Holly Blahun
Forum Replies Created

I keep telling my kids, “One of these days, you’re going to hear about this lady that revamped the Alberta Math Curriculum and fixed all of its issues. That lady will be me!”
I totally agree that there is A LOT of content, and even if we do have longer in the day to cover content, you’ll notice kids aren’t geared to do hours of math on end. It’s exhausting work turning those math gears in their heads. I run on a quad system, so during a regular inclass (nonCOVID) year, I’d have nearly 3 hours of math in either the morning or the afternoon – and kids are totally beat by the end of it. More time in the day is not the answer – curriculum redesign is!
Math needs to be synced up to Science (ex. pH in Science 10 and Chem 20 but logs in Math 12) – but I don’t see myself working for AlbertaEd any time soon. So for now, Jon is right! Big ideas! This year, I’ve tried to cut out examples that are repetitive – show them once (or twice), and let them try more on their own.

I like the idea! I am a Physics Major Math Minor B.Ed in Alberta and definitely see the opportunity. I have noticed in my 5 years of teaching, the students who take Math 201 (PreCalc 11) are often the students who do well in Physics 20. This year, I taught them within the same Quad and it was a lot of assessment and practice to be good at each course. Integrating them would cut back on lots of this repeated practice!
Unfortunately, our curriculums are slightly different – but what you have looks like a great start!

I use the technique that Jon shows in his video! I start with multiplying binomials to find area since students are familiar with length x width gives you the area of the rectangle (how I start the distributive property – FOIL – arrays). Afterward, I have students rearrange tiles into a rectangle and find side lengths without using the word factor.

I love this! We cover conjectures and counterexamples in Math 202 and this fits perfectly <3

No I haven’t checked out the course yet, but attended your session during the summit this year! I will add it to my todo list.
I saw something recently about marking students based on their performance of outcomes, creating a scale of proficiency for each outcome, rather than assigning grades based on correctness of assignments and tests. I love the idea, and think this is how students should be assessed (in a perfect world), but am scared off by the time it will take to implement – at first, and on an ongoing basis. I worry that reviewing every question for every student to see if they’ve improved on that skill will take up more time that I have to spare. And I’m not sure that I am completely in love with our program of studies outcomes either.