Study Circle on Adult Numeracy

The LINCS Region 1 Professional Development Center recently hosted a virtual study circle on adult numeracy for teachers in Region 1. Participants attended three online meetings and used a private LINCS Community group to complete assignments and share ideas and resources with their colleagues.  Lynda Ginsburg, Mary Jane Schmitt, and Donna Curry were our subject matter experts and facilitated the study circle.

I’d like to share the resources we used and how we used those resources. We also did some problem solving and then thinking about our own thinking to help us understand the concepts. 

I’m also hoping that the study circle participants will take a few minutes to add Comments about their key learnings and “a-ha” moments.  We’d also invite you to comment on what you see.

In session one, we reflected on our own attitudes and experiences in studying and teaching math.  We then analyzed how our own instruction aligns with the concepts presented in “Designing Instruction with the Components of Numeracy in Mind” through sharing our own “risk” category and discussing the reflection questions.

If you’re curious, read Ginsburg, L. (2008, May). Designing instruction with the components of numeracy in mind. Focus on Basics (9)A, pp. 14–19. Available at: http://ncsall.net/fileadmin/resources/fob/2008/fob_9a.pdf.

Poll: Which is your “risk” category when teaching math?

• emphasizing calculation skills
• focusing on the language aspect of word problems
• attempting to dissipate math anxiety
• dividing math content into distinct, non-overlapping topics
• only embedding instruction within real-life contexts

Reflections: How do you feel about your "risk" category? What might you change?

You can learn more about the components of numeracy by reviewing the occasional paper: Ginsburg, L., Manly, M., & Schmitt, M.J. (2006). The Components of Numeracy. [NCSALL Occasional Paper]. Cambridge, MA: National Center for the Study of Adult Learning and Literacy.  Available at: www.ncsall.net/resources/research/op_numeracy.pdf

In preparation for sessions 2 and 3, we read Building on Foundations for Success: Guidelines for improving adult mathematics instruction (2011). Berkeley, CA: MPR Associates. Available at: http://lincs.ed.gov/publications/pdf/AdultNumeracyReportFinal2011.pdf.

The focus for session 2 was on the Guidelines for Improving the Content of Adult Mathematics Instruction:

1. Mathematics content should emphasize a consistent link between math concepts learned and their use in context and form a coherent progression of learning.
2. The topics of fractions, decimals, percent, and proportions are essential and should form the instructional foundation for adult mathematics education.
3. Algebraic thinking is essential for decision making in daily life and in the workplace. Elements of algebra, therefore, should be introduced early to all students in adult mathematics instruction.
4. All content strands (number, geometry and measurement, algebra, and statistics) should be included in varying degrees at all levels of adult mathematical instruction.

We considered what these guidelines mean for what students learn in our programs. And, thus, what that means for what we teach.

The focus for session 3 was on the Guidelines for Improving Instructional Strategies in Adult Mathematics Instruction

1. Students should demonstrate all aspects of mathematical proficiency.
2. Computational fluency is more than knowledge of procedures.
3. Instruction should address negative affective factors.
4. Instruction should include meaningful contexts.
5. Formative assessment should be an integral classroom component.
6. A variety of student groupings should be used to enhance communication and collaboration.
7. Instruction should include technology in contexts for which students are preparing.

We spent time considering what these guidelines mean for how teachers teach and students learn. In doing this we focused on the mathematical proficiency strands and collectively explored math examples. As we solved math problems from real-life and samples from the new high school equivalency tests we shared our own approaches and thinking in coming to the solutions.

What intrigues you? What might you like to know more about? How have these resources affected what content you use and how you teach math?