Why this case study?
Luz Maldonado and I are working with four second graders who are having difficulties in math. Their teachers have asked us to work with them because, out of all the second graders at their school, these four scored the lowest on a benchmark test.
My research at the University of Texas at Austin focuses on understanding children’s problem solving and the implications of what we know about children’s problem solving for teaching. I have always had a soft spot for people who struggle to understand math, but it hasn’t been until recently that I have begun to seriously research how to help children who are considered struggling or low achieving. I was drawn to work with these four children because I wanted to put my money where my mouth is: I wanted to see whether a problem-solving approach was an effective way to help these children learn. Many people believe that the best way to teach those who have difficulties in math is direct instruction. But I believe that the very things that make a problem-solving approach succesful for middle and high achieving students — building on what children know, integration of concepts, processes, strategies, practices — should hold for low-achieving students too.
My goal is to write about my decision making as I work with these four students and to share with you what I learn about each of them as we interact. Ultimately, I hope that you, the reader, find something useful here — not a formula or script for teaching but a way of thinking about your own work with children learning math.
(You can read about the research base here [pdf file].)
Posted in Case Study: Four Second Graders, Uncategorized | Comments (0)
No Comments »
No comments yet.
RSS feed for comments on this post.
Leave a comment
You must be logged in to post a comment.