Escolar Documentos
Profissional Documentos
Cultura Documentos
Susunod na Blog
A blog that tackles issues on basic education (in the Philippines and the United States) including early childhood education, th
teaching profession, math and science education, medium of instruction, poverty, and the role of research and higher educat
"Bear in mind that the wonderful things you learn in your schools are the work of many generations, produced by enthusiastic effort and infinite labor in every country of the w
is put into your hands as your inheritance in order that you may receive it, honor it, add to it, and one day faithfully hand it to your children. Thus do we mortals achieve immo
permanent things which we create in common." - Albert Einstein
Search This B
About Me
Washington
States
Angel C. de
is currently a
professor of
Georgetown
At Georgeto
been teachi
Chemistry s
addition to g
courses in m
spectroscop
quantum ch
research int
include nucl
resonance s
protein struc
determinatio
malarial dru
and science
He was a re
CAREER Aw
National Sci
Foundation
Georgetown
Deans Awa
Excellence i
A member o
helped the r
Paete, Lagu
incorporate
and the Inte
public schoo
View my com
Content and skills are not opposite sides of a pole. These are two orthogonal axes of learning. Students with low content but high skills have very
limited factual knowledge, "someone who knows how to think, but who has nothing to think about." These are the "intellectual amnesiacs". Students
with high content but low skills are likewise unable to progress since these students have not been able to develop skills necessary to transfer what
they have learned into a new or different area. These are the "encyclopedist learners". What we need are the "expert learners", which from the
above diagram is clearly a product of emphasizing both content and skills. The editors of the Journal of Research in Science Teaching are quick to
point out that the argument of analogical versus rote learning is likewise a false dichotomy:
Labels
Comment
http://philbasiceducation.blogspot.com/search/label/Spiral%20Approach
1/31
11/15/2014
Evidence
Data and
Teaching
Suggestio
Education
Science E
Early Chi
News
Education
Meaningful learning as described by the chemistry faculty of the University of Michigan in their 1997 J. Chem. Ed. paper is:
Technolo
Curriculu
Teacher
Higher Ed
Kinderga
Classroom
Mother T
Shortage
Education
Views fro
Discovery
Instructio
School D
Math Edu
Spiral Ap
poverty
Nonprofit
In this light, one can look at a curriculum and ask if a student is indeed given ample opportunities to learn both skills and content. It is through this
perspective that one could ask whether a spiral curriculum for both mathematics and the sciences in high school is the right or wrong way to go.
The last sentence from the above excerpt answers this question. It is immersion that is required not a spiral progression....
Standard
Overview
Reading
Special E
Blog Archive
http://philbasiceducation.blogspot.com/search/label/Spiral%20Approach
2/31
11/15/2014
Popular Posts
http://philbasiceducation.blogspot.com/search/label/Spiral%20Approach
3/31
11/15/2014
In the same presentation, it is also mentioned that "Science curriculum framework of high performing countries (Australia, Brunei, England, Finland,
Japan, Taiwan, Thailand, Singapore, New Zealand, USA (3 states)) follow a spiral progression and integrated approach at least up to G9". The
presentation, however, fails to cite that in Singapore, for example, "Teachers for early grades are trained and teach in either math and science or in
languages and social studies, not all subjects." (Schools in Singapore may provide lessons for educators here, Cleveland.com). The presentation
also does not mention the following observation highlighted by the US National Science Board's Science and Engineering Indicators 2002:
Analyses conducted in conjunction with TIMSS (Schmidt, McKnight, and Raizen 1997) documented that curriculum guides in the
United States include more topics than is the international norm. Most other countries focus on a limited number of topics, and each
topic is generally completed before a new one is introduced. In contrast, U.S. curriculums follow a "spiral" approach: topics are
introduced in an elemental form in the early grades, then elaborated and extended in subsequent grades. One result of this is that U.S.
curriculums are quite repetitive, because the same topic appears and reappears at several different grades. Another result is that
topics are not presented in any great depth, giving the U.S. curriculum the appearance of being unfocused and shallow.
