|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Using the Curriculum Corporation Task Centre:
Marita MiesenWhat Worked. What Did Not. Catholic Regional College, Melton, Victoria, Australia [This article was first prepared for the 1996 December conference of the Mathematical Association of Victoria and was first published in the proceedings of that conference, viz: Forgasz et. al. (Editors), (1996) Mathematics: Making Connections, Mathematical Association of Victoria, Melbourne, Australia, p.130.]
Introduction- Our historyWe bought 100 tasks from Curriculum Corporation in 1994. They are currently used in two ways in our Mathematics course. Some are stored in the Library in crates and have been categorised according to five of the Curriculum and Standards Framework Strands; ie: Space, Number, Measurement, Algebra and Chance & Data; and others, are stored in a separate room which classes visit. They were purchased as both a part of the Special Education Program and the Mathematics Curriculum. At the time we were attempting to set up a Numeracy Centre based on a model observed at Carwatha Secondary College, Noble Park in 1990.Our aims were to incorporate problem solving into our course and to cater for mixed abilities in the one classroom in a non-threatening, self-paced learning environment. Over the past three years we have tried using the tasks in various ways. We have also experimented with both different formats for students to express their interpretations of, and their solutions to, the tasks, and with different methods of assessing their interaction with the tasks. We have formed some opinions on what works and what does not.
Getting startedWhen purchasing the tasks from Curriculum Corporation you have the option of additional consultancy. We participated in two workshop based in-service programs and these were a positive introduction to the use of the tasks and developed a lot of enthusiasm amongst the staff. It felt somewhat like Christmas unpacking the tasks together and actually working through some ourselves. We were presented with many of the issues we were to face and the experiences of other schools, in using these resources.We already had a Numeracy Centre operating with an extra staff member allocated to those lessons. Students completed Tables tests at the beginning and then went on to cooperative problem solving tasks we had produced. We replaced the problem solving tasks with Curriculum Corporation tasks which were bright, colourful and far more enjoyable.
Teachers' NotesWe could have purchased Teacher's Notes, of which we were given samples, which looked good but were beyond our budget and we wanted staff to become familiar with tasks themselves. We, with the help of a past student, wrote our own solutions for teachers under the following headings:
Expectations of studentsWe expected students to write up tasks, and developed the format for this ourselves taking ideas from many we had seen. The headings were as follows:
Maintenance of TasksA major difficulty for us as a secondary school was, and continues to be, maintenance of the tasks. Part of the problem is that we have eight to ten Year 7 & 8 classes using the facility. To overcome this we needed consistency in the room we used and the staff.
Procedures implementedWe use my Home Room which has enabled constant checking. Rules were posted in the room and students are drilled with checking before and after use, and on reporting to teachers any missing parts. Incomplete or damaged tasks are immediately put on my desk. We bought supplies of materials including: counters, dice, playing cards, rubber bands and mirrors. We raided toy stores for army men and other objects The Woodwork teacher was of great assistance making extra wooden blocks and other shapes. It required constant checking and after two years of use, my Home Room class and I also checked them all carefully, restoring those that had been damaged. We did not want them deteriorating and becoming a wasted and unused resource. Those stored in the Library are bar coded and have lists of equipment attached to the boxes.
The second year of useThe review at the end of the first year identified the following:
Consequently, during our second year of using the tasks we left out the Tables tests and shifted the focus in the room to purely problem solving. We provided sample reports of what students should write and worked through this with them. We were not allocated two teachers in the room each lesson but had the use of a job skills person to record student progress during most lessons. We recorded depth of involvement and report writing and reported to parents on these two areas. Grades or marks were not awarded; rather, feedback was descriptive.
Integration into the CurriculumI was aware of the need to integrate these tasks into the curriculum but this was an involved process because the tasks are well designed and almost every one has the potential to link to a unit we were teaching. So, having our management and organisation procedures established, it was time to begin using some of the tasks to their full potential. This year was the perfect time to begin incorporating them into units since we were rewriting our course and completing a Curriculum and Standards Frameworks audit.After attending an in-service by Charles Lovitt, one of the producers of these tasks, I realised that they were best used as a starting point from which we could then teach content. They work best not as an addition to what we are doing to teach concepts but as a means of enabling the students to make links and establish concepts themselves. A model was presented entitled "The Replacement Unit Model" and a description of this is available from Curriculum Corporation. Our adaptation of this has been to choose areas of content within a unit and allow initial student learning to happen solely via the tasks. The staff feedback has been positive with comments including:
AssessmentWe chose to assess the following areas in the Chance and Data unit at Year 7:
YEAR 7 MATHS 1996 UNIT: CHANCE & DATA
Table 1: Portion of a recording table which teachers used when assessing students working on tasks during a specific unit.
Continued use of Task CentreOur task centre room is still operating with what we considered to be the tasks which were predominantly logic based. Table 2 shows a chart we designed on which students still express their interpretation of the task and the strategies they used to solve the task, but which is not as onerous as what we had initially asked of them.TASK CENTRE REPORT CHARTName:Home Room:
Table 2. Chart which students complete in the Task Centre. Students continued to work in pairs but each filled in their own chart. As the year progressed these became boring and the task centre needed supplementing, so once a crate of a particular strand had been used by a class in a particular unit, then it was able to be borrowed by that class from the Library and used during the Task Centre lesson.
ConclusionOur experience with these tasks has been so rich that I recommend any Maths Faculty, Primary or Secondary, purchase them. I also recommend that they use the consultancy service. My suggestions for their actual use are:
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Cliveden, 61 Blyth Street, Brunswick, Victoria 3056 Email: office@mav.vic.edu.au Phone: 03 9380 2399 Fax: 03 9389 0399 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||