TOPReturn to list of materials about "Identifying characteristics of math inquiry experiences"
In-service program documentation
"Identifying characteristics of math inquiry experiences"
(D5.1)
Logistics and scheduling information (by Raffaella Borasi)
| SCROLL TO READ THE ENTIRE DOCUMENT, or click an item to go directly to that section. |
| Choice of readings assigned |
| Scheduling of readings and discussions within the program |
| Logistics of making the readings available to the participants |
| TOP |
Choice of readings assigned:
Based on realistic expectations of what the participants in an in-service program are willing to read -- especially when the texts are perceived to be more theoretical or scholarly! -- we were concerned to limit the readings on an inquiry approach to mathematics instruction to a minimum and to texts that would not be too "intimidating". This led us to decide to "adapt" a piece one of us had previously written with similar goals in mind, but for a different audience and context, so that the examples used as illustrations would be some the participants were already familiar with because of previous activities in the Summer Institute. The result of this effort was the paper "Major assumptions and implications of an inquiry approach to mathematics instruction" (Borasi, 1993) (see Instructional materials). Recently, instead of this paper we have been using a modified version of the text in section C1, entitled "Characteristic features of teaching mathematics through inquiry" (see Instructional materials) that we think is more appropriate.
| TOP |
Scheduling of readings and discussions within the program
A first discussion on the characteristics of math inquiry experiences has usually taken place in the last day of our Summer Institute, after the participants have had the opportunity to become familar with both the Tessellation and the Area illustrative units -- both as a result of their own experiences as learners and from viewing/reading about implementations of these units at the middle school level. Although the participants are invited to think about commonalities between our two illustrative inquiry units as a preliminary homework assignment, this session is not preceded by any readings. Participants are instead asked to do the reading of the 1993 Borasi's paper, or the more recent essay by Borasi and Fonzi, as a follow-up assignment -- with the discussion of this reading left for the first "follow-up project meeting" in the Fall, once all participants meet again after the Summer Institute. It should be pointed out, however, that delaying the follow-up discussion of this important reading is a serious drawback -- as by that time too many participants have either forgotten the assignment or read the paper so much in advance that they cannot bring back to bare its details.
For more information about how these readings and discussions were scheduled with respect to other components of the program, see Implementation C schedule.
| TOP |
Logistics of making the readings available to the participants
Since these are unpublished manuscripts, with the author's permission we have provided participants with Xerox copies. Teacher educators using this package are also permitted by the author to duplicate either manuscript. (See Instructional Materials for their location.)
| TOP |