The classroom teacher is, by all means, the most significant figure in the context of knowledge and information perception. However, when cooperating with students, it is of paramount importance for the teacher to realize the scope of their intervention in the learning process. As far as math instruction is concerned, it should be outlined that the teacher serves both as a major provider of theoretical fundamentals and a moderator of the student’s knowledge application (Van de Walle et al., 2013). Hence, there is little doubt that classroom teachers should actively participate in all aspects of math instruction. However, it is the extent of intervention that makes a significant difference in the learning approaches.
When speaking of math instruction, many educators falsely assume that the learning process is rather limited to the material introduced to the classroom. As a result, such an approach creates an impression of rigidness and lack of creativity in terms of students’ perception of math. For this reason, the teacher’s participation in the teaching aspects should have a facilitating nature, which gives the students the freedom of information processing. Such an effect may be achieved by introducing interactive classroom activities such as making snapdragons in order to respond to the questions (Hunter-Doniger, 2016). The element of play could even be directly integrated into the process of learning a new topic, giving learners the ability to define the math topic on their own (Stipek, 2017). Moreover, the educators can present an outdoor activity for the children to realize math is not limited to desks and copybooks with numbers written all over the page (Montalvo, 2017). Considering the aforementioned notions, it may be concluded that classroom teachers should definitely participate in all the aspects of math instruction while taking on the role of facilitator and leaving learners enough room for creativity.
Teaching as a concept inevitably requires the skill of life-long learning and flexibility. One of the most efficient ways to expand the area of one’s competency is the experience exchange that allows educators to look at the learning process from an entirely different perspective. Moreover, working with a class presupposes a variety of challenges regarding teachers’ professional and cultural competence (Van de Walle et al., 2013). Hence, when it comes to the notion of collaboration between educators teaching the same grade level, the following benefits may be outlined:
- Co-planning enhancement. When sharing experiences, professionals have the opportunity to improve each other’s lesson plans with new approaches (Andrews-Larson et al., 2017). As a result, teachers expand their competence sphere with new observations of the same communicative situation in the classroom.
- Identification of working educational strategies. Today’s teaching paradigm is replete with theoretical information and seemingly innovative approaches to learning, creating a challenge for teachers to choose an adequate one (Warner & Kaur, 2017). However, once teachers share their experiences, they have the ability to narrow down the list of efficient strategies to use in the classroom, thus saving time for planning.
- Student achievement. As pooling efforts make a considerable contribution to the quality of the lesson, students become more engaged in the learning process and show better results (Reeves et al., 2017). The levels of efficiency are usually measured with the help of quantitative indicators such as grades and academic achievements.
Considering the data, it may be concluded that teachers willing to collaborate are at a greater advantage in terms of working with students, as they have the ability to let others assess the situation critically. Moreover, although every student is a sophisticated individual, some situations have the tendency to repeat over the years. In such scenarios, advice from colleagues may play a crucial role.
References
Andrews-Larson, C., Wilson, J., & Larbi-Cherif, A. (2017). Instructional improvement and teachers’ collaborative conversations: The role of focus and facilitation. Teachers College Record, 119(2), 1-37.
Hunter-Doniger, T. (2016). Snapdragons and math: Using creativity to inspire, motivate, and engage. Young Children, 71(3), 30-35.
Montalvo, M. (2017). Take math outside! Reinforce math, science, and art with these engaging outdoor activities. Scholastic Teacher, 54-55.
Reeves, P. M., Pun, W. H., & Chung, K. S. (2017). Influence of teacher collaboration on job satisfaction and student achievement. Teaching and Teacher Education, 67, 227-236. Web.
Stipek, D. (2017). Playful math instruction in the context of standards and accountability. Young Children, 72(3), 8-12.
Van de Walle, J., Karp, K. S., & Bay-Williams, J. L. (2013). Elementary and middle school mathematics: Teaching developmentally (8th ed.). Pearson.
Warner, S., & Kaur, A. (2017). The perceptions of teachers and students on a 21st Century mathematics instructional model. International Electronic Journal of Mathematics Education, 12(2), 193-215.