The first part of the article that stood out for me was when she talked about how she “viewed instructional strategies as hit or miss” but how she had “come to realize that research can inform the selection and implementation of instructional strategies and, as a result, make a huge difference in whether a strategy hits or misses.” This stood out for me because I have heard many times this year that it is inevitable that some our lessons will flop. Taken the wrong way, one could easily just take a flopped lesson to mean that it just wasn't a good day and fail to reflect. I think that it is important to remember that while your lessons may not work out as well as you may have hoped, there is often something that we can adjust that can improve the likelihood of that lesson being effective. With our lessons, it is important to think about why something worked our didn't work so we can change our selection and implementation of instructional strategies.
What was also interesting was the section about higher-level thinking and how he implemented these higher-level questions into his class. In my experience, if you go through any math textbook or test, you will find very few questions requiring deeper thought. We did go through Bloom’s taxonomy in another course but, honestly, I don’t think I would have even considered it when writing a test or assignment just because it is something so uncommon in most math classes. This article really got me to think about how important it is to promote this critical thinking.
No comments:
Post a Comment