As we develop our practice, we all have questions that lead our work. Recently one question that has led our collective efforts with math education is how do we teach students whose skill level is years below the grade-level expectations. Together we've put a lot of good scaffolded teaching/learning efforts in place to work towards good answers to this question.
Another question that I've had in terms of math education is how do we teach in ways that Jo Boaler's research has determined to be more effective, ways that utilize greater project/problem-based math investigations. Last night's #SBLchatMA led me to some new answers to explore in this regard.
In the past, questions such as how to blend learning, how to use assessments effectively, and how to integrate technology have been focal areas of our individual and collective practice. We continue to think about those questions and grow our efforts in those areas.
I've been thinking a lot about professional learning I invite and professional learning/endeavor I resist. I think one answer here is that I embrace professional learning that is motivated by meaningful inquiry, research-based inquiry that will help us to solve the problems that stand in our way of teaching as well as we can. I resist professional learning/endeavor that is more check-list-like or directive, but not inquiry driven. As to simply complete a checklist is not to grow your knowledge or practice, but instead, to dig deep, problem solve, and create together and on you own led by terrific questions is the way to develop your practice in ways that matter. Do you agree?
