Dear Sirs,
I have read a very right publication at Decembers News Bulletin of NCTM (Volume 41, Issue 5).
The NCTM President Cathy L. Seeley in her
Beyond “Pockets of Wonderfulness” article pointed the problem of organizing of
mutual work of teachers within or across levels.
I would like to
propose a short comment.
I had have in Russia a long experience of working as an educator and a researcher. There is one really beg difference between the organizing of a school work in Russia and in the US. In the US a teacher teaches only at one grade, every year at the same grade. In Russia a teacher takes a class and teaches it for three years (in average). I believe that the Russian way is more effective. It is not because I am Russian. It is just the matter of my experience. As an experienced teacher I can say that a teacher will never be absolutely prepared to students questions. An every new lesson, an every new student regularly presents something unexpected. To find out the answer an the unexpected question quickly enough and organically inweave it into the lesson a teacher must see a much more broader subject context the just for a single grade. The rule of thumb is to feel him/herself comfortable in a class a teacher must be aware with the material at least of next two levels. Collaboration of teachers is a very helpful thing, but it is not enough for making lasting system change.
Any lasting system changes are based on significant improvement of system’s elements, that is teachers for such system as a school. One of the most significant improvements can be the overcoming of the single grade level orientation of teachers, especially of Math and Science teachers using a more then “ a mile wide and an inch deep” improved curriculum.
Thank you,
Valentin Voroshilov, Ph.D. in EducationTeaching Labs Tech CoordinatorPhysics Department, BU590 Commonwealth Ave
Boston, MA 02215
617-353-2602