The second/third of the reading text for “Childrens Mathematical Anxiety” continues with discussing the framework and methodology that will be used in the “Mathematics Anxiety Questionaire”. The text deals with characterizing teaching approaches. The text talks about traditional (pupils are taught standard pencil-and-paper methods of computation taught by the teacher followed by individual practice) and alternative (pupils use and discuss their own strategies to solve routine and non-routine problems using small groups) approaches. The article goes further to discuss math classroom observation strategies and in particular four categories that wil be used (Context, Teaching Organization, Verbal Interaction Analysis and Cognitive Level).
The readings now are not so much about math, but are about the actual classroom implementation and strategy of using a questionnaire to determine and understand “anxiety” outcomes. This is the part of math that interests me the most because it factors in two very important motivators for me (remember motivators from my first 1/3 of text reading?). The first motivator satisfies my need to be an “arm-chair” psychiatrist observing human behavior and the second motivator to apply math (in this case statistics) to a tangible and real world application.
I have to admit the readings now are quite intense for two reasons. One is now I am more aware of metacognitive skills and I find that I am crowding my mind with a lot of noise over analyzing how I am reading text. I was better off when my process for reading text was automatic and second nature and I was engaging my metacognitive skills subconciously in the background. Sometimes ignorance is bliss. The second factor that added to the intensity of the reading was that the observations themselves become “mathematical anxiety” issues because the observations are dependent on the pupils skills and the size of the student populations observed. Here is where the reading gets tough. There is lots of room for interpretation that is going on in my mind so I draw upon experiences and familiarities to navigate me through muddy waters. It is with these type of readings that I use the 80/20 rule. That is I will pick up most of the information being presented (80%) by absorbing 20% of the reading. I may go back and re-read but only if I know what I need to re-read for. Most of the time my 80/20 rule approach works. I donot get anxious if I donot get or understand everything. I’ve learned over the years to be kind to myself; no need to beat myself up. No one is an expert or perfect the first time around when learning or reading something new.
I'm interested in your 80/20 strategy. I teach SAT Critical Reading classes, and in those classes we usually discuss three major types of reading: academic reading, pleasure reading, and business reading. Academic reading is the type you do for class, usually a slow process that will hopefully go into your long-term memory. Pleasure reading is not timed because it's for pleasure, and business reading is akin to the type of reading people usually do when reading the newspaper--quick and for the info. It seems like that's the type of reading you seem to do very often. My question is, what about texts you read NOT for information? Do you practice your 80/20 rule then? Also, when you read for the information, how much of it do you remember later on?
ReplyDelete