Four Goals for Instructors Using Inquiry-Based Learning

Previous Topic Next Topic
 
classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
30 messages Options
12
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Four Goals for Instructors Using Inquiry-Based Learning

Domenico Rosa
http://www.ams.org/publications/journals/notices/201711/rnoti-p1308.pdf

Four Goals for Instructors Using Inquiry-Based Learning

Chris Rasmussen, Karen Marrongelle, Oh Nam Kwon, and Angie Hodge

[...]
(1) get students to share their thinking,
(2)  help  students  to  orient  to  and  engage  in  others' thinking,
(3) help students deepen their thinking, and
(4) build on and extend student ideas.
[...]
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Four Goals for Instructors Using Inquiry-Based Learning

Bishop, Wayne-2

Why is the AMS still pushing math avoidance?  I liked Bob's assessment of IBL so much that I saved it:


What Is Inquiry-Based Learning?
6/18/2017, 5:16 PM

For many students in college, and high school, mathematics is a terminal course, that actually
terminated in high school algebra. As a physics major, I had no terminal math or physics courses, but
several terminal humanities courses. A terminal course is generally the last course in a subject that you
are required to take, but that has no importance to you, your interests, or your degree. It is the end of
that subject as far as you are concerned.
In the past, in mathematics, algebra was that course for most students.
However, in recent decades, in order to cash in on the demand for college and diversity, schools have
stretched that terminal algebra class all the way through calculus, and beyond. But the instructors
assigned this task, became increasingly dissatisfied with teaching the dead. Some of these instructors
dealt with that angst by reinventing what it means to learn mathematics.
IBL is one such reinvention. Realizing that the dead can't respond to direct instruction, the instructors
came up with a simple fix. Animation. By animating the dead with activities, the classrooms now seem
alive and the instructors now have a purpose.
Harmless enough, except for the fraud and debt being piled on students for phony courses.
But it didn't end there. Some of the animators of the dead began to believe that their students were
alive. Over the years I have interacted with many of these animators who swear that this is true. That
they have raised the dead. I want to believe them, but unfortunately, the animators give different tests
to the dead, than we give to the living. And even though I ask them many times, to give the dead a test
of life, they refuse.
The cause is always the same. If you put dead students in classrooms with instructors long enough,
some of the instructors will change.




From: [hidden email] <[hidden email]> on behalf of Domenico Rosa <[hidden email]>
Sent: Friday, December 1, 2017 10:56 AM
To: [hidden email]
Subject: Four Goals for Instructors Using Inquiry-Based Learning
 
http://www.ams.org/publications/journals/notices/201711/rnoti-p1308.pdf

Four Goals for Instructors Using Inquiry-Based Learning

Chris Rasmussen, Karen Marrongelle, Oh Nam Kwon, and Angie Hodge

[...]
(1) get students to share their thinking,
(2)  help  students  to  orient  to  and  engage  in  others' thinking,
(3) help students deepen their thinking, and
(4) build on and extend student ideas.
[...]
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Four Goals for Instructors Using Inquiry-Based Learning

Robert Hansen
In reply to this post by Domenico Rosa
To further what I said regarding IBL...

After 10 years of studying education research, the take-away for me is that education research is as inapplicable to education as cancer research is to life. Education research is simply not about healthy successful students. The prognosis and goals for a cancer patient are certainly not the same as those for a healthy person, and thus it is in education research as well.

I am not saying I believe in what they do. I don't. But that is what education research is. They research failure. Success in their world is very different than success in ours. And it is bizarre how large the gap has grown between the two worlds. I recently saw papers on how to teach undergraduate chemistry to students who couldn't add. I asked the group "Why?" I didn't get a reply. Education research is truly weird stuff.

Bob
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Four Goals for Instructors Using Inquiry-Based Learning

Richard Strausz
In reply to this post by Domenico Rosa
On Bob's post #11,297 he wrote the following. My comments will be inserted along the way.

> To further what I said regarding IBL...
> After 10 years of studying education research, the
> take-away for me is that education research is as
> inapplicable to education as cancer research is to
> life. Education research is simply not about healthy
> successful students. The prognosis and goals for a
> cancer patient are certainly not the same as those
> for a healthy person, and thus it is in education
> research as well.

I find your metaphor confusing. Isn't part of cancer research to look at prevention and maintaining health? Because of that, it is very much about life.

>
> I am not saying I believe in what they do. I don't.
> But that is what education research is. They research
> failure.

