SED 525 Methods for Teaching Secondary Mathematics Due April 20

Read:

· Greenwood, J. J. (1993). On the nature of teaching and assessing “mathematical power” and “mathematical thinking.” Arithmetic Teacher, 41(3), 18-26 (up to Assessing Students' Progress) (Online through Oviatt. Find Arithmetic Teacher in the online catalogue; then find this issue.)

· Reinhart, S. C. (2000). Never say anything a kid can say! Mathematics teaching in the middle school, 5(8), 478-483.

(Online through Oviatt. Find Mathematics teaching in the middle school in the online

catalogue; then find this issue.)

· NCTM data-analysis standards, at www.nctm.org

Do to submit:

· Greenwood and Reinhart meet for coffee and decide to write an article together about mathematical autonomy in the high-school math class, since neither one of them addressed high school per se in their articles. To get started, they brainstorm a list of things that an observer would see teachers or students doing (or not doing) in a high-school class where the students had a high degree of mathematical autonomy. Based on their articles, write 8 things you think will appear on their list.

· Assessment Assignment due!!

Also:

· Add notes about Greenwood and Reinhart to your Author Notebook

o The authors’ main points (1-3 sentences)

o How their ideas could be applied to the math classroom (for lesson planning, assessment, task design, interactions with students…)

· Bring GCs next week!

Written Critique of Micro-Teaching

The scoring criteria for the Micro-Teaching assignment are:

ü Quality of activity design – the potential of the activity, as planned, to engage students in high-level thinking and to deepen their understanding of an important math concept

ü Motivation – the potential of the activity and the effectiveness of the presentation to motivate students to engage in the mathematics (including the teacher’s manner and voice tone)

ü Logistics – the clarity of the directions to students, the smoothness of the transitions and distribution of materials, and the organization of the action

If you presented, critique your own presentation as follows:

· What went well in terms of each of the criteria?

· If you could do it over, what would you do differently to improve your activity design or performance in terms of the criteria?

If you did not present, critique the presentation as follows:

· What went well in terms of each of the criteria?

· If this teacher were to redesign this lesson or teach again, how might he/she modify the plan or implementation in order to better achieve the criteria?

Please put your name and the name of the presenter on your critique.