Mathematics in the Curriculum - Case Study Example

Mathematics in the Curriculum Mathematics in the Curriculum In the UK, mathematics is one of the key lessons that the educational curriculum has given special attention. Owing to the challenges that mathematics poses to most students, it becomes vital for any instructor to learn various dimensions of teaching mathematics to ensure that the student perform excellently in this subject. Mathematics is closely interrelated with other subjects of mathematics. For instance, a pupil’s understanding of mathematics depends on their performance in languages. In the key stage 1 of the curricula, mathematic pupils are expected to understand the foundations of mathematics and how to name visual objects that surround their environment (Booth, 1993). In addition, practical activities are very crucial for students at this stage as they enhance the students to discover and raise questions that are related to their subject. According to the Early Years Foundation Stage (EYFS) standards, it is crucial to support young learners in laying a strong mathematical foundation (Zeichner, 1987). Using an integrative approach in teaching mathematics is crucial in ensuring that the learners utilize their previous learning to prepare for new knowledge and skills as they climb the ladder (Silberman, 1996). The aim of this report is to design a teaching approach for primary school children in their initial year. Effective learning in National curriculum and maths requires the understanding of how students learn mathematics in their first year in school. According to the England national primary curriculum key stage one, learners in their first year of studies are acquainted with sounds that they can associate with their day to day activities (Smith, 1991: Turnbull, 1995). They are acquainted with different sound techniques and can be able to associate certain objects with specific objects. This is a crucial for a mathematics instructor who intends to introduce the subject of geometry to learners in their first year of primary education. Another way that learners acquire education is through their interaction during physical activities (Jaworski, 2006). Therefore, students learn a lot both in class and at home where they interact with their physical space. Therefore, a cognitive approach to teaching is crucial to inspire students to understand the practicality of mathematics by associating their learning experiences with the real physical world. Secondly, it is crucial to understand that different students learn differently due to the background influence (Dalton and Smith, 1986). Thus, it is crucial to understand the learning abilities of each learner and to define ways to curb the challenges that might arise amongst them. Activity The following activity aims at helping year 1 students learn how to recognize different shapes of geometry and to associate these shapes with real objects that they often see in their day to day activities. Therefore, the lesson is interactive as well as engaging for the students and the teacher. KEY ELEMENTS DETAILS 1. Key Stage / Year Group Group year 1 2. Subject/Area of Learning Mathematics: Geometry 3. Topic shapes 4. Framework( e.g. EYFS, NC) National Curriculum 5. Duration 40minuets 6. Learning Objectives(Mathematics or Science) from session To match shapes with their names To recognise shapes that appear in their outdoor activities 7. Key Vocabulary “triangle” “round”, “triangle”, “oval”, “circular”, “rectangle” 8. Resources Required Flashcards Cutting Papers Cutting knife Modelling plasticine 9. Description of learning activities (these may be cross-curricular Introduction To begin with, I will share the objectives of the study to students. A simple definition of the shapes will help to introduce the learners to the expected outcome at the end of the lesson. Next, flash card of different shapes will be shown to the learners and they will be required to identify different shapes. The learner writes down the name of the shape in their exercise book as each card is shown. After that, the children are will be provided with a cutting knife to cut as many shapes from a cutting paper as they can remember. The learner is expected to at least cut out basic or common geometrical shapes. Outdoor Activity In this main activity, the student will be required to identify objects that they say in their daily activities and cite their shapes. The students will go out and identify various objects in the environment around them and then list their shapes. For this activity, the students will be grouped in fours. Plenary In this session, the learners will be expected to have an interactive session in which each group presents objects that they observed in the outdoor activity. The groups with unique objects (those that other groups did not identify) will be awarded the title of “the heroes of the day” 10. Key Questions What shapes can you identify? What is the difference between a rectangle and triangle, an oval and a circle? 11. Differentiation - SEN/EAL/G and T, Learners who have English as their second language (EAL) 12. Success criteria Ability to cut out basic geometry shapes and to differentiate them. Ability to identify physical objects that have different geometrical shapes 11. Assessment Strategy Allowing the child to work in groups Asking the child more questions based on the topic. The value of this activity is to use both a theoretical and practical approach in introducing mathematics for first year learners of the national primary curriculum. The theoretical approach of the study aims at introducing geometrical shapes to the learners. At their age, learners have the ability to listen and communicate simple words that they can easily pronounce (Van Heuvelen, 1991). Therefore, they are able to pronounce the names of each shape at a time. Introducing basic shapes ensures that even those students who have not mastered pronunciation can easily cope with the lesson. The practical dimension of the activity aims at imploring the learners’ cognitive abilities and to make the learning interesting (Richardson, 1997). Theory proves that