Contact: Dan Dempsey at dempsey_dan@yahoo.com ....... The Math Underground is part of a national coalition, originated by NYC HOLD. .. a coalition of groups of citizens NOT vested in continually reinventing the wheel in order to justify our own existence, jobs or expertise. ........ Check the Blog list for Seattle Math Group.
Wednesday, July 15, 2009
Letter to Seattle and others
Problem based teaching = 0.15
Inquiry based teaching = 0.31
Direct Instruction = 0.59
Dear Decision Makers,
If you are interested in increasing student achievement, then
Empirical evidence should be considered in making decisions.
In the SPS this has often NOT been the case.
Math teachers throughout Washington State watched the abysmal results as Administration forced changes in instructional decision making through a bizarre top down destruction of more effective practices (often under the guise of best practices).
Check this:
John Hattie published "Visible Learning" which uses "A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses relating to achievement" which collectively looks at 83 million students and found the following effect sizes:
Problem based teaching = 0.15
Inquiry based teaching = 0.31
Direct Instruction = 0.59
The following should be a non-issue:
"Discovery/Inquiry" vs: Example Based "Explicit/Direct Instruction"
But it is not, much to the chagrin of teachers interested in results.
To improve a system requires the intelligent application of relevant data.
Sincerely,
Danaher M. Dempsey, Jr.
No comments:
Post a Comment