one teacher described her experience of realising
the importance of a concept in Shape and Space:
I asked him ‘what is a prism’ and I don’t know if
he was shocked by me asking […] I didn’t
understand it, I didn’t do maths at school […]. It
made me study more of Shape and space [because]
it was the one subject that was difficult for me. I
didn’t know these volumes – [in] what [way] and
how am I going to explain to the kids what […]
those things [are] so concerning the tiling, which
relates to the real life, [or] the volume of […] for
instance a can of coke, how much liquid must be in
there […] that was the new thing I learnt, it helped
me a lot (T9: Thembela, 2013).
The teacher explained that the tutor was shocked
that she did not know what a prism was, but this
experience motivated her to work harder at the section
so that she could handle the real life applications
of the concept.
Another teacher from Brijlal’s (2014) study
found the opportunities for integration of mathematics
across knowledge strands exciting.
In terms of content knowledge it added to my
content in terms of the maths itself. With that
content, I was able to use that to empower my
learners in the classroom […]. In terms of history,
in terms of space and shape, whereby I took the Taj
Mahal […] I was shocked to find the building
inside is only 56 metre square, I was able to work
out whether the length is short [and] using [what I
learnt in] the programme, I was able to work out
the formula (T2: Brijlal, 2014).
The first university offered three 30-credit content
courses. The fourth module was designed as an ML
pedagogical content module that enabled teachers
to experience the curriculum imperative of combining
content and context in order to develop
mathematical competencies and to develop reflective
skills. All teachers were required to have at
least three years’ prior teaching experience, where
the emphasis was on reskilling teachers in a new
subject area. The emphasis on content in the first
ACE showed a leaning towards the imperative of
skilling teachers in the content required for a
6 Bansilal, Webb, James
particular curriculum, thus Ball et al.’s (2008)
sections of specialised content knowledge and
knowledge of content and curriculum were addressed;
however, the section on knowledge of
content and teaching was presumed to have been
assimilated by the teachers during their prior
teaching experiences. The teachers worked through
many contextualised tasks, which they could later
facilitate with their own pupils. This was done in
order to help them become familiar with the
contextual language, rules, signifiers and graphs
pertinent to particular contexts. The participants
welcomed the close alignment of the programme
with the curriculum (Brijlal, 2014). Many of the
teachers from the first ACE found it helpful that the
textbook they used in the programme was one that
they would later teach from. It provided a sense of
direction for the teachers and gave them ideas
about how they could approach the teaching of the
same topics:
the lectures were very relevant to us as teachers,
when we did the same thing in the class, it was not
something out of context from the class, very
practical and we were able to relate it to learners
(T1: Brijlal, 2014).
The topics that were covered [reflected] what the
learners were going to do in class […] the teaching
methods we learnt there like the methods you teach
the learners [such as] to do the area or the
perimeter (T4: Brijlal, 2014).
The comments by teachers 1 (T1) and 4 (T4)
reported in Brijlal (2014) suggest that they
appreciated the close alignment of the content and
PCK to the school curriculum, because it helped
them directly in their teaching. Another teacher,
T2, found the project work that was part of the
assessment in a module very practical and relevant
to his ML lessons. The teacher (T2) continued to
use the model that was built to scale for
demonstrations in his ML classroom.
ครูหนึ่งอธิบายประสบการณ์ของเหยื่อความสำคัญของแนวคิดในรูปร่างและพื้นที่:ฉันถามเขา "เป็นปริซึม' และผมไม่ทราบว่าเขาไม่ตกใจกลัวความผิดฉันขอ [...] ผมไม่ได้เข้าใจมัน ฉันไม่ได้ทำคณิตศาสตร์โรงเรียน [...] มันทำให้ฉันเรียนหลายรูปร่างและพื้นที่ [เนื่องจาก]มันเป็นเรื่องหนึ่งที่เป็นเรื่องที่ยากสำหรับฉัน ฉันไม่ทราบว่าวอลุ่มเหล่านี้ – [ใน [วิธี] ใด] และวิธีผมจะอธิบายให้เด็กอะไร [...] หรือไม่สิ่งเหล่านั้น [ถูก] เกี่ยวกับมัน ดังนั้นซึ่งเกี่ยวข้องกับชีวิตจริง, [หรือ] เสียงของ [...]อินสแตนซ์สามารถของโค้ก ของเหลวเท่าใดต้องมี [...] ที่เป็นสิ่งใหม่ที่ผมได้เรียนรู้ มันช่วยฉันมาก (T9: Thembela, 2013)ครูอธิบายว่า tutor ที่ตกใจว่า เธอไม่รู้ว่าปริซึมมี แต่นี้ประสบการณ์แรงจูงใจของเธอทำงานหนักในส่วนดังนั้น ที่เธอสามารถจัดการงานชีวิตจริงแนวความคิดครูอื่นจากการศึกษาของ Brijlal (2014)พบโอกาสสำหรับการรวมของคณิตศาสตร์ข้าม strands ความรู้ที่น่าตื่นเต้นในด้านความรู้เนื้อหา จะเพิ่มเข้าไปของฉันเนื้อหาในคณิตศาสตร์เอง กับที่เนื้อหา ผมสามารถใช้เป็นการเพิ่มพลังของฉันเรียนในห้องเรียน [...] ในประวัติศาสตร์พื้นที่และรูปร่าง โดยผมเอาทัชมาฮาล [...] แค่ตกใจหาอาคารภายในมีเพียง 56 เมตรสี่เหลี่ยม สามารถทำงานได้ว่าความยาวจะสั้น [และ] ใช้ [อะไร ilearnt in] the programme, I was able to work outthe formula (T2: Brijlal, 2014).The first university offered three 30-credit contentcourses. The fourth module was designed as an MLpedagogical content module that enabled teachersto experience the curriculum imperative of combiningcontent and context in order to developmathematical competencies and to develop reflectiveskills. All teachers were required to have atleast three years’ prior teaching experience, wherethe emphasis was on reskilling teachers in a newsubject area. The emphasis on content in the firstACE showed a leaning towards the imperative ofskilling teachers in the content required for a6 Bansilal, Webb, Jamesparticular curriculum, thus Ball et al.’s (2008)sections of specialised content knowledge andknowledge of content and curriculum were addressed;however, the section on knowledge ofcontent and teaching was presumed to have beenassimilated by the teachers during their priorteaching experiences. The teachers worked throughmany contextualised tasks, which they could laterfacilitate with their own pupils. This was done inorder to help them become familiar with thecontextual language, rules, signifiers and graphspertinent to particular contexts. The participantswelcomed the close alignment of the programmewith the curriculum (Brijlal, 2014). Many of theteachers from the first ACE found it helpful that thetextbook they used in the programme was one thatthey would later teach from. It provided a sense ofdirection for the teachers and gave them ideasabout how they could approach the teaching of thesame topics:the lectures were very relevant to us as teachers,when we did the same thing in the class, it was notsomething out of context from the class, verypractical and we were able to relate it to learners(T1: Brijlal, 2014).The topics that were covered [reflected] what thelearners were going to do in class […] the teachingmethods we learnt there like the methods you teachthe learners [such as] to do the area or theperimeter (T4: Brijlal, 2014).The comments by teachers 1 (T1) and 4 (T4)reported in Brijlal (2014) suggest that theyappreciated the close alignment of the content andPCK to the school curriculum, because it helpedthem directly in their teaching. Another teacher,T2, found the project work that was part of theassessment in a module very practical and relevantto his ML lessons. The teacher (T2) continued touse the model that was built to scale fordemonstrations in his ML classroom.
การแปล กรุณารอสักครู่..