I would say that some might research failure - to find out how to minimize it, yes? - and others would research improving the status quo.

> Success in their world is very different
> than success in ours. And it is bizarre how large the
> gap has grown between the two worlds. I recently saw
> papers on how to teach undergraduate chemistry to
> students who couldn't add. I asked the group "Why?" I
> didn't get a reply. Education research is truly weird
> stuff.

Are you saying that one or two odd research projects will damn all research? Beware of overreaching. The question is whether there are measurable results.

>
> Bob

Richard
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Four Goals for Instructors Using Inquiry-Based Learning

Bishop, Wayne-2

>   The question is whether there are measurable results. 


If only.   Most education articles contain no data-based evidence and, among those that do, the data is usually based on assessments developed by the "researchers" as opposed to any kind of independent assessment.  At least Bob's cancer research contains meaningful data-based evidence.


 Wayne

From: [hidden email] <[hidden email]> on behalf of Richard Strausz <[hidden email]>
Sent: Monday, December 4, 2017 12:54 PM
To: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: Four Goals for Instructors Using Inquiry-Based Learning
 
On Bob's post #11,297 he wrote the following. My comments will be inserted along the way.

> To further what I said regarding IBL...
> After 10 years of studying education research, the
> take-away for me is that education research is as
> inapplicable to education as cancer research is to
> life. Education research is simply not about healthy
> successful students. The prognosis and goals for a
> cancer patient are certainly not the same as those
> for a healthy person, and thus it is in education
> research as well.

I find your metaphor confusing. Isn't part of cancer research to look at prevention and maintaining health? Because of that, it is very much about life.

>
> I am not saying I believe in what they do. I don't.
> But that is what education research is. They research
> failure.

I would say that some might research failure - to find out how to minimize it, yes? - and others would research improving the status quo.

> Success in their world is very different
> than success in ours. And it is bizarre how large the
> gap has grown between the two worlds. I recently saw
> papers on how to teach undergraduate chemistry to
> students who couldn't add. I asked the group "Why?" I
> didn't get a reply. Education research is truly weird
> stuff.

Are you saying that one or two odd research projects will damn all research? Beware of overreaching. The question is whether there are measurable results.

>
> Bob

Richard
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Four Goals for Instructors Using Inquiry-Based Learning

Richard Strausz
In reply to this post by Domenico Rosa
Richard:
> >   The question is whether there are measurable
> results.
>
Wayne:
> If only.   Most education articles contain no
> data-based evidence and, among those that do, the
> data is usually based on assessments developed by the
> "researchers" as opposed to any kind of independent
> assessment...

I always smile when *you* criticize assessments. Thanks!

Richard
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Four Goals for Instructors Using Inquiry-Based Learning

Robert Hansen
In reply to this post by Domenico Rosa
Richard wrote ...

"I find your metaphor confusing. Isn't part of cancer research to look at prevention and maintaining health? Because of that, it is very much about life."

It is an analogy, not a metaphor. Analogies are used as an aid to communicate ideas and the point is to look for similarity. A good analogy isn't an exact analogy, just sufficient enough to convey the idea. The idea is this. You do not find cancer researchers studying people without cancer. Likewise, you do not find education researchers studying successful students. Education researchers study cancer. (that is a metaphor).


"Are you saying that one or two odd research projects will damn all research? "

One or two? No. All of them. None of us have been able to find even one example of a success story with honest results that we could compare to successful students. I provided the example of adding and chemistry just to show how wide and strange the gap has become.


"The question is whether there are measurable results. "

And this is the issue. When people think "education" they are not looking for measurable results, they are looking for success on an end of course exam. Raising student scores from 20% to 30% means nothing in that context. It is still a fail. The "measurable results" cottage research industry only exists today because of teachers being tasked with teaching students subjects they are not the least bit prepared for. No one ever asked these researchers to research teaching algebra to students who can't add. The researchers simply had nothing else to do, had a bunch of students who couldn't add in an algebra class and started calling it "research". The problem itself isn't even real. We didn't suggest that those kids be put in algebra classes. That just sorta of happened over the last 2 or 3 decades.

Most people do not equate teaching or education with that scenario.

Bob
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Four Goals for Instructors Using Inquiry-Based Learning

Richard Strausz
In reply to this post by Domenico Rosa
> Richard wrote ...
>
> "I find your metaphor confusing. Isn't part of cancer
> research to look at prevention and maintaining
> health? Because of that, it is very much about life."
>
Bob's reply began:
> It is an analogy, not a metaphor. Analogies are used
> as an aid to communicate ideas and the point is to
> look for similarity. A good analogy isn't an exact
> analogy, just sufficient enough to convey the idea.
> The idea is this. You do not find cancer researchers
> studying people without cancer. Likewise, you do not
> find education researchers studying successful
> students. Education researchers study cancer. (that
> is a metaphor).

