I guess I was caught up in preparing for my presentation, I've just realized I hadn't posted a reflection on Chapters 1-3, mea culpa Luckily I'd made a few notes, here they are:
After reading Schoenfeld's introduction, it did in fact "induce me to read on",( of course the fact its required reading played a part too!) This being my first graduate level course I am unfamiliar with the rigors of research and what makes a reliable study, suffice it to say I was suitably impressed by Boaler's explanation of her study and have no doubts that her findings are accurate and founded in truth. I was struck but the inclusion (in both Schoenfeld's and Boaler's introductions) of gender as an issue. I must have been living with my head in the sand, I so thought that had been dealt with ( this was an issue yea those many years ago when I did my Bachelor's degree) . Upon reflection I wonder if it wasn't because I didn't see gender in math. In other words I don't expect the boys to do better than the girls, I just expect ( and find) that there are always a mixture of abilities in any classroom.
I was also struck by the idea of reality versus facade in education. When Boaler described Amber Hill, its Principal, its reception area, classroom/hallway behaviour, I started to get a picture of the school, as was her intention. This was then contrasted with what was happening at Amber Hill,( type of instruction, level of learning etc) and one quickly realized that 'you have bite into the chocolate to find out what flavor is on the inside'. I'm sure as we progress through the book Amber Hill will reveal itself to have some redeeming qualities. I look forward to the journey!
Postscript: Now that I've looked so closely at chapter 4 I realize that as Boaler states (p.47) "the portrayal of mathematics at Amber Hill is quite bleak" More about that in my next entry!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment