Return to list of materials about "Soliciting feedback about the program"
In-service program documentation
Soliciting feedback about the program (D8.1)
Participants' responses to the Summer Institute evaluation questionnaire
-- Implementations B/C
Representative sample (3 out of 21)
Participant 1 (1 of 3)
1. Preliminary information provided prior to S.I.
Directions were excellent. The description of the Institute was very clear and specific. I have no suggestions for improvement.
2. Preliminary assignments
NCTM Standards - Good idea! All of this provided a framework and a common base for all.
3. "What is math" activity
Probably a good way to start - you have to start somewhere. But this wasn't my favorite activity. It seemed a bit vague in direction. Probably most valuable was the whole group discussion afterwards.
4. Tessellation
This was taught very well. The walk down memory lane went on too long - I'd try to shorten it up a lot. It's valuable - but due to the length some people tuned out.
5. Area
The teaching of the adults clearly modeled the appropriate way to teach children. We enjoyed it and learned together. For the August Institute - do it the same way!
6. Remodelling
I think there was time to remodel something - even if small - so that we could experience the unit as we did with area and tessellation.
7. Sessions on learning differences
Unfortunately, there wasn't time to study the case studies people had brought to the Institute. Dana did an excellent job with a diverse group in terms of background in special educ. The folder study was productive.
8. Reflections on teaching math through inquiry
This went on too long and much of it was already apparent as we had reflected on strategies as we went along.
9. Assessment issues
The article was very helpful. The teachers experienced with the units had some good ideas to share.
10. Preparation to planning
This was extremely beneficial. Glad you gave us phone numbers, too because they will be great resources during the year.
11. Journals
Always a good idea to solidify learnings by having students put thoughts into words. You provided just the right combination of structure & openness to journal assignments.
12. Supporting materials
Thursday night's assignment seemed a little long. The rest of the week was manageable. I liked the way you selected certain parts to read - an we needed to read it to have a base for the next day's learning. The articles you gave us on the follow-up day were interesting - and you could even give us more hopefully we have time to read it then!
Other comments
A tremendous experience! You obviously put a lot of time and energy into organization and implementation. Well done!
Return to top of document
Participant 5 (2 of 3)
1. Preliminary information provided prior to S.I.
I found the information to be clear and understandable. I appreciated receiving information that may not have been addressed to my particular role. This let me know the background and responsibilities of others who were to attend the Institute.
The Tessellation assignment was a surprise, and therefore, quite intriguing. I quickly went to a math text, found the definition to be similar, and looked at the examples in the book. I spend about thirty minutes on the assignment. A colleague joined me, and she and I discussed the attributes of tessellations - even though she had come to invite me to lunch! I found I could more easily reproduce things on paper. I had examples and non-examples to bring to class.
Observations:
I found there was a lengthy discussion on participants consulting books/experts. There seemed to be surprise and some dismay that such consulting had taken place. A comment was made to the effect that a late mailing had taken place, so that such a thing was less likely to happen. In my opinion, such individual investigating led naturally to an inquiry approach. I don't think anyone was over-helped, or led to an answer that took away from the assignment.
2. Preliminary assignments
The most difficult task of the student story was to settle on one particular student. I found the questions to be clear, and ones that I wished I had thought about throughout the year.
Observations:
I had not realized that the notes I had jotted down were meant to be handed in. Even after I re-read the assignment I was unable to determine that those observations were for someone else to read. I believe I was not the only participant confused by this issue. Another assignment I am embarrassed to admit confused me was the direction for writing down my own questions. The assignment before that refers to learning about the NCTM standards over the course of the Institute. I assumed the questions were to be developed over the course of the Institute also, and therefore was not as well prepared as I should have been.
3. "What is math" activity
This is a critical piece to the presentations that follow. It seemed as though our group approached it more as an ice-breaker. As I look back on it, my group approached our task with different ideas on how to express what we felt was needed. We all seemed to be a bit unclear as to what our perspective should be. Perhaps it was the timing of the piece, but video-break-video did not give me time to absorb what had been discussed, and move to a different mindset. At this time we also talked about our questions on math. Using the video, freewrite, poster and small group discussion left me feeling we had only skimmed the surface. I needed more depth at that point, and fewer transtitions. I had not known whether or not to make a switch from learner, teacher, participant or observer.
4. Tessellation
The tessellation activity from start to finish was captivating. The scope of the discussion was ever changing. This was an excellent vehicle to rattle our cages. We were made uncomfortable and unsure, but not necessarily due to lack of skill. It was more a shift in perspective. I found the comments by Sandy Segal to be enlightening and reassuring. I found the "Walk Down Memory Lane" to be an interesting activity. Although I found the actual writing somewhat tedious, I could feel the steps clicking into place. I think it is important to be complete on each step, so due time constraints I would suggest having the steps written out on paper so that all we would write are the midle and final column. (We would still brainstorm the list, but you already know what we'll say). Or I might suggest that this technique be used in two chunks, so that there is less to write at a time. This would also serve to reinforce this strategy.
5. Area
I found the selection on area to be most interesting. Perhaps I was feeling cocky because I had survived tessellations. I thought the questions and discussion was so intriguing. It was great to hear different approaches from different people, and to see that sometimes their perspective might make an "incorrect" answer acceptable. When I go in the small group, I let the experts take over, and as a result I was lost on the homework. I had to come up with an alternative answer, and I was sure mine did not have the merit that others had. I found this to be valuable, as I think this happens frequently with students, and I hope I will be more cognizant of the signs, and can help remedy it.
6. Remodelling
As I look back on it now, I think the Remodeling unit will be one I will have great fun with. I remember Connie saying she did not want it to be the "poor sister," and at the time it was being discussed, I remember that my brain had gone through major overhaul in the past few days, how could I concentrate on anything new? But as we shared the math embedded in remodeling experiences, I realized that the new aspect was more the way of looking at the problem. I see great applications across the curriculum.
7. Sessions on learning differences
Having seen the video a few times, I wasn't sure whether of not it would hold my interest. But I did become drawn in and wished there was time for more segments. This presents many issues in a no-nonsense fashion. I think we need to be made uncomfortable so that we are apt to recognize the need for a change.
Observations:
I recognize there is a time pressure, but according to the journals there were many people who had not seen the video. Perhaps you could make the uncut version available during the work session from 2:30-4:30. Or make it available as an optional assignment.
I observed much interest on the part of participants when it came to the information re: the three LD students. I wish we could have spent more time on our case study students, perhaps sharing problems with others to get some ideas on what to do to increase a success rate.
8. Reflections on teaching math through inquiry
The use of newsprint to record our responses was effective. It helped me stay focused, and helped clarify responses. I observed much attention from the participants, and although there was little disagreement on the issues presented, people responded with energy and enthusiasm. I still feel the parts where the experts did a "stand and deliver" was important.
9. Assessment issues
I had decided to spend this day as an observer, rather than a participant so that I could recognize problems, and ask some final questions during the debriefing. So I was only partially prepared for any of the assigned tasks. But the groups were so small that I was called upon to participate, and I really was in over my head. I felt that Judi and Barb recognized that the direction we were headed did not meet the objective, and this raised my level of concern. Because time is a factor, and people have such varied backgrounds, I think it is acceptable to say that a specific type of response is more helpful, and will lead us into the next level. Direct nudging is necessary. Sometimes a push is required.
10. Preparation to planning
11. Journals
I enjoyed reading the journals each evening. I was amazed at what similar issues, questions, and concerns we shared. I appreciated Dana making a personal comment to me re: my journal. I wish the facilitators could have written one journal entry. I was able to see the humor and personal side of you because of the debriefing sessions, and it did give me a different perspective on events the following day. I feel I will use journals next year. I realize my comments will be important.
12. Supporting materials
I found the pink, blue, and green booklets to be a wealth of information. I can easily understand what is being presented, and it has integrity. It is new, I have read little like this. The other handouts had merit. They were obviously chosen for a reason. The piece we read the first night was so true for our experiences that day. I especially find the Goals booklets to be helpful. Justification for this approach is clearly written, and will help immensely in planning next year. The only readings I did not find helpful as of yet were the readings handed out the final day. Again, time seemed to be a critical factor. They were handed out so quickly.
Other comments
What a great opportunity to meet each of you! I am very fortunate to have made your acquaintance. Watching the lengths you went to to "get it right" made me reassess the focus of my time and energy in my work. What better way to model the importance of improvement and the lessening of complacency? Thanks for the push!