So, you claim that no cancer researchers (or education researchers) would study differences between 'sick' and 'well'? Are you sure about this?

Richard

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Four Goals for Instructors Using Inquiry-Based Learning

Robert Hansen
In reply to this post by Domenico Rosa
Richard wrote ...

"So, you claim that no cancer researchers (or education researchers) would study differences between 'sick' and 'well'? Are you sure about this?"

Studying differences between sick and well is not the same thing as studying "well". A healthy person wouldn't go to a cancer researcher for advice on exercise. That being said, show me even a single study that studies the differences between non-successful and successful students. The closest they get to that is correcting for SAT scores. In other words, they not only don't study the successful students, they reject them.

If our genes have a fault that causes uncontrolled cellular division and death, that is a problem.  But I don't think not having a high interest or ability in advanced math is a cancer. In other words, like the researchers tying to teach chemistry to students who can't add, wtf are they even doing? As I suggested, the whole field is a fabrication.

Bob
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Four Goals for Instructors Using Inquiry-Based Learning

Bishop, Wayne-2
In reply to this post by Richard Strausz

I know your incessantly-repeated perspective but exactly where (which journals and dates) did I publish my "research"or even just discuss my teaching in regard to your qualification "measurable results"?  I was simply pointing out in mathematics education, or in the "profession" of teaching more generally, the paucity of measurable results that (if any at all) can withstand standard academic scrutiny.  You may remember, that was the reason that, a couple decades ago, U of Chicago (at the time, among the big 3 in education) dropped their school of education because, in spite of lots of "research" publications, the University couldn't make the school maintain academic standards for those publications worthy of the institution's well-established prestige.


Wayne


From: [hidden email] <[hidden email]> on behalf of Richard Strausz <[hidden email]>
Sent: Monday, December 4, 2017 4:45 PM
To: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: Four Goals for Instructors Using Inquiry-Based Learning
 
Richard:
> >   The question is whether there are measurable
> results.
>
Wayne:
> If only.   Most education articles contain no
> data-based evidence and, among those that do, the
> data is usually based on assessments developed by the
> "researchers" as opposed to any kind of independent
> assessment...

I always smile when *you* criticize assessments. Thanks!

Richard
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Four Goals for Instructors Using Inquiry-Based Learning

Richard Strausz
In reply to this post by Domenico Rosa
Bob, this will be one of our last dialogues as Math Teach fades away. Once again, we will have to agree to disagree. I do hope you get to teach at least a little bit in a K-12 classroom one day. I have to go do my 4th grade volunteering now.

Richard

> Richard wrote ...
>
> "So, you claim that no cancer researchers (or
> education researchers) would study differences
> between 'sick' and 'well'? Are you sure about this?"
>
> Studying differences between sick and well is not the
> same thing as studying "well". A healthy person
> wouldn't go to a cancer researcher for advice on
> exercise. That being said, show me even a single
> study that studies the differences between
> non-successful and successful students. The closest
> they get to that is correcting for SAT scores. In
> other words, they not only don't study the successful
> students, they reject them.
>
> If our genes have a fault that causes uncontrolled
> cellular division and death, that is a problem.  But
> I don't think not having a high interest or ability
> in advanced math is a cancer. In other words, like
> the researchers tying to teach chemistry to students
> who can't add, wtf are they even doing? As I
> suggested, the whole field is a fabrication.
>
> Bob
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Four Goals for Instructors Using Inquiry-Based Learning

Robert Hansen
In reply to this post by Domenico Rosa
Richard wrote...

"agree to disagree"

Agree to disagree on what? If you claim to have discovered a way to teach long division to students who struggle with it, at the end of the day, what we want to see is your students doing long division. Not just "progress". And we don't care how you did it.

Are you disagreeing in the sense that that is not what we want? I am pretty sure that is exactly what we want. But education research is not delivering that. They make up their own tests of what they want.

I have seen cognitive science study long division though. And it actually involves long division. And then I see education research claim that they are based on cognitive science, and yet again, at the end of the day, there is still no long division. Truly bizarre.

My theory is so simple I should have thought it the first week I started down this rabbit hole. They can't achieve what we want. If they could, they would have certainly given us that instead.

