Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Thoughts on Teaching and Learning Mathematics Toronto, Ontario: Queen's Printer for Ontario, 2015, 4 hours ISBN: 978-1-4606-6609-8 (DVD) Thoughts on Teaching and Learning Mathematics is a video compilation of interviews of education experts recorded during the 2015 Ontario Association for Mathematics Education (OAME) conference. The resource is aimed at mathematics educators at the elementary and secondary school levels. The topics resonate with current issues in mathematics classrooms throughout Ontario and are explained by individuals who are well respected by mathematics educators in the province. Unfortunately, although the individuals who were interviewed cite a few pieces of research, the resource as a whole is not heavily research-based. LearnTeachLead attempted to section the resource into small, usable sections consisting of 5- to 10-minute video clips; in actuality, however, the resource is dissected in such a way that it is hard to follow or to extract meaningful content. Interview questions were not asked on video, meaning that the viewer needs to remember the title of the segment to understand the subject under discussion. While the closed captioning helps slightly with comprehension, the resource overall is not an effective means of communicating about the issues. The DVD is available on the LearnTeachLead website (http:// learnteachlead.ca/project_category/mathematics/). Full transcripts of the interviews have been published online and are a slightly more effective choice of media for this resource. The first segment addresses mathematical thinking for every learner. In this segment, Chris Suurtamm speaks of what she thinks are the causes of mathematics anxiety and how to overcome it. She challenges teachers to think of different ways in which students think about problems, different ways to solve them and to accept the possibility that teachers themselves do not always have all the answers. She invites teachers to involve parents in students' mathematical learning, to help change the society's perspective of mathematics learning, and to look at the curriculum for what the students should be doing in the classroom. Suurtamm also stresses the importance of having teachers deepen their understanding of mathematics knowledge for teaching through collaborating with their colleagues. She also argues that sound assessment is ongoing assessment in which teachers are listening and responding to how students are thinking. She stresses that students need to receive feedback as to how they are doing, as opposed to just a mark. Nora Newcombe presents the second segment, which addresses spatial reasoning. Newcombe defines spatial reasoning and provides examples of how certain mathematics principles can be thought of spatially. The concepts she mentions are shapes, the equals sign, and the continuous number line. Pedagogically speaking, she believes direct instruction and play-based learning should be used together. On the topic of gender, Newcombe speaks briefly about her belief that the scientific community should realize that both girls and boys can be engaged and can improve their special reasoning skills. Educators should therefore simply dedicate themselves to learning and not to figuring out the gender differences. Finally, Newcombe describes some research she has completed with preschoolers. Her research suggests that although digital manipulatives may be useful, physical manipulatives led to better conversations about the shapes and therefore may be more useful for learning. Marian Small begins her interview about substantive mathematics learning by saying that it makes sense to use games to help kids learn automaticity. Casual learning makes learning fun and inviting. She believes that it is important to have good mental mathematics skills and that the development of good mental mathematics skills should be part of the goal of mathematics educators. On mathematics anxiety, she believes that students pick up anxiety from teachers and parents. …
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,003 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,002 | 0,003 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,005 | 0,009 |
| Communication savante | 0,005 | 0,002 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,031 | 0,005 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».