most young learners discover new object surrounding their environment and can associate them with the theories they study in class. Therefore, a practical approach will give the learners the opportunity to discover and simulate creativity that is necessary for the mathematics curriculum. From critical point of view, the lesson plan can still be adjusted to take into consideration of the specific needs of the learners. Learners from different backgrounds have different abilities and this influences their uptake of mathematical knowledge. For instance, the EAL students will have challenges in understanding language with the same speed as the natives (Franson, 1999: Hogan and Pressley, 1997). Therefore, it is advisable that lessons take consideration of the vulnerable students to provide special attention. To support such learners, I would improve the study plan by ensuring that these minority students are awarded more time and their pronunciation is given special attention. This will provide them with an opportunity to improve their performance and compete with other learners. Secondly, it would be crucial to pay attention to accuracy of the cuttings to ensure that learners provide accurate results. This may be enhanced by giving the learners an opportunity to repeat the exercise severally and comparing the results each time. This will ensure that the student can provide sharp shapes and hence improve their accuracy. Psychologists have proposed different theories of curriculum design for young learners. Bruner (1960; 1980) propose the spiral curriculum that helps learners discover from practical sessions by ensuring that the practical lessons remain as natural as possible. The scaffolding theories suggest that students should learn progressive to ensure that there is a connection between their previous knowledge and what they are learning (Alibali, 2006: Berk & Winsler, 1995: Dennen, 2004). This is why the lesion plan takes the consideration of the learners’ previous key learning of pronunciation and writing techniques (Donato, 1994: Piper, 2005). Another key element of teaching young learners is providing motivation in form of rewards. For this plan lesson, the motivational concept is considered through awarding the best groups heroic titles. This provides them with the motivation to learn and induces positive competition. The role of learning individual abilities while mathematic emanates from the constructivism theories that stipulate that each human has an innate capability to deal with mathematics (Piaget & Cook, 1952: Piaget, 2013). Therefore, it is crucial to pay attention to individual needs of a learner and to ensure that their weaknesses in mathematics are suppressed. Bibliography Alibali, M. 2006. Does visual scaffolding facilitate students’ mathematics learning? Evidence from early algebra. http://ies.ed.gov/funding/grantsearch/details.asp?ID=54 Berk, L. E., & Winsler, A. 1995. Scaffolding Childrens Learning: Vygotsky and Early Childhood Education. NAEYC Research into Practice Series. Volume 7. National Association for the Education of Young Children, 1509 16th Street, NW, Washington, DC 20036-1426 (NAEYC catalog# 146). Booth, M. 1993. Students historical thinking and the national history curriculum in England. Theory & Research in Social Education, 21(2), 105-127. Bruner, J. S. 1960. On learning mathematics. The Mathematics Teacher, 610-619. Bruner, J. 1980. Jerome Bruner. A history of psychology in autobiography, 7. Brown, M., Askew, M., Baker, D., Denvir, H., & Millett, A. 1998. Is the national numeracy strategy research‐based?. British Journal of Educational Studies, 46(4), 362-385. Dalton, J., and Smith, D. 1986. Extending children’s special abilities: Strategies for primary classrooms. http://www.teachers.ash.org.au/researchskills/dalton.htm Dennen, V. P. 2004. Cognitive apprenticeship in educational practice: Research on scaffolding, modeling, mentoring, and coaching as instructional strategies. In D. H. Jonassen (Ed.), Handbook of Research on Educational Communications and Technology (2nd ed.), (p. 815). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Donato, R. 1994. Collective scaffolding in second language learning. Vygotskian approaches to second language research, 33456. Franson, C. 1999. Mainstreaming learners of English as an additional language: The class teachers perspective. Language Culture and Curriculum, 12(1), 59-71. Hogan, K., and Pressley, M. 1997. Scaffolding student learning: Instructional approaches and issues. Cambridge, MA: Brookline Books. Jaworski, B. 2006. Theory and practice in mathematics teaching development: Critical inquiry as a mode of learning in teaching. Journal of mathematics teacher education, 9 (2), 187-211. Korthagen, F. A., & Kessels, J. P. 1999. Linking theory and practice: Changing the pedagogy of teacher education. Educational researcher, 28(4), 4-17. Piaget, J., & Cook, M. T. 1952. The origins of intelligence in children. Piaget, J. 2013. The construction of reality in the child (Vol. 82). Routledge. Piper, C. 2005. Teaching with Technology What is scaffolding? Richardson, V. 1997. Constructivist teaching and teacher education: Theory and practice. Constructivist teacher education: Building a world of new understandings, 3-14. Silberman, M. 1996. Active Learning: 101 Strategies To Teach Any Subject. Prentice-Hall, Des Moines, IA 50336-1071. Smith, A. E. 1991. A National Curriculum in England. Stipek, D. J., Givvin, K. B., Salmon, J. M., & MacGyvers, V. L. 2001. Teachers’ beliefs and practices related to mathematics instruction. Teaching and teacher education, 17 (2), 213-226. Turnbull, A. P. 1995. Exceptional lives: Special education in todays schools. Merrill/Prentice Hall, Order Department, 200 Old Tappan Rd., Old Tappan, NJ 07675.. Van Heuvelen, A. 1991. Learning to think like a physicist: A review of research-based instructional strategies. American Journal of Physics, 59 (10), 891-897. Zeichner, K. M. 1987. Preparing reflective teachers: An overview of instructional strategies which have been employed in preservice teacher education. International Journal of Educational Research, 11 (5), 565-575. Read More