The above is summarized in the following figure:
http://philbasiceducation.blogspot.com/search/label/Spiral%20Approach
4/31
11/15/2014
http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/seind02/c1/fig01-14.htm
The spiral curriculum is in fact viewed as one of the problems of basic education in the United States. This is likewise emphasized in a study on
curriculum coherence (J. CURRICULUM STUDIES, 2005, VOL. 37, NO. 5, 525559) where the following table (for the physical sciences),
illustrating coherence in curriculum in the top performing countries (Singapore, the Czech Republic, Japan, and Korea) and the lack thereof in the
United States, is presented:
Total Pagevie
April 2012)
1,168,7
In the above table, the topics covered by curriculum in the top performing countries are enclosed. The US curriculum is redundant while those of
http://philbasiceducation.blogspot.com/search/label/Spiral%20Approach
5/31
11/15/2014
http://books.google.com/books?id=6xvkJNWTErAC&source=gbs_navlinks_s
Spiral curriculum, when and how? These are in fact very important questions which can easily decide whether a curriculum will succeed or fail.
First, for most countries including the top performing ones, the spiral curriculum is only applied up to middle school (Grade 8). The international
exam, TIMSS, is given to students in Grades 4 and 8. Students from the US are only average among developed countries in the Grade 8 exam,
suggesting that problems lie mainly in the later elementary years and middle school. In the top performing countries, the foundations of physics
(forces, time, space and motion) are first introduced in Grade 5, while the fundamental building blocks of chemical knowledge (atoms, molecules
and ions) are taught in Grade 7. Although these topics are likewise covered in the US curriculum, a little bit about everything is also presented to
children during these years. The US curriculum is quite diffused. The top performing countries pay attention to coherence in the curriculum.
Perhaps, this is the reasoning behind less breadth. These countries choose to emphasize instead depth in the foundations of these science
disciplines. Along this line, the sequence is very important. Chemistry is taught first with atoms, molecules and ions. This is one major
characteristic that is lacking in the Philippines' DepEd K+12 curriculum.
http://philbasiceducation.blogspot.com/search/label/Spiral%20Approach
6/31
11/15/2014
There is an amount of pragmatism required to tackle education reforms. Public school education requires money. There are clearly resources that
are fundamentally required: teachers, classrooms, chairs, toilets, and learning materials (textbooks and supplies). It should be obvious that without
these, no education reform is worth the experiment. Thus, it may seem that research on education reform is already a luxury for a country that
cannot even meet the basic requirements of public schooling. However, not having the backup of good studies maybe more expensive than doing
nothing especially when the reforms do harm to the current system.
Various interventions or education reforms have been implemented in developed countries like the United States with varying degrees of success
or failure. A huge difference between a country like the US and a developing country like the Philippines is money although wasting public funds
http://philbasiceducation.blogspot.com/search/label/Spiral%20Approach
7/31
11/15/2014
http://philbasiceducation.blogspot.com/search/label/Spiral%20Approach
8/31
11/15/2014
Labels: Curriculum, Data and Statistics, Education Reform, Evidence-Based Research, Spiral Approach, Suggestions to Solve Problems in Basic Education
http://philbasiceducation.blogspot.com/search/label/Spiral%20Approach
9/31
11/15/2014
One dissertation from Lindenwood University tackles specifically the transition of Missouri school districts to the new science curriculum:
http://gradworks.umi.com/3450281.pdf
Abstract
This investigation examined the transition from a spiral science curriculum to a field-focus science curriculum in middle school. A
spiral science curriculum focuses on a small part of each field of science during each middle school year, more of a general science
concept. In contrast to that, the base of a field-focus curriculum is that each grade level focuses on a specific field of science, more of
a high school like concept. The literature reviewed provides a history of science education, the steps of the change process, and the
importance of professional development. The literature review provided a basis for determining trends in the science education.
The researcher collected a variety of data to understand the process that districts move through to transition to a field-focus science
curriculum. Interviews provided information concerning the transition process of three Midwestern school districts that have arranged
their curriculum into a field-focus alignment. Teacher surveys of one district supplied the perceptions of the professional development
involved during the transition process. The researcher also examined school district student achievement data in the area of science.
Suggestions made through this investigation focused on the Eight Steps to a Successful Change when implementing a field-focus
science curriculum alignment. Following the suggested steps will help a transition go smoother.
This study specifically looks at the New Heart School District in the state of Missouri. The science teachers in this district have agreed to abandon
the spiral approach and adopt a field-focus approach to teaching science. The rationale was simple - surrounding school districts that have
instituted this reform are doing better in statewide standard exams. The following are among Alwardt's findings regarding the transition New Heart
School District undertook:
Transition is always difficult so it is important that evidence supporting the reform is shared. In this particular case, data supporting the
notion that a spiral approach leads only to a superficial treatment of topics and does not prepare students for the the rigor expected in
standard tests.
Communication is vital between supervisors and teachers. These need to be regular so that updates and concerns are immediately
addressed.
