NSW DOE also promotes Explicit Teaching through it's 8 What Works Best Strategies & emphasizes CLT, Vic also promotes Explicit Teaching, Structured Lessons & Worked Examples through its 10 High Impact Teaching Strategies & these are linked to Teacher Performance Reviews. IMO most senior Maths Teachers have used Worked Examples as the main method of Maths instruction for decades. Most High School texts mostly use Worked Examples (though not part of this discussion there is the issue of engagement with this approach). Even the CIS presentations are conflicting with Eddie Woo promoting Inquiry via his example lesson on the Game of 23 & encouraging Group work, then the next presentation, Ms Powell says these are fads & Ms Buckingham promoting the maths wars.
Hi Rebecca, thanks for the comment! Even if this is the case (could you send me some links and detail of where this comes up?), would you still consider this as evidence of these myths being embedded in the everyday practice of teachers? It would seem to me more of an assumption, which doesn't meet the author's conceptualisation of evidence.
Keep it coming, Tom. Love this.
Your encouragement is much appreciate Mel!
The primary syllabus in NSW embeds these myths.
NSW DOE also promotes Explicit Teaching through it's 8 What Works Best Strategies & emphasizes CLT, Vic also promotes Explicit Teaching, Structured Lessons & Worked Examples through its 10 High Impact Teaching Strategies & these are linked to Teacher Performance Reviews. IMO most senior Maths Teachers have used Worked Examples as the main method of Maths instruction for decades. Most High School texts mostly use Worked Examples (though not part of this discussion there is the issue of engagement with this approach). Even the CIS presentations are conflicting with Eddie Woo promoting Inquiry via his example lesson on the Game of 23 & encouraging Group work, then the next presentation, Ms Powell says these are fads & Ms Buckingham promoting the maths wars.
Hi Rebecca, thanks for the comment! Even if this is the case (could you send me some links and detail of where this comes up?), would you still consider this as evidence of these myths being embedded in the everyday practice of teachers? It would seem to me more of an assumption, which doesn't meet the author's conceptualisation of evidence.