Note: Long division is a metaphor.:)

Good luck with your fourth graders.

Bob
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Four Goals for Instructors Using Inquiry-Based Learning

Richard Strausz
In reply to this post by Domenico Rosa
Wayne:

> I know your incessantly-repeated perspective but
> exactly where (which journals and dates) did I
> publish my "research"or even just discuss my teaching
> in regard to your qualification "measurable results"?
> I was simply pointing out in mathematics education,
> , or in the "profession" of teaching more generally,
> the paucity of measurable results that (if any at
> all) can withstand standard academic scrutiny.  You
> may remember, that was the reason that, a couple
> decades ago, U of Chicago (at the time, among the big
> 3 in education) dropped their school of education
> because, in spite of lots of "research" publications,
> the University couldn't make the school maintain
> academic standards for those publications worthy of
> the institution's well-established prestige.
>
You deserve congratulations for - as evidence seems to show - having taught in high school and at the university level for many years and managed to avoid any assessments that showed if students learned as well from you as they did from others. All your fans have to go on is your confidence that you did well.

Richard
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Four Goals for Instructors Using Inquiry-Based Learning

Greg Goodknight
I was reading some paper recently and CalState LA was ranked #1 in the
country for an economic outcome for college students... raising students
from modest beginnings into the middle class. I gather one former
student of Wayne's, Jaime Escalante, introduced Wayne proudly as his
math teacher at the premiere of Stand and Deliver. That will do for me.

- -Greg

On 12/05/2017 08:13 AM, Richard Strausz wrote:

> Wayne:
>> I know your incessantly-repeated perspective but
>> exactly where (which journals and dates) did I
>> publish my "research"or even just discuss my teaching
>> in regard to your qualification "measurable results"?
>> I was simply pointing out in mathematics education,
>> , or in the "profession" of teaching more generally,
>> the paucity of measurable results that (if any at
>> all) can withstand standard academic scrutiny.  You
>> may remember, that was the reason that, a couple
>> decades ago, U of Chicago (at the time, among the big
>> 3 in education) dropped their school of education
>> because, in spite of lots of "research" publications,
>> the University couldn't make the school maintain
>> academic standards for those publications worthy of
>> the institution's well-established prestige.
>>
> You deserve congratulations for - as evidence seems to show - having taught in high school and at the university level for many years and managed to avoid any assessments that showed if students learned as well from you as they did from others. All your fans have to go on is your confidence that you did well.
>
> Richard
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Four Goals for Instructors Using Inquiry-Based Learning

Bishop, Wayne-2
In reply to this post by Richard Strausz

> All your fans have to go on is your confidence that you did well.


Close but no cigar.  It's their confidence, not mine.  In spite of having officially retired 7 years ago, just yesterday, the department asked me if I would be willing teach a 3rd course in the coming spring quarter. It's not math; it's math ed - a course for math masters candidates to prepare for community college teaching.  That will go with another, also math ed, a course for bachelors candidates to prepare for high school teaching.  My salvation is that the third course is an upper division math course.

Wayne

From: [hidden email] <[hidden email]> on behalf of Richard Strausz <[hidden email]>
Sent: Tuesday, December 5, 2017 8:13 AM
To: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: Four Goals for Instructors Using Inquiry-Based Learning
 
Wayne:
> I know your incessantly-repeated perspective but
> exactly where (which journals and dates) did I
> publish my "research"or even just discuss my teaching
> in regard to your qualification "measurable results"?
> I was simply pointing out in mathematics education,
> , or in the "profession" of teaching more generally,
> the paucity of measurable results that (if any at
> all) can withstand standard academic scrutiny.  You
> may remember, that was the reason that, a couple
> decades ago, U of Chicago (at the time, among the big
> 3 in education) dropped their school of education
> because, in spite of lots of "research" publications,
> the University couldn't make the school maintain
> academic standards for those publications worthy of
> the institution's well-established prestige.
>
You deserve congratulations for - as evidence seems to show - having taught in high school and at the university level for many years and managed to avoid any assessments that showed if students learned as well from you as they did from others. All your fans have to go on is your confidence that you did well.