All necessary materials required for the new curriculum are promptly provided to all teachers. This effectively alleviates tension and
http://philbasiceducation.blogspot.com/search/label/Spiral%20Approach
10/31
11/15/2014
Labels: Curriculum, Education Reform, Evidence-Based Research, Science Education, Spiral Approach, Teaching
To understand what the above study is really about, it is important to look at exactly what topics were being taught in chemistry and biology. The
chemistry lectures are on intermolecular forces, polar and nonpolar compounds, and solutions, while the topics covered in biology are the sugars;
monosaccharides, disaccharides and polysaccharides, as well, as movement of ions and water inside cells. In this case, the biology topics clearly
benefit from a background in chemistry. Chemistry provides a perspective that allows students to see the components inside a cell in molecular
terms. What is important in this curriculum design is a deliberate effort to connect the topics between the two fields of science. Such is not evident
in the DepEd's K to 12 science curriculum.
http://philbasiceducation.blogspot.com/search/label/Spiral%20Approach
11/31
11/15/2014
Whether taking one subject in science helps in another is an important question. A survey of how students perform in college science courses
provides preliminary insights:
The above does not directly answer the question since this is a study of how students performed in these fields after finishing high school.
However, although it does not specifically address how a student's background affects a student's performance on a science subject in high
school, it clearly shows that there are cross-subject benefits. Of special interest, is how high school math influences a student's performance in all
sciences, including biology. The fact that students who had high school calculus perform much better across the board is probably not so much on
an improvement in background, but more on being exposed to greater challenges. These studies are still ongoing and these illustrate how reforms
in science education should be made. Reforms in science education can not be simply dictated in a whimsical fashion.
Labels: Data and Statistics, Evidence-Based Research, Science Education, Spiral Approach
http://philbasiceducation.blogspot.com/search/label/Spiral%20Approach
12/31
11/15/2014
The University of Missouri currently has a program that helps train teachers in implementing the above course sequence. It is briefly described in a
brochure with the following brief rationale:
http://philbasiceducation.blogspot.com/search/label/Spiral%20Approach
13/31
11/15/2014
http://philbasiceducation.blogspot.com/search/label/Spiral%20Approach
14/31
11/15/2014
Bottom line: Unlike the spiral curriculum that DepEd's K to 12 promotes, "Physics First" is a response to our improved understanding of how the
brain learns. There are additional significant differences. "Physics First", as demonstrated in the University of Missouri program involves summer
workshops for teachers over a three year period. This reform does not take place with teacher training lasting for a week or two. An institution of
higher learning is intimately involved not for weeks, but for years. The program is not imposed on all public schools. And in the limited, welldesigned, controlled studies, regular evaluation will be performed. This is in line with a perspective from another Nobel laureate, Richard Feynman:
"Ane cdotal e vide nce alone , howe ve r, cannot confirm the succe ss of the physics-first curriculum . R ichard Fe ynm an, re nowne d physicist and Nobe l laure ate ,
spok e of this lack of cre dible studie s in scie nce e ducation alm ost 40 ye ars ago. "The re is an e norm ous num be r of studie s and a gre at de al of statistics,"
he said in a spe e ch about e ducation at the Galile o Sym posium in Italy in 1964, "but the y are m ix ture s of ane cdote s, uncontrolle d e x pe rim e nts, and ve ry
poorly controlle d e x pe rim e nts, so that the re is ve ry little inform ation as a re sult." Following this logic, the physics-first curriculum cannot be de clare d a
com ple te succe ss without we ll-controlle d studie s showing its utility in raising scie nce lite racy."
Key aspects of this curriculum include application of accessible algorithms that can be more easily understood and used by students;
use of student math drawings and research-based visual representations to support student understanding and class discussion of
mathematical thinking; an emphasis on in-depth sustained learning of core grade-level concepts (rather than a spiral
curriculum) to support students conceptual understanding and fluency; and a learn by teaching design to support teachers new to
the curriculum.
Contrast the above study with DepEd's Secretary Luistro's view:
"Mapapagbuti na natin ang kaalaman ng mga mag-aaral sa Agham at Matematika sa pagsusulong ng spiral approach sa ating bagong curriculum,"
the DepEd chief said. (With the spiral approach in the new curriculum, we will improve learning in math and science)
http://www.gmanetwork.com/news/story/256058/news/nation/deped-pinoy-school-kids-would-be-able-to-read-before-they-enter-grade-2-of-k-12
http://philbasiceducation.blogspot.com/search/label/Spiral%20Approach
15/31
11/15/2014
To compare DepEd's K to 12 treatment of chemistry with the basic education curriculum in other countries, one can combine Grades 7 to 10. Each
of these grades in DepEd's K to 12, assigns one quarter of the year to chemistry. Adding these through the first four years of high school sums up
to one year of instruction in chemistry. This, of course, only allows for comparison on the basis of the length of time devoted to the subject. In
countries where chemistry is taught as a year-long subject, there are no three-quarter gaps between each incursion into chemistry. The flow of
concepts covered can be managed more easily in a year-long subject than in a spiral curriculum. The brief instructions in chemistry followed by
long gaps require significant long term memory on the part of the students and it is likely that each year would require a significant amount of review
of previous material. Nonetheless, even in the ideal scenario where students retain what they have learned in each year, there are huge differences
between the topics covered by DepEd's K to 12 and those found in other countries. An example of what is generally covered in high school
chemistry in the United States is provided by Dr. Anne Marie Helmenstein, PhD. (See Topics Studied in High School Chemistry)
One of these differences is very important. The word "stoichiometry" cannot be found in DepEd's K to 12 curriculum guide. Tai, Ward and Sadler,
in a study published in the Journal of Chemical Education ("High school chemistry content background of introductory college chemistry students
and its association with college chemistry grades." J. Chem. Ed., 2006, 83(11), 1703-1711.), found that of all the topics that high school chemistry
covers, only "stoichiometry" is found to be a good predictor of college chemistry performance. They arrived at this conclusion from a survey of
http://philbasiceducation.blogspot.com/search/label/Spiral%20Approach
16/31
11/15/2014
I think stoichiometry gave a lot of kids trouble so I think my fairly strong background with that gave me a heads up.
...stoichiometryI learned that really well in high school and I remembered it all throughout chemistry.
...knowledge about stoichiometry from high school chemistry helped me most.
Id have to say stoichiometry because quite a few people had problems with that.
...stoichiometry and the ability to apply conversions helped the most.
...most helpful was the depth [with which] we covered stoichiometry....
What is stoichiometry? For the benefit of readers who do not have any background in chemistry, here is "stoichiometry" as described by Wikipedia:
Stoichiometry (
/stkimtri/) is a branch of chemistry that deals with the relative quantities of reactants and products in chemical
reactions. In a balanced chemical reaction, the relations among quantities of reactants and products typically form a ratio of whole
numbers. For example, in a reaction that forms ammonia (NH3), exactly one molecule of nitrogen (N2) reacts with three molecules of
hydrogen (H2) to produce two molecules of NH3:
N2 + 3H2 2NH3
Stoichiometry can be used to find quantities such as the amount of products (in mass, moles, volume, etc.) that can be produced with given
reactants and percent yield (the percentage of the given reactant that is made into the product). Stoichiometry calculations can predict how
elements and components diluted in a standard solution react in experimental conditions. Stoichiometry is founded on the law of
conservation of mass: the mass of the reactants equals the mass of the products.
When I was teaching chemistry to non science majors at the Ateneo, I used the assembly of bicycles to illustrate stoichiometry. I begin with the
assumption that all bicycle parts are available except for the handles and tires. I then ask the class how many bicycles I could assemble if I had two
handles and two pairs of tires and of course, everyone answers "two". Interestingly, when I change the initial conditions to having 5 pairs of tires and
only one handle, the class got the correct answer as well, only one bicycle, because I was limited by the number of handles I have. This is
stoichiometry. In a chemical reaction, a given ratio needs to be met by the starting materials. If this ratio is not met, there will be an excess in one of
the starting materials while another will be totally used. Doing this in chemistry involves arithmetic since substances react with each other in units
of either ions, atoms or molecules. Thus, to evaluate the stoichiometry of a given reaction, one must first know how to convert quantities that we
are familiar with in the macroscopic world such as mass or volume into units that are appropriate for the microscopic world of atoms, ions and
molecules. Stoichiometry is quantitative and for this reason, in high schools where only the descriptive or qualitative aspects of chemistry are
emphasized, this topic is often neglected.
If stoichiometry is covered in college courses, why should its high school coverage have an effect on a student's performance especially when
stoichiometry is only one of the more than two dozens of topics covered in an introductory course of chemistry in college? A college instructor
should be able to address and teach stoichiometry. Herein lies one of the principles of basic education. Basic education not only teaches what to
think, but also how to think. Basic education should make students think. And this is what students do when they perform calculations in
stoichiometry. And if students fail to learn this in high school, they will have great difficulty not just in college, but in real life. We should not leave this
important ingredient in chemistry education to the additional two years in high school. At that time, the two tracks are already in place. And not
everyone will be taking chemistry as a subject.
DepEd's K to 12 chemistry fails to emphasize stoichiometry because it likewise neglects what chemistry is all about. Chemistry is founded on
seeing the world through the eyes of atoms and molecules. Chemists see reactions in the following way:
http://philbasiceducation.blogspot.com/search/label/Spiral%20Approach
17/31
11/15/2014
With the images above, it is easy to see why there are given proportions in chemical reactions. The combinations are as specific as how a bicycle
is assembled. The arrows also go both ways, which denote equilibrium, another important concept in chemistry, which is likewise not mentioned in
DepEd's K to 12 curriculum guide for science. Obviously, I have other fundamental objections to DepEd's curriculum in chemistry. I do not even
know what DepEd means by saying, "They will also recognize that ingredients in food and medical products are made up of these particles and are
absorbed by the body in the form of ions." I can only scratch my head while reading this sentence.
Stoichiometry is indeed important. It illustrates a way of thinking and an important fact of life. Both teacher groups, the Alliance of Concerned
Teachers and the Teachers' Dignity Coalition probably have their own version of stoichiometry as applied to improving Philippine basic education:
Unfortunately, President Aquino's government does not even have any one of these ingredients....
http://philbasiceducation.blogspot.com/search/label/Spiral%20Approach
18/31
11/15/2014
No, this blog is not selling modules for DepEd K to 12. Although, it is noteworthy to point out a comment that I recently read on the Facebook page
of the Alliance of Concerned Teachers. The comment describes how some division offices are distributing the new materials. A new workbook
apparently costs 160 pesos. Of this price 120 pesos go to the supplier or publisher and the remaining 40 pesos are divided among the teacher
adviser (20 pesos), department chairman or head (10 pesos), office of the principal (5 pesos), and the remaining 5 pesos go to the cooperative that
sells the workbooks. This is rumor, of course. The fact, however, is that the new curriculum, with its spiral approach, creates the need for new
instructional materials. The unique character of the new curriculum makes it difficult to resort to already available teaching materials. For example,
the modules shown in the figure above comprise the first quarter of the science subject in the new grade 7 of DepEd's K to 12. This coverage is
quite different from grade 7 science subjects in other countries. It is different from the science subject that I took when I started high school. And
this will be followed by three quarters on entirely different topics in biology, physics and earth science.
The word "Diversity" in the title is highly appropriate since this set of materials for the first quarter already covers a very wide array of topics and
concepts in chemistry. It illustrates one of the dangers of the spiral approach. It easily lends to a "mile wide and an inch deep" coverage. As a
result, students fail to master the necessary skills to progress from one level to the next. The desire to cover something complex at the beginning
disregards the need to acquire basic skills and understand the fundamentals of a science discipline. One can browse any general chemistry
textbook and see that the topics covered in these modules are found not near the beginning of the book, but in much later chapters. The following
are the chapters, for example, of Chemistry: The Central Science, Brown, LeMay, High School Edition:
1 Introduction: Matter and Measurement
2 Atoms, Molecules, and Ions
3 Stoichiometry: Calculations with Chemical Formulas and Equations
4 Reactions and Solution Stoichiometry
5 Thermochemistry
http://philbasiceducation.blogspot.com/search/label/Spiral%20Approach
19/31
11/15/2014
The spiral approach of DepEd's K to 12 to learning math and the sciences and the absence of a formal science subject in the early years will lead
to a poorer basic education in these fields. On top of these, DepEd also claims a transition to an inquiry-based teaching. We do not think in a spiral
fashion. Inquiry, which in layman's terms suggests "getting to the bottom of things", requires immersion, not a smorgasbord.
The National Academies Press of the United States provides materials that guide education in the sciences. The following is an example.
http://philbasiceducation.blogspot.com/search/label/Spiral%20Approach
20/31
11/15/2014
The above book, a publication of the National Academies Press (http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=9596) talks about how inquiry happens
in two settings, in science, and inside a classroom. The book starts with the two examples given below. The example from science is taken from a
geological study of the Pacific coast of North America:
Radiocarbon evidence for extensive plate-boundary rupture about 300 years ago at the Cascadia subduction zone
ALAN R. NELSON*, BRIAN F. ATWATER, PETER T. BOBROWSKY , LEE-ANN BRADLEY *, JOHN J. CLAGUE , GARY A. CARVER, MARK E. DARIENZO, WENDY C. GRANT , HAROLD W. KRUEGER
, RODGER SPARKS **, THOMAS W. STAFFORD JR & MINZE STUIVER
*
Institute of Arctic and Alpine Research, CB 450,Univ ersity of Colorado, Boulder, Colorado 80309-0450, USA
US Geological Surv ey at Department of Geological Sciences,Box 351310, Univ ersity of Washington, Seattle,Washington 98195-1310, USA
British Columbia Geological Surv ey Branch, 1810 Blanshard Street,Victoria, British Columbia V8V 1X4, Canada
Geological Surv ey of Canada, 100 West Render Street, Vancouv er,British Columbia V6B 1R8, Canada
Department of Geology , Humboldt State Univ ersity , Arcata,Calif ornia 95521, USA
Geology Department, Portland State Univ ersity , Box 751, Portland, Oregon 97207, USA
Krueger Enterprises, Inc., Geochron Laboratories Div ision, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02138, USA
**
Raf ter Radiocarbon Laboratory , Nuclear Sciences Group, Institute of Geological and Nuclear Sciences, Ltd, Box 31 312, Lower Hutt, New Zealand
Department of Geological Sciences and Quaternary Research Center, Box 351310, Univ ersity of Washington, Seattle, Washington 98195-1310, USA
THE Cascadia subduction zone, a region of converging tectonic plates along the Pacific coast of North America, has a geological history of very large plateboundary earthquakes 1,2 , but no such earthquakes have struck this region since Euro-American settlement about 150 years ago. Geophysical estimates of the
moment magnitudes (M w) of the largest such earthquakes range from 8 (ref. 3) to 9 1 /2 : (ref. 4). Radiocarbon dating of earthquake-killed vegetation can set upper
bounds on earthquake size by constraining the length of plate boundary that ruptured in individual earth-quakes. Such dating has shown that the most recent
rupture, or series of ruptures, extended at least 55 km along the Washington coast within a period of a few decades about 300 years ago 5 . Here we report 85
new 14 C ages, which suggest that this most recent rupture (or series) extended at least 900 km between southern British Columbia and northern California. By
comparing the 14 C ages with written records of the past 150 years, we conclude that a single magnitude 9 earthquake, or a series of lesser earthquakes, ruptured
most of the length of the Cascadia subduction zone between the late 1600s and early 1800s, and probably in the early 1700s.
(http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v378/n6555/abs/378371a0.html)
The example from the classroom takes place in an elementary school:
"Several of the children in Mrs. Grahams fifth grade class were excited when they returned to their room after recess one fall day. They
pulled their teacher over to a window, pointed outside, and said, We noticed something about the trees on the playground. Whats
wrong with them? Mrs. Graham didnt know what they were concerned about, so she said, Show me what you mean.
The students pointed to three trees growing side by side. One had lost all its leaves, the middle one had multicolored leaves mostly
yellow and the third had lush, green leaves. The children said, Why are those three trees different? They used to look the same,
didnt they? Mrs. Graham didnt know the answer."
And the story continues with the entire class spending more than three weeks trying to find answers to their question. This is inquiry. This is
immersion, not a smorgasbord, not a spiral approach.
Jeannie Fulbright, author of Apologia's Elementary Science Series, wrote an article on the immersion, and I am sharing her article (with her kind
permission) here:
Though many educators promote the spiral approach to education wherein a child is exposed over and over again to minute amounts of a variety of
science topics, we believe there is a far better way.
The theory goes that we just want to expose the child to science at this age. Each year he is given a tad bit more information than was given the
year before, thus spiraling upward. However, this approach supposes that young minds are incapable of understanding deeper science; and
education is thus dumbed down. Sadly, this 'exposure method has proved unsuccessful in the public and private schools as NCES (National
Center for Education Statistics) statistic show American eighth graders (all having been trained under this method) are consistently less than 50%
proficient in science. This data reveals this approach to be an inadequate methodology in education.
http://philbasiceducation.blogspot.com/search/label/Spiral%20Approach
21/31
11/15/2014
A friend of mine teaches remedial math at the Community College level. We were discussing the problem of a number of students who never
seem to have their addition facts mastered (much less their multiplication facts). He wrote:
I remember as a young math teacher wondering how many hours of flash card drill it takes in the elementary grades to become fluent in the
addition and multiplication facts. I could imagine ten minutes a day of actual flash card drill, five days a week, for 45 weeks in one grade, a total of
50 hours if I multiplied correctly, might be a reasonable guess. Surely it has been studied. Well, if it has been studied I have never seen any
evidence of it in the last fifty years. I thought of that as probably pretty basic knowledge about the teaching of arithmetic.
http://philbasiceducation.blogspot.com/search/label/Spiral%20Approach
22/31
11/15/2014
Id estimate that at least 30 hours of drill, spread over a period of time would be required for an average child to learn addition facts, and an equal
amount of time later on to learn multiplication facts. But there is NO classroom time provided for this in the math curriculum.
The problem here, speaking as a third-grade teacher of 8-and-9-year-old students for a decade, is that the elementary math curriculum (in
America) is not structured to provide ANY time for drill such as he describes. Even when I was a child in the early 1960s, we did not have drill of
that type in elementary school. My mother worked on flash cards with me 10-15 minutes every day before I was allowed to play. I HATED every
moment of it, but saw the value of it when I got into the working world in my 20s and was using multiplication every day, knowing my multiplication
tables by heart thanks to her efforts.
Ive been discussing math teaching with other math teachers for several years now, and I find there are several trends I highly disagree with.
Trend 1: The amount of math homework has been cut in half from 24-30 problems nightly, to 12-15. I can only guess that this has come about
from parents complaining about too much homework over the years. While I am in favor of not giving more homework than necessary,
unfortunately, the current lighter homework often does not give sufficient practice in a certain type of problem for the students to be able to
understand or master that type of problem. One or two examples of a certain type of problem are just not sufficient.
http://philbasiceducation.blogspot.com/search/label/Spiral%20Approach
23/31
11/15/2014
Trend 2: Drill practice is considered old-fashioned. Never mind that the teacher can make drill practice into a fun lesson, just like any other type of
lesson can be made fun by a a dedicated teacher. Without any drill, and without parents practicing or drilling children at home (such as the type of
flash card practice my mother did with me as a child), many children are just NEVER mastering even the basic addition facts, let alone
multiplication facts.
I no longer teach Grade 3; I am now a private tutor. Unfortunately, I am now running across a number of 14-year-olds who are using calculators to
add 5 + 3, or 7 + 6, or 9 + 2. Whats even worse, THEIR TEACHERS LET THEM!!!! I personally think calculators should just be thrown out until
about Grade 11, or whenever math involving higher functions on calculators is started. Prior to that time, they shouldnt be allowed in school at all.
http://philbasiceducation.blogspot.com/search/label/Spiral%20Approach
24/31
11/15/2014
When I taught Grade 3, I made students show all of their work on their homework, including every carry number, and every cross-out for borrowing;
I didnt allow them to say, I did it in my head. (See photo above of example homework prior to 2007.) One reason for making students show all of
their work (I had several reasons) is that I knew perfectly well many of them had calculators at home. However, even if they did their homework with
calculators, they would have to redo it to mark all the carry numbers and borrowing cross-outs. This makes it better to just do it by hand in the first
place. I then spent 30 minutes of my teaching time DAILY, going over these homework problems. Its so satisfying to a teacher to hear, Oh! Now I
see my mistake! Its a big mistake for a teacher just to mark answers right or wrong, as students learn nothing from that.
Trend 3: (mostly at the high school level, I havent yet seen it appearing in middle schools, although I could be mistaken): Dont instruct and explain,
and then follow up with practice to master the skills. Instead, put students into groups, and let them see if they can figure out themselves how to
do problems. Dont give much feedback, but of course, students will have the same test as if you taught them the traditional way. (So the parents
who can afford it get math tutors to do at home the job that the teacher should be doing; the parents who cannot afford tutors or understand the
math themselves have children who completely fail math).
Trend 4: (has been around for at least 25 years): It doesnt matter if children dont master a unit. Just move through all the units, and the same
units will be covered next year in a little more detail. If they still dont get it, the same thing will happen the following year, and hopefully they will get it
then. This idea has a name, which is called something like spiraling.
Even though Ive never seen it, in the past couple of years Ive become aware that Singapore math requires mastery of each math subject to a
certain degree before moving on to the next math subject.
