Did you child do well overall with the first grade curriculum? Are you curious about the second grade team's philosophy on enrichment?
Our philosophy for enrichment is digging deeper. What does that mean? Digging deeper means taking what students know and working with that knowledge. Can students apply that knowledge from kindergarten and first grade because they have internalized it? Can they use what they know to approach a more difficult problem in the same area? Can they teach it to someone they know (you will see that question on our math unit self-assessments)? Can they explain what they know verbally and in writing?
We want to help our students be able to convey their knowledge. In today's world, whether in older grades, on the ol' MCAS, or in the workplace, people need to be able to explain their thinking clearly and thoroughly so that they can get their message across to others.
So first we need to look at metacognition - they understand what they know and are thinking about their thinking and apply it. Usually for second graders, their metacognition related to learning is just beginning to develop. You can see that when we ask in math, "How did you solve 12 + 7?" and a child says "I just knew it". Or they are just beginning to tap into metacognition, "I counted," but cannot go farther than that on their own, which is perfectly normal at this time.
Then, if a student has that metacognition and can explain their thinking, and we want to further differentiate, we would do so with more challenging activities in the same area that the class in working on (the common core curriculum standard, the Treasures reading curriculum, spelling pattern, etc.). For example, if a child knows by heart (in less than 3 seconds) their addition facts with sums up to 18, I would have them work on problem solving with those addition facts. Can they solve word problems? Can they create addition word problems with missing sum, and missing first and second addends? Or I would give them some double digit addition to work with, not give them a challenging activity in measurement or division, for example.
An example in reading - if a student has great literal comprehension, I would not immediately introduce a harder texts (again when we are working with comprehension - but if the focus of the lesson is fluency, yes a harder texts would be appropriate) - I would first look at higher level thinking skills with grade level texts such as inferring. If a student's inferring skills (for example) with grade level texts were solid, and they could fluently read a harder text, then I would use the harder text to work on comprehension skills. Key thinking skills can include decision making, comparing and contrasting, and cause and effect. See also Bloom's Taxonomy.
Another example is if we are working in reading class on syllable types, and a student knows all the syllable types and can use them to read one and two syllable words, then i'd move onto identifying syllable types in 3 syllable words and using them to read 3 syllable or longer words.
If students enjoy division and multiplication, and we have not gotten to it yet in the curriculum, they can do it for fun at home; however, in school enrichment will be in what we are working on in our core programs and with the CCSS such as time, money, etc. If we just add in computation skills from other graders and(or another advanced, non second grade skills) and do not dig deeper first, students will get older, and the skills of mathematical practice (like explaining your thinking) , higher level thinking skills will end up with gaps anyway.
It is interesting - we just completed unit 1 in math and at least with my class, I found most students did well with most standards addressed BUT an area we really need to work on as a class is standards of mathematical practice, (click to read them at another website) which is exactly what I am talking about here. If we forge ahead without going back and working on those areas and just give harder arithmetic work, we are doing a disservice to students.
I am not great with analogies, but this is what I think. It is like you are building a ladder when you are working on curriculum and skills with students and after they build that rung, we then build the next rung, then they climb onto that rung and so on. If we build a rung, climb onto it, but jump above without building a solid next rung, we might fall down or fall off the ladder.
For specific questions, if you haven't already started, take a look at your child's work but keep in mind a lot of his daily work can not be sent home as it is in his math journal, his writing journal, etc. Speaking to his classroom teacher is the best next step!
-Miss Mawn
Our philosophy for enrichment is digging deeper. What does that mean? Digging deeper means taking what students know and working with that knowledge. Can students apply that knowledge from kindergarten and first grade because they have internalized it? Can they use what they know to approach a more difficult problem in the same area? Can they teach it to someone they know (you will see that question on our math unit self-assessments)? Can they explain what they know verbally and in writing?
We want to help our students be able to convey their knowledge. In today's world, whether in older grades, on the ol' MCAS, or in the workplace, people need to be able to explain their thinking clearly and thoroughly so that they can get their message across to others.
So first we need to look at metacognition - they understand what they know and are thinking about their thinking and apply it. Usually for second graders, their metacognition related to learning is just beginning to develop. You can see that when we ask in math, "How did you solve 12 + 7?" and a child says "I just knew it". Or they are just beginning to tap into metacognition, "I counted," but cannot go farther than that on their own, which is perfectly normal at this time.
Then, if a student has that metacognition and can explain their thinking, and we want to further differentiate, we would do so with more challenging activities in the same area that the class in working on (the common core curriculum standard, the Treasures reading curriculum, spelling pattern, etc.). For example, if a child knows by heart (in less than 3 seconds) their addition facts with sums up to 18, I would have them work on problem solving with those addition facts. Can they solve word problems? Can they create addition word problems with missing sum, and missing first and second addends? Or I would give them some double digit addition to work with, not give them a challenging activity in measurement or division, for example.
An example in reading - if a student has great literal comprehension, I would not immediately introduce a harder texts (again when we are working with comprehension - but if the focus of the lesson is fluency, yes a harder texts would be appropriate) - I would first look at higher level thinking skills with grade level texts such as inferring. If a student's inferring skills (for example) with grade level texts were solid, and they could fluently read a harder text, then I would use the harder text to work on comprehension skills. Key thinking skills can include decision making, comparing and contrasting, and cause and effect. See also Bloom's Taxonomy.
Another example is if we are working in reading class on syllable types, and a student knows all the syllable types and can use them to read one and two syllable words, then i'd move onto identifying syllable types in 3 syllable words and using them to read 3 syllable or longer words.
If students enjoy division and multiplication, and we have not gotten to it yet in the curriculum, they can do it for fun at home; however, in school enrichment will be in what we are working on in our core programs and with the CCSS such as time, money, etc. If we just add in computation skills from other graders and(or another advanced, non second grade skills) and do not dig deeper first, students will get older, and the skills of mathematical practice (like explaining your thinking) , higher level thinking skills will end up with gaps anyway.
It is interesting - we just completed unit 1 in math and at least with my class, I found most students did well with most standards addressed BUT an area we really need to work on as a class is standards of mathematical practice, (click to read them at another website) which is exactly what I am talking about here. If we forge ahead without going back and working on those areas and just give harder arithmetic work, we are doing a disservice to students.
I am not great with analogies, but this is what I think. It is like you are building a ladder when you are working on curriculum and skills with students and after they build that rung, we then build the next rung, then they climb onto that rung and so on. If we build a rung, climb onto it, but jump above without building a solid next rung, we might fall down or fall off the ladder.
For specific questions, if you haven't already started, take a look at your child's work but keep in mind a lot of his daily work can not be sent home as it is in his math journal, his writing journal, etc. Speaking to his classroom teacher is the best next step!
-Miss Mawn