Richard
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Four Goals for Instructors Using Inquiry-Based Learning

Richard Strausz
In reply to this post by Domenico Rosa
> I was reading some paper recently and CalState LA was
> ranked #1 in the
> country for an economic outcome for college
> students... raising students
> from modest beginnings into the middle class. I
> gather one former
> student of Wayne's, Jaime Escalante, introduced Wayne
> proudly as his
> math teacher at the premiere of Stand and Deliver.
> That will do for me.
>
> - -Greg

I bet he's had other successes too, but such anecdotes don't answer Wayne's own criteria for data to substantiate progress. He's always happy to make that challenge when someone else claims success.

Richard
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Four Goals for Instructors Using Inquiry-Based Learning

Haim-5
In reply to this post by Domenico Rosa
Richard Strausz Posted: Dec 5, 2017 12:18 PM

>I bet he's had other successes too, but such anecdotes
>don't answer Wayne's own criteria for data to
>substantiate progress. He's always happy to make that
>challenge when someone else claims success

Richard, it is just your kind of response that saps the credibility of the Education Mafia, and your own.  The mistake you make, if it is a mistake, is so commonplace and has been known for so long that it has a name:  the "tu quoque" fallacy.

The quality and efficacy of college classes and, frankly, the value of a college degree, are important questions in their own right.  But, they are different from the questions of the quality and efficacy of public school education.  The subject being investigated in this forum is "public education", understood by everyone to mean public school from grade one through grade twelve.

Your constant effort to deflect from that one and only issue makes me wonder if you are an honest interlocutor.  For the time remaining to us in Math-Teach, please stick to the issues.  You will be doing us all a favor, especially yourself.

Haim
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Four Goals for Instructors Using Inquiry-Based Learning

Richard Strausz
In reply to this post by Domenico Rosa
> Richard Strausz Posted: Dec 5, 2017 12:18 PM
>
> >I bet he's had other successes too, but such
> anecdotes
> >don't answer Wayne's own criteria for data to
> >substantiate progress. He's always happy to make
> that
> >challenge when someone else claims success

Hiam responded:

> Richard, it is just your kind of response that saps
> the credibility of the Education Mafia, and your own.
> The mistake you make, if it is a mistake, is so
> o commonplace and has been known for so long that it
> has a name:  the "tu quoque" fallacy.
>
> The quality and efficacy of college classes and,
> frankly, the value of a college degree, are important
> questions in their own right.  But, they are
> different from the questions of the quality and
> efficacy of public school education.  The subject
> being investigated in this forum is "public
> education", understood by everyone to mean public
> school from grade one through grade twelve.
>
> Your constant effort to deflect from that one and
> only issue makes me wonder if you are an honest
> interlocutor.  For the time remaining to us in
> Math-Teach, please stick to the issues.  You will be
> doing us all a favor, especially yourself.

Wayne is, of course, hypocritical because he criticizes K-12 persons like myself with a successful track record including assessments which support our results. He fancies the 'math avoidance' label for anyone (including university folks) who don't meet his approval.

As far as I can tell, his teaching (even including his time in K-12) never had any such verification. Tu Quoque? It feels like hypocrisy to me.

Richard
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Four Goals for Instructors Using Inquiry-Based Learning

Haim-5
In reply to this post by Domenico Rosa
Richard Strausz Posted: Dec 7, 2017 1:10 PM

>As far as I can tell, his teaching (even including his
>time in K-12) never had any such verification. Tu
>Quoque? It feels like hypocrisy to me.

Richard, this is like demanding the rules of football apply to chess because both are sports.  Yes, you teach and Wayne teaches, but you are not playing the same game.

I'm not sure which is worse, that

(a) you know the difference and pretend there isn't one,
or
(b) you can't tell the difference between football and chess (i.e., between public school and college).

Haim
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Four Goals for Instructors Using Inquiry-Based Learning

Richard Strausz
In reply to this post by Domenico Rosa
Haim, you miss the point.

Wayne calls all 'non-Wayne-approved' pedagogy 'math avoidance'. He dodges or ignores evidence when such pedagogy is shown successful by assessments.

He knows what he's doing and he hates being called on it.

Thanks for your interest.

Richard

> Richard Strausz Posted: Dec 7, 2017 1:10 PM
>
> >As far as I can tell, his teaching (even including
> his
> >time in K-12) never had any such verification. Tu
> >Quoque? It feels like hypocrisy to me.
>
> Richard, this is like demanding the rules of football
> apply to chess because both are sports.  Yes, you
> teach and Wayne teaches, but you are not playing the
> same game.
>
> I'm not sure which is worse, that
>
> (a) you know the difference and pretend there isn't
> one,
> or
> (b) you can't tell the difference between football
> and chess (i.e., between public school and college).
>
> Haim
12