Return to top of document
Participant 6 (3 of 3)
1. Preliminary information provided prior to S.I.
I found all information sent prior to the workshop to be relevant, although the opportunity to meet with Judi helped to clarify that information. The tessellation assignment was worthwhile. The reading homework was borderline in its helpfulness.
2. Preliminary assignments
Levine's reading and the student's story seemed to be busy work. I don't feel that the preliminary reading added that much, if anything, to the institute. The student story could have been eliminated entirely without affecting what I received from the workshop. I was already familiar with the NCTM standards and did not reread them thoroughly.
3. "What is math" activity
The video I had seen before and, unlike most workshop participants, I found it to be of limited value. The problem with most math class tapes is that fit into the lecture type approach which we are trying to minimize, if not eliminate. The small and large group discussions were beneficial. I liked the activity and will probably modify it for classroom use.
4. Tessellation
I found this to be the most enjoyable part of the week. I'm sure the novelty of the topic had much to do with the benefits I derived from it. This will be the first unit I use in class because of its novelty. Just as I felt more interested because of the relative unfamiliarity of the material, I feel the kids will react the same way.
5. Area
The introduction to the area unit was rushed and confusing. It wasn't until we actually got into the material the following day that the value of the approach became clear. I do have some problems with "agreeing upon" an acceptable answer. Although there were several different approaches and interpretations as to what the area of the fish was, there was a definite answer. What would happen if a student gave a convincing argument for a completely erroneous answer to a similar problem? Would the consensus then be accepted even if inaccurate?
6. Remodelling
This entire topic was too rushed. It might be better to discuss a number of units than to try and rush through one. I have done similar units in class and derived nothing new from this session.
7. Sessions on learning differences
The F.A.T. City video bothers me. I am well aware of what is being done during the course of the tape, but I still feel that the presenter violates, unintentionally, some of his own policies. The tapes were of limited value due to the quality of the tapes and the accompanying visuals.
8. Reflections on teaching math through inquiry
What amazed me the most is the degree to which this material is appropriate for ALL students. I suppose that just maximizes the notion that LD students are not different in kind, but in degree. What is beneficial to some students is probably beneficial to all.
9. Assessment issues
I did not like the "pass out the folder" approach. The time would have been better spent with a straightforward discussion on what to look for in such folders. I now average five labeled student per class. I need to know the essentials at the beginning of the year. The team teaching approach allows for the discussion of students on a daily basis. Interestingly enough, more time is spent on specific non-labeled students than on those already coded. Another approach; some straight forward advice on how to get help to those kids not coded. I feel that there are many more LD students than on the books. These are the kids we spend hour after hour discussing. Many students are obviously in need of services, but have somehow slipped through the cracks. Sometimes parents fight against having their kids labeled. Sometimes our own efforts defeat our intents! I had a student this year suffering from encopresis. He was obviously in need of servicing and received a lot of attention. The attention paid off and this student showed amazing progress throughout the year. This progress is now working against him. Since he showed some success, he may be deemed not longer in need of help. What is wrong with this picture?
10. Preparation to planning
I appreciate the opportunity to question the second year teachers, but I would have preferred immediate feedback to questions rather than a "list them all" approach. If one question seemed to be getting prolonged attention, it could be cut off with a promise to return to it if time permitted.
11. Journals
I found them interesting, but of limited value. The primary benefit seemed to be a chance to voice opinions or ideas not thought of during workshop time.
12. Supporting materials
I was, and still am, overwhelmed by the amount of written material provided. I appreciated the guidance as to which parts to read first. Judging from the number of questions, more definite leads as to where to purchase the necessary "hands on" materials would be appreciated. Case studies I find of limited value.
Other comments
Overall, I thought that the workshop was very successful; much more so than I had anticipated. The most successful aspects were those with which I was least familiar and with which I had the opportunity to deal with "hand on" and over a relatively prolonged time. The least successful units were those which were rushed. I would rather have a "how you could adapt this generic unit" approach than to rush through a specific unit as we did with remodeling.
Thank you for all your time and effort.
Return to top of document
Return to list of materials about "Soliciting
feedback about the program"