Shandrika Burrison and Jacquelyn Carson are enrolled in the School of Graduate Studies at South Carolina State University. Both are matriculating for master’s degrees in mathematics education. They desire to pursue careers in teaching and, eventually, in school administration.

Prior to the start of a recent graduate class (ED 545: Learning Theories for Teachers) at the university, Burison and Carson engaged in conversation about a calculator and when proficiency with it should be developed. The conversation gradually took on tones highlighting philosophical differences between them.

Burrison feels an instructional plan must be altered to look forward and backward to fully address learner needs, particularly the needs of academically marginal learners. She recommends using planned instructional time and remediation activities simultaneously in teaching. For her, planned instructional time should be subdivided according to needs.

Carson maintains that planned instructional time should not be subdivided to focus on isolated remediation activities. If academic deficiencies are noted, they might best be addressed at other times, e.g., after school, a study hall or free period, with peer or instructor assistance. Instructional time is for maintaining the focus of the curriculum based on a defined plan.

This conversation between Burrison and Carson took on intensity. Both were advocating the use of metacognitive teaching and learning strategies to advance their positions. It became apparent neither was prepared, nor willing, to let this conversation end in opposition to a positioned stance. Each appeared to find support for her position.

Seven suggestions are presented to influence whether one might be a supporters or a critic of Burrison’s, Carson’s or both of their teaching philosophies:

1. Address learner needs. Immediately. There is little to be gained by clinging to an expectation that, in time, noticeable learner deficiencies will be corrected.

2. Require action. Something went situationally wrong with an upper elementary school-age student not knowing the functional use of a calculator. This observed skill deficiency must be corrected ... outside the regular period of instruction. But leave no child behind.

3. Provide support. Provide direct support or request the assistance of a peer learner, co-worker, etc., to guide a deficient learner to a proficiency level in whatever the area might be.

4. Monitor progress. While student was identified lacking a skill needed to advance in mathematics, educators must look backward to determine if there are students in a like situation.

5. Develop self-regulated learners. Students can be taught to become self-regulated.

6. Teach cooperatively. Academic weaknesses abound, but the weaknesses must not be so obvious. With cooperative learning activities, advance routes to cooperative achievement.

7. Blend in teacher-efficacy and intentionality. But what works well for one teacher might not work well for another. Do not become discombobulated over this fact.

Wrote Polish author Henryk Sienkiewicz (1846-1916): “The greater the philosopher, the harder it is to answer the questions of common people.” Therefore, the exchange of teaching ideas and viewpoints between Shandrika Burrison and Jacquelyn Carson ends inconclusively.

Reach T&D Columnist Howard D. Hill, Ph.D., via educationconsultant@sc.rr.com.

You must be logged in to comment.