I think students would be far better served by having HALF the number of math topics (eliminating topics in Grade 2 such as Data, Graphing and
Probablility; Congruent Shapes and Symmetry; etc.) and making sure they have mastered basic addition facts (by heart), addition and subtraction
of two-digit numbers, and multiplication tables up to 5 (by heart) before moving into Grade 3. If parents dont have time to drill children at home on
http://philbasiceducation.blogspot.com/search/label/Spiral%20Approach
25/31
11/15/2014
One of the major problems with the spiral math curriculum is that in every grade, limited and precious classroom math time is being wasted on
unnecessary math concepts, given the age of the students. Those who have put the spiral curriculum together have moved math education from
practical, daily skills to incorporating many advanced and unnecessary skills (for the age of the students). Many of these topics could be saved for
higher grades (6-8) and students would arrive better prepared, and intellectually ready.
Some important topics, which are covered briefly in the curriculum, but to which little or no time is devoted to practice or mastery of these important
life skills: making change for customers, knowing addition and multiplication tables by heart, knowing how to do the simplest operations without a
calculator, being able to recognize a wrong answer when a wrong button has been pushed on a calculator, developing estimation skills, becoming
competent in measurement and fractions (useful to every housewife in halving or doubling recipes on a daily basis).
Consider: Are we not cooking anymore in American society? Are we not hanging picture frames? Are we not doing any home repairs or
improvements ourselves? Is there never a need to count back change? Does no one sew or do woodworking for pleasure anymore?
There is also a great disconnect in many classrooms between the material students are working on, and on knowing the reason for learning it.
Instead of letting students feel that they are learning skills which can be useful to them NOW, so much time is wasted on learning concepts where
the only use is for passing a test which seems useless to the child. Younger elementary children are mostly concrete learners, and they love and
appreciate fun concrete tasks to work on.
Here are five examples of the types of things I feel should be eliminated from the Grade 2 curriculum (for seven-year-old students):
http://philbasiceducation.blogspot.com/search/label/Spiral%20Approach
26/31
11/15/2014
http://philbasiceducation.blogspot.com/search/label/Spiral%20Approach
27/31
11/15/2014
http://philbasiceducation.blogspot.com/search/label/Spiral%20Approach
28/31
11/15/2014
http://philbasiceducation.blogspot.com/search/label/Spiral%20Approach
29/31
11/15/2014
Are the Chinese or Indian students spending time on these things at age 7? I doubt it.
In my opinion, more time needs to be spent on mastery of basic life skills in the early elementary grades.
One last point about the spiral curriculum. Math educator Brian Rude feels that the spiral curriculum should not be thrown out entirely, but that the
problems are caused from barely touching on subjects each time, instead of cutting a bit deeper, so that information is retained. He points out,
however, that if cuts are too deep, that there is a danger of never having time to return to that subject, and students will also forget. He feels a
balance between the two extremes is best.
-Lynne Diligent
___________________________________________________________
"Singapore mathematics curriculum emphasizes the spiral approach based on Jerome Bruner's explanation on spiral curriculum. The idea of the
spiral curriculum, according to Bruner - 'A curriculum as it develops should revisit this basic ideas repeatedly, building upon them until the student
has grasped the full formal apparatus that goes with them.' Most people will not miss the idea of 'repeatedly' but may miss the subtle notion of
'building upon them' and 'until the student has grasped the full formal apparatus' of the target concept. In Singapore curriculum, addition is taught
four times in Grade 1 (this is a core idea and they are new to it) - addition within 10, within 20, within 40 and within 100. Students get to revisit the
idea of addition repeatedly but each time building on the strategies that they already had. When they add with 10, they count all and count on,
perhaps with the use of concrete objects and drawings. Later, in addition within 20, they learn to make ten before adding, effectively acquiring the
notion of place value. Later they progress to more formal approaches such as adding ones and adding tens in the formal algorithm. Thus, it is not
mere a review of materials. It involves extension. In a similar way, multiplication of whole numbers is taught in grades one through four; addition and
subtraction of fractions is taught in grades two through five; area of plane figures is taught in grades three through seven; solving equations is
taught in grades seven through nine. As a result, in Singapore, Algebra is taught across grade levels in high school (grades seven through twelve).
Thus, we do not have the practice of teaching Algebra, Geometry etc separately. They are all under the subject of mathematics. There is geometry
in all grade levels."
-Dr. Yeap Ban Har, Director of curriculum and professional development at Pathlight School, an autism-oriented K-10 school in Singapore, and the
principal of Marshall Cavendish Institute, a global teacher professional development institute.
http://philbasiceducation.blogspot.com/search/label/Spiral%20Approach
30/31
11/15/2014
Home
Older Posts
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 3.0 Unported License.
http://philbasiceducation.blogspot.com/search/label/Spiral%20Approach
31/31