitions so the student
 >     can begin
 > 4.  arranges for equipment, supplies, supervision and help, and
 > 5.  examines students when they are done to see what progress was
 >     made
 >
 > What do you think?  Is this what Logo instruction looks like?  Is
 > this what all instruction should look like?  What else do we do?

It seems to me that #2, #4 and #5 are necessary as part of the
teaching *process*, but at least in a narrower sense, are not
stricktly teaching.  Maybe it's only semantics.

I'm a bit unclear about "essential background and definitions" in #3.
Is that were you actually *teach*, e.g., provide the theoretical
background, give examples and case studies, ask questions and discuss,
etc.?

Chuck



Mon, 21 Oct 2002 03:00:00 GMT  
 
 [ 2 post ] 

 Relevant Pages 

1. LOGO-L> MATH EXPERIMENT PROVOKES PARENTAL REBELLION

2. LOGO-L> Enhanced Ehrenfest's Experiment

3. LOGO-L> Ehrenfest's Experiment - MSWLogo

4. LOGO-L>Re: Cool math curriculae being developed

5. LOGO-L> math applications

6. LOGO-L> Math trivia

7. LOGO-L> DIST and Math

8. LOGO-L> Re: DIST and Math

9. LOGO-L> off-topic: math education joke

10. LOGO-L> new math stuff

11. LOGO-L> Re: MicroWorlds Math Links

 

 
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software